Pumping Hydrogen
#1
09-28-2008, 11:55 AM
Pumping Hydrogen
ON a strip of Santa Monica Boulevard in Los Angeles, a futuristic experiment posing as an ordinary fuel station may be bringing the world one step closer to the hydrogen age.
From the moment engineers started dreaming about hydrogen as an alternative to oil, they faced a nagging question: What should come first — the fuel-cell car or the hydrogen pump?
Carmakers have argued that without a network of hydrogen filling stations they couldn’t roll out fuel-cell vehicles from the research lab to the dealership. Energy companies, on the other hand, said that without large numbers of fuel-cell cars available at reasonable prices, they saw little point in building a costly new fueling infrastructure.
From the moment engineers started dreaming about hydrogen as an alternative to oil, they faced a nagging question: What should come first — the fuel-cell car or the hydrogen pump?
Carmakers have argued that without a network of hydrogen filling stations they couldn’t roll out fuel-cell vehicles from the research lab to the dealership. Energy companies, on the other hand, said that without large numbers of fuel-cell cars available at reasonable prices, they saw little point in building a costly new fueling infrastructure.
#2
02-14-2009, 05:01 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
But first, let's get this out of the way: Hydrogen fuel-cell technology won't work in cars. It's a tragic cul-de-sac in the search for sustainable mobility, being used to game the California Air Resources Board's rules requiring carmakers to build zero-emission vehicles. Any way you look at it, hydrogen is a lousy way to move cars.
Face it: Fuel-cell technology has been eclipsed by vastly cheaper, here-now advances in batteries and plug-in electric vehicles. To knit together even the barest network of H2 refueling stations would cost billions. And, in any case, the fuel itself, whether produced by cracking natural gas or hydrolyzing water (consult your freshman chemistry texts), represents a horrible energy return on investment.
Some illustrative math: It takes about 60 kilowatt-hours of electricity to gin a kilogram of hydrogen from water. The FCX Clarity's tank holds about 4 kilograms of H2 and that gives it a range of about 270 miles on 240 kWhs.
The all-electric Tesla Roadster has a 53-kWh lithium-ion battery and a range of 220 miles. So the Tesla's per-mile costs in electricity are roughly one-quarter what they are in the FCX Clarity.
So, whadya think - stick with the Prius for a couple more years? He does point out that without the H2, "stuff" (my word), the rest of the car is a thing of beauty and can readily become a working model without too much effort.
#3
02-28-2009, 11:13 AM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
A few simple facts.
1 It doesnt cost that much energy to make h2 these days and it will cost less by the time it goes mainstream.
2 As long as the fuel is there and costs low enough people realy wont care what it is.. assuming it doesnt blow up the planet.
3 The depression has nuked the bev rollout but it has done nothing at all to the h2 plans as they werent planning on anything big this decade or even early next.
4 Bev competes headon with mass transit and taxis and biking and mopeds and el cheapo 2-3 bangers and walking... And loses. H2 competes vs petrolium... time alone is all it needs to win that battle. And concidering the same people making gas make h2 the mear fact they are in it means they intend to transit to it someday.. Meanwhile taxis busses biking cheapo cars and walking will fight it out for a pie that has little money in it.
5 The winner will be the fuel that pays taxes. Bev wont do that bio wont do that only h2 will.
1 It doesnt cost that much energy to make h2 these days and it will cost less by the time it goes mainstream.
2 As long as the fuel is there and costs low enough people realy wont care what it is.. assuming it doesnt blow up the planet.
3 The depression has nuked the bev rollout but it has done nothing at all to the h2 plans as they werent planning on anything big this decade or even early next.
4 Bev competes headon with mass transit and taxis and biking and mopeds and el cheapo 2-3 bangers and walking... And loses. H2 competes vs petrolium... time alone is all it needs to win that battle. And concidering the same people making gas make h2 the mear fact they are in it means they intend to transit to it someday.. Meanwhile taxis busses biking cheapo cars and walking will fight it out for a pie that has little money in it.
5 The winner will be the fuel that pays taxes. Bev wont do that bio wont do that only h2 will.
#4
02-28-2009, 03:33 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
A few simple facts.
