Germany's first hydrogen filling station on the autobahn opens

[nationalize the fed]

Autocar Pro News Desk May 05, 2015

As part of the Clean Energy Partnership (CEP), Daimler, Linde and Total have jointly taken an important step forward in the expansion of Germany’s hydrogen (H2) infrastructure. Earlier today, Germany's first motorway hydrogen filling station was officially inaugurated.


Wasserstoff-Tankstelle eröffnet

The new H2 filling pump at the Total motorway service area in Geiselwind on the A3 between Würzburg and Nuremberg links the existing filling facilities in the metropolitan regions of Frankfurt/Main, Stuttgart and Munich with each other, forming a hub for electric fuel cell vehicles in southern Germany.

In her opening speech, Dorothee Bär, Parliamentary State Secretary at the Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure, said: “Electric vehicles with hydrogen fuel cell drives produce no harmful emissions. They have a long range and can refuel in minutes. Politics, science and industry have worked together to bring hydrogen mobility to the brink of market entry. Together with industry, we have provided a total of 1.4 billion euros (Rs 10,701 crore) for research, development and demonstration projects up until 2016. We are now increasingly tackling the development of infrastructure: by the end of 2015, 50 hydrogen filling stations will be available in metropolitan areas and along major roads. The new filling station in Geiselwind brings us one step closer to this target. The nearly one million euros (Rs 7.6 crore) of funding spent on the construction of this filling station is money well spent because good infrastructure is a prerequisite for this new form of mobility to really catch on!”.

“Networking the national H2 infrastructure is the key to success for the market introduction of electric vehicles with fuel cells. Only then can they be a ‘real’ alternative for customers,” said Prof. Dr Herbert Kohler, Vice President Group Research and Sustainability and Chief Environmental Officer at Daimler AG. “That's why we are not only actively investing in the development of the next generation of vehicles, but we are the only car manufacturer to invest in the development of a nationwide network of filling stations in Germany.”...snip
more: http://www.autocarpro.in/news-international/germanys-hydrogen-filling-station-autobahn-8349

After Toyota's Mirai goes on sale in September- Mercedes!



Related: Europe's Largest Hydrogen Refuelling Station Opens in Hamburg (2012)



A hydrogen station capable of delivering 750 kilograms of hydrogen per day opened on Friday in Hamburg's HafenCity development, supplied by power company Vattenfall...

...Half the hydrogen is produced on site by electrolysis of water using renewable energy and the other half is delivered. At the inauguration of the station, Pieter Wasmuth, Executive Vice President of Vattenfall, said that hydrogen storage is a key technology in the integration of a growing proportion of electricity from wind power and photovoltaics into the German energy system...snip
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/news-archive/2012/february/europes-largest-hydrogen-refuelling-station-opens-in-hamburg

Around the world- H2 is #1


Wasserstoff ?????ό?? hidrógeno водород hidrojen idrogeno hydrogène waterstof

[Gregorian]

1. It's a net energy loss from the start, and then we don't have a hydrogen infrastructure. Fail!

But of course, with a llittle help from the foolish, this too will become a reality. One we don't need nor want.

Do you even read the replies? If so, how can you still be posting this stuff that is only going to facilitate more fracking.

[nationalize the fed]

2. I've about had enough of your bullsh*t

If you don't want to read about Hydrogen don't click articles with hydrogen in the title. I don't care what you "think" about H2 or anything else.

I'm not going to stop posting about the #1 green energy revolution on the planet because you don't like it.

If so, how can you still be posting this stuff that is only going to facilitate more fracking.

You're not paying attention- maybe because you're too emotional about hydrogen.

You will receive no more replies from me as you are now ignored. Something I advise you to do to me.

By the way, why are you wasting time on threads you don't like- you need to get on the phone to Germany and Japan straight away and tell them not to waste their time with hydrogen.

[Gregorian]

3. I'm not doing it for me. I'm doing it for the people who might not know better.

You seem to have a real interest in getting this to be a reality. I take this very seriously. In case you haven't read my other posts, I have been in the business of engineering things like fuel cells. This is not the future.

