- Related Stories
-
Studying the hydrogen energy chain
April 4, 2007 -
Energy start-ups see IPOs ahead
March 29, 2007 -
Full steam ahead for Nevada solar project
March 12, 2007 -
The greening of Las Vegas
March 9, 2007 -
FAQ: Guide to alternative fuels
February 1, 2007
The public's excitement and interest is an unexpected side effect to the city's hydrogen initiative, according to Dan Hyde, the director of fleet and transportation services for the city of Las Vegas.
Think of your city's road vehicles and you probably envision a fleet of aging utility trucks and maybe a sensible sedan for the mayor. But some state, county and city governments are on the cutting edge when it comes to hydrogen fuel.
The average hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle can go about 150 miles before it needs to refuel, according to Patrick Davis, acting program manager for hydrogen fuel cells and infrastructure technologies at the U.S. Department of Energy. That makes municipalities, which generally keep their cars within short distances and return them to a common station, good testing grounds.
London and Luxembourg, along with Barcelona and Madrid in Spain; Amsterdam in the Netherlands; Hamburg, Germany; and Reykjavik, Iceland, have been using hydrogen fuel cell buses as part of their fleets since 2003 through a pilot program with Daimler-Chrysler.
U.S. cities have also been joining hydrogen programs through sponsorships with car companies, energy companies and initiatives from the Department of Energy. There are now fleets with hydrogen fuel cell buses, cars and light-duty utility trucks, as well as vehicles with converted internal combustion engines that take hydrogen fuel.
The Las Vegas area, for example, has one hydrogen filling station for the city and one at the Las Vegas Valley Water District's Springs Preserve.
The city fleet station run by Dan Hyde uses compressed hydrogen fuel that gets delivered to two separate types of pumps. One dispenses pure hydrogen at 5,000 psi for fuel cell cars like the Honda SCX; the other dispenses a blend of hydrogen and compressed natural gas for cars with internal combustion engine conversions. It will also fill up two hydrogen engine buses from Ford to be delivered this June.
Hydrogen's energy chain
The Las Vegas Valley Water District chose to make its own hydrogen from a completely sustainable energy source for the Springs Preserve station, according to James Morwood, fleet services manager for the LVVWD.
Solar panels make electricity for electrolysis, a common method for liberating hydrogen from water. While that hydrogen production method can use up a lot of electricity, the solar panels at Springs Preserve make more electricity than the hydrogen station uses in 24 hours. The excess electricity is directed to the Nevada grid.
"This project demonstrates the district's commitment to renewable energy. We are trying to lead the way and show people that this is out there and we can get there, but we need more participation or it's going to be pretty hard to sell hydrogen vehicles," said Morwood.
Of course, it's arguable whether these programs can catalyze hydrogen into the winners' circle of alternative fuels.
Ken Kurani, an associate researcher at the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California at Davis, was part of the Hydrogen Pathways Program that from 2003 to 2006 studied every aspect of the hydrogen "energy chain."
While he sees state and local governments as playing a part in illustrating the pros of hydrogen, they aren't going to push the market into using it, he says. Since they often rely on partnerships with the private sector and federal government, they are subject to the whims of bureaucracy at all levels. If hydrogen falls out of favor and loses sponsor support, for example, or if the leasing company wants its hydrogen fuel cell vehicle back (as in the case of the electric car), those government programs are out of luck.
The midterm, hybrid option
The city of Las Vegas, for example, spent $150,000 in land and manpower to prepare the site for its hydrogen station, according to fleet director Hyde. The rest of the $10.8 million project came from Air Products and the Department of Energy. Air Products maintains the station for about $24,000 a year, about half of which is paid for by the government, according to Hyde. Air Products also supplies 1,500 gallons of compressed hydrogen fuel twice a month.
Hydrogen could be the long-term solution once transportation systems become "electrified," but not just yet, said Kurani.
"The immediate-to-midterm option is going to happen through hybrid electric vehicles and...subject to fixing the lifetime costs and the short-lifespan-of-batteries issue...plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, as well," says Kurani.
But for both local governments and consumers, this isn't going to be a winner-take-all situation.
"We started the 20th century with steam, electric and gas, and we settled on one. I don't think there is an imperative that we have to settle on one again, though. You have the electrical grid with so many sources. If we have grid-connected vehicles, that opens up the transportation industry to those possibilities," Kurani said.
Hyde lists several reasons why Las Vegas was willing to try out hydrogen.
"First, air quality, which is everyone's concern. Second, it goes a long way for energy independence if we can perfect the tech for mainstream use. And third, it creates new business for the economy," he said.
Other areas working on similar hydrogen programs are Washington, D.C., Atlanta and a Boston-based consortium that looks at alternative forms of transportation in the Northeast. California's Hydrogen Highways Network aims to make hydrogen fuel accessible to all Californians at service stations along the state's major highways by the end of the decade.
See more CNET content tagged:
hydrogen, fuel cell, hydrogen fuel cell, fleet, electricity
I am concerned that these limitations are not mentioned right away and addressed throughout the article. Why? Because the public is being led to believe that there is a coming "Hydrogen Revolution" that will solve our transportation energy ills. This simply isn't true. Electric vehicles powered by batteries (charged directly by solar panels) provide a feasible alternative to most transportation without heavy investment in infrastructure. This article states a driving range of 150 miles. GM's own (now-defunct) EV-1 electric vehicle achieved nearly this range five years ago and was capable of far greater range with little effort. This, too, is something that we seem to have forgotten.
CNET has a responsibility to report this issue accurately.