1 It doesnt cost that much energy to make h2 these days and it will cost less by the time it goes mainstream.
2 As long as the fuel is there and costs low enough people realy wont care what it is.. assuming it doesnt blow up the planet.
3 The depression has nuked the bev rollout but it has done nothing at all to the h2 plans as they werent planning on anything big this decade or even early next.
4 Bev competes headon with mass transit and taxis and biking and mopeds and el cheapo 2-3 bangers and walking... And loses. H2 competes vs petrolium... time alone is all it needs to win that battle. And concidering the same people making gas make h2 the mear fact they are in it means they intend to transit to it someday.. Meanwhile taxis busses biking cheapo cars and walking will fight it out for a pie that has little money in it.
5 The winner will be the fuel that pays taxes. Bev wont do that bio wont do that only h2 will.
1 It doesnt cost that much energy to make h2 these days and it will cost less by the time it goes mainstream.
2 As long as the fuel is there and costs low enough people realy wont care what it is.. assuming it doesnt blow up the planet.
3 The depression has nuked the bev rollout but it has done nothing at all to the h2 plans as they werent planning on anything big this decade or even early next.
4 Bev competes headon with mass transit and taxis and biking and mopeds and el cheapo 2-3 bangers and walking... And loses. H2 competes vs petrolium... time alone is all it needs to win that battle. And concidering the same people making gas make h2 the mear fact they are in it means they intend to transit to it someday.. Meanwhile taxis busses biking cheapo cars and walking will fight it out for a pie that has little money in it.
5 The winner will be the fuel that pays taxes. Bev wont do that bio wont do that only h2 will.
Second. Note the article I quoted is only 13 days old, so I wonder if your facts are more recent than the LA Times.
Third. One primary issue I think is the fueling stations. Do you think Exxon Mobil will allow a competing technology? They'd better have their oar in the water, so to speak, else - H2 is going to need some of that bail-out money.
I think we're in that phase of the evolution which was similar to the early 20th C when there were lots of different forms of engines, i.e., steam, gas, battery, diesel, and was there others?
Now we're looking at hybrid (gas-battery), plug-in electric, various bio techs and H2. The problem is not only getting the cost down, but finally distribution. See my previous comment.
#5
02-28-2009, 05:33 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
Bev means battery electric vehickle.
As for the numbers... they were spouting 60 kwh back 5-6 years ago.
The important thing to remember is by the time they start selling them mid next decade a fuel cell car should be going over 400 miles on a fill and that fill should cost less then fossil fuel and should be one heck of alot better for the environment.
And thats all that matters mid term.
Long term we are looking at a fuel cell able to power a given car a good 80-90% of the miles per kwh as batteries could but of course with alot more miles of range.
As for the numbers... they were spouting 60 kwh back 5-6 years ago.
The important thing to remember is by the time they start selling them mid next decade a fuel cell car should be going over 400 miles on a fill and that fill should cost less then fossil fuel and should be one heck of alot better for the environment.
And thats all that matters mid term.
Long term we are looking at a fuel cell able to power a given car a good 80-90% of the miles per kwh as batteries could but of course with alot more miles of range.
#6
02-28-2009, 06:50 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
Hello wintermane,
Sorry but I'm afraid that H2 fuel cells for cars is a red herring. It may be usable for some niche applications but not for the bulk of our transportation needs. BEV's will likely win out.
There is no H2 fuel. It has to be produced either from reforming natural gas or from electrolyzing water. For the former, H2 conversion takes energy and there will always be a thermodynamic maximum efficiency. Also it comes from natural gas which is a non-sustainable resource.
For the former, at least as much energy is required to put into electrolyzing water as is produced when you combust the H2, either in a fuel cell or ICE. (Thermodynamics again)
Then for both you need to gather and compress and transport the H2. (very energy intensive). Better just to store the electricity in a battery and convert to work at 90% efficiency in the first place.
BTW, I am a chemical engineer, and part of my job was aspects of producing and handling way over 200,000,000 cubic feet of H2 per day so I have a little familiarity with it. OCICBW!
Sorry but I'm afraid that H2 fuel cells for cars is a red herring. It may be usable for some niche applications but not for the bulk of our transportation needs. BEV's will likely win out.