Yes, it isn't all fracking that powers the production of hydrogen. But that's only part of the equation. There are other good reasons to abandon this.

Edit- it's not that I don't like it. After all,. I spent years working on a state of the art fuel cell architecture. It's the production of hydrogen that is the problem. The world's leading fuel cell scientist, Ulf Bossel, has stated unequivocally that hydrogen is not our future. It's a loser path to pursue when there are alternatives that make much more sense.

[OKIsItJustMe]

6. “A net energy loss from the start”

The same could be said of oil.

It takes an investment of energy to get oil out of the ground, and to refine it into usable forms, like gasoline and diesel fuel. That energy is lost.

The same can also be said of batteries. Contrary to popular opinion, although rechargeable batteries are quite efficient, they are not 100% efficient, that’s why they heat up when they’re used. Energy is lost when they are charged, and energy is lost when they are discharged. A charged battery loses energy just sitting there, doing nothing. (A net loss.)

The question isn’t whether energy is lost or not, the question is whether the losses are acceptable.

[Gregorian]

7. I agree.

Studied it in thermo courses. "Well to wheel" before it was common knowledge.

Hydrogen is a no brainer on multiple levels. Extra conversion stages, complexity of system, existing infrastructure...

[OKIsItJustMe]

8. Except that I disagree; it’s far from a “no brainer”

Hydrogen has both disadvantages and advantages. The question is whether its advantages outweigh its disadvantages.

The answer depends on the application.

[Gregorian]

10. Yes, but the topic is about cars, and that's not a best use.

Show me that I'm incorrect. I'll gladly change my mind, if it can be shown that all the things that have been stated in the multitude of other threads are not feasible.

Not only that, but there are far fewer processes and materials in an electric car than one with internal combustion. Even transmissions can become simpler if not eliminated, in an EV. That's not even part of this discussion, but it should be.

[OKIsItJustMe]

11. The comparison to an internal combustion engine doesn’t seem apropos

The primary difference between a fuel cell electric vehicle and a battery electric vehicle is that the battery electric vehicle must carry around a large storage battery, which needs to be recharged, while a fuel cell electric vehicle needs to carry around a fuel cell, and a tank(s) which needs to be refilled.

• The Toyota Mirai has greater range on full tanks than a Tesla Model S has with a full storage battery.
• The Mirai can be refilled faster than a Model S can be recharged.

These “convenience factors” are clear advantages.

• The Model S can be recharged at home (assuming you have a private garage, or some other arrangement.)—In theory, the Mirai can be refilled at home, but this is much less likely.
• The hydrogen to fill a Mirai will cost more than the electricity to charge a Model S (even though, reportedly, the first three years of hydrogen for your new Mirai will be free.)

However, if your income is high enough for you to buy either vehicle, I don’t think the cost of operation is going to bother you.


To increase the range of a BEV means a larger, heavier battery (which means a less efficient vehicle.) To increase the range of a HFCEV means a larger (but not much heavier) tank(s.)

At some point, the weight of batteries makes them impractical. Is that a locamotive? A tractor-trailer? A bus? An SUV? or a Midsize sedan?

I think we’ll see BEV’s be most popular for small, commuter vehicles. I may be wrong.

[OKIsItJustMe]

14. Imperfect Graphene Opens Door to Better Fuel Cells

http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2015/03/imperfect-graphene-opens-door-to-better-fuel-cells.html

[font face=Serif][font size=5]Imperfect Graphene Opens Door to Better Fuel Cells[/font]
[font size=4]Membrane could lead to fast-charging batteries for transportation[/font]

March 17, 2015


The world’s thinnest proton channel: A few hydroxylated defect sites allow for simple and speedy proton transfer through pristine single-layer graphene. (Credit: University of Minnesota)

[font size=3]EVANSTON, Ill. --- The honeycomb structure of pristine graphene is beautiful, but Northwestern University scientists, together with collaborators from five other institutions, have discovered that if the graphene naturally has a few tiny holes in it, you have a proton-selective membrane that could lead to improved fuel cells.