There is no H2 fuel. It has to be produced either from reforming natural gas or from electrolyzing water. For the former, H2 conversion takes energy and there will always be a thermodynamic maximum efficiency. Also it comes from natural gas which is a non-sustainable resource.
For the former, at least as much energy is required to put into electrolyzing water as is produced when you combust the H2, either in a fuel cell or ICE. (Thermodynamics again)
Then for both you need to gather and compress and transport the H2. (very energy intensive). Better just to store the electricity in a battery and convert to work at 90% efficiency in the first place.
BTW, I am a chemical engineer, and part of my job was aspects of producing and handling way over 200,000,000 cubic feet of H2 per day so I have a little familiarity with it. OCICBW!
#7
02-28-2009, 07:58 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
There is no H2 fuel. It has to be produced either from reforming natural gas or from electrolyzing water. For the former, H2 conversion takes energy and there will always be a thermodynamic maximum efficiency. Also it comes from natural gas which is a non-sustainable resource.
For the former, at least as much energy is required to put into electrolyzing water as is produced when you combust the H2, either in a fuel cell or ICE. (Thermodynamics again)
For the former, at least as much energy is required to put into electrolyzing water as is produced when you combust the H2, either in a fuel cell or ICE. (Thermodynamics again)
attilla1, you probably know that the majority of H2 in the US is produced from natural gas, not electrolyzing. Pointing out that hydrogen requires more energy to produce then you get out of it is silly. That's true with any energy conversion, even electricity. BTW, electricity in the US comes mostly from coal, which is a non-sustainable resource.
You give battery electric vehicles too much credit with 90% efficiency. What happens to your battery state of charge when it's sitting in a cold garage, or during the winter time with temperatures below zero? It kind of just disappears. I know when I go snowboarding and carry my cell phone with me, the battery is always dead by the end of the day.
The following is quoted from an article by Dan Neil of the LA Times in Friday's (2/13/09) Business Section on the latest Honda Fuel Cell car:
The all-electric Tesla Roadster has a 53-kWh lithium-ion battery and a range of 220 miles. So the Tesla's per-mile costs in electricity are roughly one-quarter what they are in the FCX Clarity.
The all-electric Tesla Roadster has a 53-kWh lithium-ion battery and a range of 220 miles. So the Tesla's per-mile costs in electricity are roughly one-quarter what they are in the FCX Clarity.
The Tesla Roadster's range of 220 miles, comes from a low speed test (city) cycle, which is not adjusted. EPA does not require low volume manufactures to post adjusted values. You will be hard pressed to find any owner getting close to that number. And the last time I counted, the carbon fiber Roadster only holds a driver and one passenger.
The Toyota Pruis EPA range comes from testing both the city cycle, and highway cycle, then it's adjusted by some faction. All major manufactures do it this way.
The Clarity is no exception, and the range of 280 comes from both adjusted City and Highway numbers. And if you don't know, the Clarity is a midsized family sedan.
It will be very interesting to see what numbers come out for Tesla's Model S, as that will be a better comparison to make with the Clarity.
#8
02-28-2009, 08:50 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
attilla1, you probably know that the majority of H2 in the US is produced from natural gas, not electrolyzing. Pointing out that hydrogen requires more energy to produce then you get out of it is silly. That's true with any energy conversion, even electricity. BTW, electricity in the US comes mostly from coal, which is a non-sustainable resource.
You give battery electric vehicles too much credit with 90% efficiency. What happens to your battery state of charge when it's sitting in a cold garage, or during the winter time with temperatures below zero? It kind of just disappears. I know when I go snowboarding and carry my cell phone with me, the battery is always dead by the end of the day.
centrider, this information is very misleading if you don't understand what you are reading.
The Tesla Roadster's range of 220 miles, comes from a low speed test (city) cycle, which is not adjusted. EPA does not require low volume manufactures to post adjusted values. You will be hard pressed to find any owner getting close to that number. And the last time I counted, the carbon fiber Roadster only holds a driver and one passenger.
The Toyota Pruis EPA range comes from testing both the city cycle, and highway cycle, then it's adjusted by some faction. All major manufactures do it this way.
The Clarity is no exception, and the range of 280 comes from both adjusted City and Highway numbers. And if you don't know, the Clarity is a midsized family sedan.
It will be very interesting to see what numbers come out for Tesla's Model S, as that will be a better comparison to make with the Clarity.
You give battery electric vehicles too much credit with 90% efficiency. What happens to your battery state of charge when it's sitting in a cold garage, or during the winter time with temperatures below zero? It kind of just disappears. I know when I go snowboarding and carry my cell phone with me, the battery is always dead by the end of the day.
centrider, this information is very misleading if you don't understand what you are reading.
The Tesla Roadster's range of 220 miles, comes from a low speed test (city) cycle, which is not adjusted. EPA does not require low volume manufactures to post adjusted values. You will be hard pressed to find any owner getting close to that number. And the last time I counted, the carbon fiber Roadster only holds a driver and one passenger.
The Toyota Pruis EPA range comes from testing both the city cycle, and highway cycle, then it's adjusted by some faction. All major manufactures do it this way.
The Clarity is no exception, and the range of 280 comes from both adjusted City and Highway numbers. And if you don't know, the Clarity is a midsized family sedan.
It will be very interesting to see what numbers come out for Tesla's Model S, as that will be a better comparison to make with the Clarity.
I don't care one way or the other. Note that I own a Prius and I'm not likely to run out to buy the Tesla, so what ever he cites is not important to me and ditto for the Clarity. Also, I might add I'll probably merge my molecules with those H2 molecules before that becomes available.
And I might add, it's not that I don't understand what I'm reading, it's that information was not given. I could have done the research, but - what the hell - it wasn't worth a trip to Snopes.com
Last edited by centrider; 02-28-2009 at 08:52 PM. Reason: clarification
#9
02-28-2009, 09:44 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
mt3c
Hi, sorry I had to add the discussion about loss in any change in form or function of energy. I am always surprised how many people don't understand the implications of the first two laws of thermodynamics. Don't mean to insult anybodies intelligence.
FYI, my 90% number I threw out was approximate simple motor efficiency. (most motors I deal with are more 92-94%, big industrial, 24/7)
At one time I was very up on H2 fuel cells. When one looks at the entire energy pathway, the multiple, multiplicative losses in electricity (or NG) ->H2-> fuel cell->electricity->work, to me are the key reasons that batteries will more likely be more economically viable.
Hi, sorry I had to add the discussion about loss in any change in form or function of energy. I am always surprised how many people don't understand the implications of the first two laws of thermodynamics. Don't mean to insult anybodies intelligence.
FYI, my 90% number I threw out was approximate simple motor efficiency. (most motors I deal with are more 92-94%, big industrial, 24/7)
At one time I was very up on H2 fuel cells. When one looks at the entire energy pathway, the multiple, multiplicative losses in electricity (or NG) ->H2-> fuel cell->electricity->work, to me are the key reasons that batteries will more likely be more economically viable.
#10
02-28-2009, 10:39 PM
Re: Pumping Hydrogen
mt3c
Hi, sorry I had to add the discussion about loss in any change in form or function of energy. I am always surprised how many people don't understand the implications of the first two laws of thermodynamics. Don't mean to insult anybodies intelligence.
FYI, my 90% number I threw out was approximate simple motor efficiency. (most motors I deal with are more 92-94%, big industrial, 24/7)
At one time I was very up on H2 fuel cells. When one looks at the entire energy pathway, the multiple, multiplicative losses in electricity (or NG) ->H2-> fuel cell->electricity->work, to me are the key reasons that batteries will more likely be more economically viable.
Hi, sorry I had to add the discussion about loss in any change in form or function of energy. I am always surprised how many people don't understand the implications of the first two laws of thermodynamics. Don't mean to insult anybodies intelligence.
FYI, my 90% number I threw out was approximate simple motor efficiency. (most motors I deal with are more 92-94%, big industrial, 24/7)
At one time I was very up on H2 fuel cells. When one looks at the entire energy pathway, the multiple, multiplicative losses in electricity (or NG) ->H2-> fuel cell->electricity->work, to me are the key reasons that batteries will more likely be more economically viable.
So, we need people like you to carry on a reasonable discussion and present other information.