…

“We found if you just dial the graphene back a little on perfection, you will get the membrane you want,” said Geiger, a professor of chemistry in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences. “Everyone always strives to make really pristine graphene, but our data show if you want to get protons through, you need less perfect graphene.”

…

Removing a few carbon atoms results in others being highly reactive, which starts the proton shuttling process. Only protons go through the tiny holes, making the membrane very selective. (Conventional membranes are not very selective.)

“Our results will not make a fuel cell tomorrow, but it provides a mechanism for engineers to design a proton separation membrane that is far less complicated than what people had thought before,” Geiger said. “All you need is slightly imperfect single-layer graphene.”

…[/font][/font]

[Gregorian]

15. Sorry, I spaced on that reply. My brain was somewhere else.

I know consumers play a big role in product design, but the planet doesn't care about how long it takes to fill a tank. Or how many miles per charge or refill.

The big bottom line for me is the infrastructure, or lack thereof. The rest is moot. What are we going to do, build a national hydrogen grid? Truck zillions of tankers with the stuff? Come on, that's just stupid. We have a grid. And now we have smaller grids.

I'll admit that there's a time factor constraint for this change in how we convert energy. But I'm basing my arguments on the time that seems reasonable for battery technology to reach levels that will be acceptable to users. I think primarily it already is, based on typical user behavior, in cars at least. Price has kept that one away. And this includes the barriers that have precluded faster battery development. You don't see Congress pushing that stuff through like the XL pipeline. It's a kind of anti-subsidy.

Too many negatives on the hydrogen side.

[OKIsItJustMe]

16. “The big bottom line for me is the infrastructure, or lack thereof.”

(It would seem you didn’t see my reply about charging at work.)
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/112785104#post13

The hydrogen “infrastructure” problem is specious.

Many stations which now sell gasoline could sell hydrogen as well. Unlike gasoline, hydrogen can be generated on-site, or (like gasoline) it can be trucked in (or both.)

https://share.sandia.gov/news/resources/news_releases/california_stations/

[font face=Serif][font size=5]Sandia Labs News Releases[/font]

July 8, 2014

[font size=4]More California gas stations can provide H2 than previously thought, Sandia study says[/font]

[font size=3]LIVERMORE, Calif. — A study by researchers at Sandia National Laboratories concludes that a number of existing gas stations in California can safely store and dispense hydrogen, suggesting a broader network of hydrogen fueling stations may be within reach.

The report examined 70 commercial gasoline stations in the state of California and sought to determine which, if any, could integrate hydrogen fuel, based on the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) hydrogen technologies code published in 2011.

The study determined that 14 of the 70 gas stations involved in the study could readily accept hydrogen fuel and that 17 more possibly could accept hydrogen with property expansions. Under previous NFPA code requirements from 2005, none of the existing gasoline stations could readily accept hydrogen.

…

“Certain smaller gas stations, especially those in cities, have unusual shapes that aren’t going to accommodate the right separation distances,” San Marchi said. For example, he said, the required distance between a high-pressure tank carrying hydrogen and the property boundary would be too great for a “skinny” station or a wedge-shaped lot. While larger lots naturally work better in the current environment, San Marchi said, there are opportunities to develop risk mitigations that could allow even wider deployment of hydrogen fueling stations.

…[/font][/font]

[mackdaddy]

4. I can't figure out how this will ever be economically feasible?

I know that you are totally in love with Hydrogen. But what I really do not get is that some very large companies are still sinking billions in to this "hydrogen economy" infrastructure. Ford, Toyota, Hyundai, and Mercedes to name a few are throwing big money at this. From a purely economic and engineering standpoint, this approach is much more expensive, and much less efficient than just about any other competing technology. Compressed Natural Gas, Hybrids, and Battery EV's are all less expensive to run because of the losses of making and storing the pure hydrogen. You can refill your tank faster than most recharging situations (with current battery technology). Fuel Cell cars have the exact same electric drive train as Battery EVs, they just get their electricity from the Hydrogen storage tank and fuel cell instead of a chemical batter.

And the statements about half of the H2 coming from on-site solar has some big questions. Most Battery Electric Vehicles get about 100miles per 30kilowatt-hours of energy. To make enough energy for one 100mile charge, you would need a full days production from 30 full sized solar panels. (This is more energy than most homes use). Using the solar energy to electrolysis water into hydrogen, and compress it for delivery and turning the hydrogen back into electricity takes even more input energy due to processing losses. So a filling station to deliver the hydrogen which is stored electricity from sunlight would need 3 to 5 thousand solar panels at least to make enough energy for 100 cars getting 100miles worth of energy each day. Most of the photos of these filling stations show less than enough solar panels to fill ONE car per day!

The top photo shows a semi trailer made of long skinny cylinders, and this is how hydrogen is delivered. But in one of my energy classes my students figured that it would take 25 of these semis to deliver the same energy as in ONE gasoline semi tanker. Again, the numbers just do not add up.

The only reason I can guess is that the Hydrogen infrastructure keeps the average driver tethered to the same Big oil people who own the current gasoline infrastructure. You can't gas up you car at home like you can with a Battery Electric Vehicle. I think that it may be also that the effects of global climate change may be so horrible in a decade of so, that we will not care how much more it costs to run a hydrogen car

But you keep putting these fluffy clouds press announcement type articles which have no real numbers. (by the way, Fuel Cell Today which you referenced in the second part of you post stopped adding anything new January a year ago by the way). I would really be interested in any technical resources that shows how this is really suppose to work economically. I am truly baffled why so much money is being put into this.

[caraher]

5. Because it maintains a business model

The one thing hydrogen for transportation has going for it is a certain familiarity for the consumer. We buy a vehicle, drive it around, and every so often put a chemical fuel inside. That's what we do now.

With present battery technology, EVs require some changes of habit, because charging takes more time than fueling. I asked Steven Chu about the latest round of hydrogen hype and he told me the Toyota engineers with whom he'd spoken say it's all about the convenience and speed of refueling. They're betting that wins out over the other considerations.

It's hard to make money from charging batteries. By contrast, if you need to buy a specialized fuel, you become dependent on suppliers of that fuel. In this case, those suppliers are pretty powerful energy companies focused on fossil fuels. It would be more surprising if they just decided to fold up and say their era is ending.

[OKIsItJustMe]

9. I think Chu (and Toyota) are right

It’s actually easy to make money from charging batteries. It’s known as an electric bill. (In this case, the “specialized fuel” is electricity.)

The assumption that every driver owns an enclosed garage is somewhat elitest.

Home charging is impractical for many drivers who (for example) park on the street.

[hunter]

12. Not really.

Charging their cars at work is the best possible solution, especially in sunny places where they can park in the shade under solar panels.

Commuters who never have to buy fuel to get to work, and simply rent hybrids on vacations, or else figure, hell, we can recharge at the local roadside sit-down restaurants and overnight at the E.V. friendly motels... That's a very scary thing for fossil fuel "business as usual."

A few hundred miles a day driving is plenty for most everyday practical purposes. If electric cars can do that then all the old fuel business models are screwed.

[OKIsItJustMe]

13. Now, wait a second here

You’re talking about a significant investment in infrastructure (i.e. arranging for charging at work sites.)

This is the major objection people raise to hydrogen.

And, may I point out that many employers do not provide parking?

[caraher]

17. Ever compare the cost of a hydrogen fueling station to a charging station?

The cost of expanding the electric charging infrastructure is far smaller.

Sure, not everybody has a garage or parking at work. But a LOT of people do. The question, from a policy perspective, is what will get the consumption of fossil fuels down the fastest, not rejecting solutions that work because not everyone will find the technology that does this best works well where they live. It's no argument against solar power in the US Southwest to point out that not everyone in the US lives in a sunny location...

[OKIsItJustMe]

18. How many charging stations are needed to support as many cars as one filling station?

I mean, seriously, if you’re talking about making every garage and parking space a charging station…