This is very true and it affects not only storing it but also transporting it. If you lose 10% of your hydrogen before it ever reaches your fuel tank than you're taking a noticeable hit to your well to wheel efficiency.
For hydrogen to become at all useful as a fuel it's going to need to integrate much better into our existing transportation structure.
> 2. It takes more energy to get hydrogen from water than you get out of it.
It's slightly sad that we actually need to tell people this, since it should be obvious to everyone that's done a high school science course, which SHOULD be the entire adult population of the Western world at least.
Right now the best electrolyzes get about 55% efficiency and fuel cells get something like 90% efficiency. Multiply 'em together and you get 50% total. Put quite simply, you put in twice as much electricity as you get out. These numbers aren't likely to improve much either, electrolysis has been used for 100+ years now and is quite well understood, while even making fuel cells 100% efficient doesn't help the equation much. Ohh, and you also need a bit of extra energy (10%?) if you want to compress the hydrogen up to 350 bar.
> 3. Most current hydrogen fuel cells use platinum, a limited and expensive metal
Catalytic converters in internal combustion engines (ICE) also use platinum (among other precious metals). Really this just comes down to a question of costs, how much would a fuel cell and accompanied equipment cost vs. an ICE or other alternatives. Suffice it to say that for the foreseeable future, fuel cells are VERY expensive and no where close to cost-competitive.
> 4. Range is limited.
Honda's latest SCX design has an estimated range of 500KM (300 miles), so they've at least solved that issue.
> 5. Fuel cells wear out, just like batteries, but they cost far more to manufacture and replace.
Everything wears out, so again we're just talking about costs here.
I'll add another problem for ya here:
6. Even when stored at 350bar (5000psi) you need a much larger fuel tank than a conventional ICE.
In any case, personally I think GM is on the right track with their Volt concept. Electric cars are great for commuting, but have a major drawback that they just can't be refilled quickly (rough estimate: with a 40-amp, 220-volt "oven and dryer" style circuit most electric cars would take about 1 hour per 160km/100miles worth of charge). They're great for commuting to and from work though, which is where most people do a lot of their driving, but people need a car that can do long trips as well as short ones.
The trick with the Volt concept is that it can run about 65km (40 miles) on an electric charge for short trips (ie the daily commute). For long trips it uses an ICE to charge the batteries for the electric motor. This gives it a ~500km (300 mile) range before fueling, and then it gets fueled using our existing infrastructure, the gas pump. While it might seem a bit odd at first to use an ICE to charge batteries, the idea actually makes very good sense and is well proven in trains and ships (among others). Internal combustion engines work best when they're tuned for a very narrow rpm range, while electric motors work well over a very wide range. Using a combination of the two can run your ICE only at it's ideal rev range meaning you always get maximum fuel economy (rough analogy: always getting highway mileage from your engine even in stop-and-go traffic).
The only brain-dead decision that GM made with this concept is that they stuck an ethanol engine in the damn thing, which is totally pointless so long as ethanol comes from corn (too energy intensive to grow and only remotely economically viable due to the many billions of dollars in subsidies). A small diesel engine makes FAR more sense in this application. They could get roughly twice the range out of 1 litre of diesel fuel vs. 1 litre of ethanol, so it would make the vehicle cheaper to operate and probably more environmentally friendly (again, so long as the ethanol is coming from corn).
It can be found here:
http://news.com.com/Studying+the+hydrogen+energy+chain/2100-11392_3-6173003.html
Thanks,
Candace
For this, a plug and drive car would make the most sense.
Maybe GM will sell me a their car without the heat engine.
I've been wondering why/how Tesla can engineer an electric roadster that offers many times the performance and range of the electric that GM is planning?
Also, why is the Tesla close to $100K? Except for the batteries/motors, it looks like a regular little $25K roadster. So do Tesla motors/batteries really cost $75K extra per car, or are they selling cars at a huge markup to recover their R&D expenses. Since a Prius battery pack costs under $7K, I'm guessing the latter.
If GM mass produced an electric roadster (say based on the Saturn Sky) using Tesla battery/motor technology, what could it profitably sell for?
I think if GM could price it at $30K, they would sell a ton, even if it didn't have Tesla's level of performance.
Why did Tesla make such a high-performance roadster? My guess is they knew it would take gobs of cash to develop and produce, so they figured why not make a supercar that rich boys would buy? I mean, they would have a much harder time selling an econobox for, say, $50,000. But a car that can best a Porsche or a Vette or even a Ferrari? Worth the extra cash.
Check out http://www.zapworld.com/ and http://zenncars.com
Zenn supposedly is working with EESTOR to develop and manufacture these lightweight capacitors that extend range into the 300-mile-plus range. And they supposedly charge in less than an hour. Sounds too good to be true, but it's on their site.
Ever notice how heavy & bulky a standard 2300 psi O2 or N2 cylinder is, and all the safety precautions for use and storage that are required for their use, well it would hold a whopping 1.6 lbs of H2 in a 120 lb cylinder. H2 is the hardest gas to prevent from leaking, and can form explosive mixtures with air in any semi-enclosed space, which can be ignited by a lighting strike one mile away. It also causes metals to become brittle, so high tech materials are needed to use it. Insurance companies may refuse to insure people with H2 vehicles, as any leak in an enclosed parking lot or garage would easily be ignited causing a deadly, destructive explosion.
Besides, there is a far superior way to store H2, called Methanol, costs $1 per gallon, simple to produce by numerous methods including from H2 and waste CO2. Burns at 43% efficiency (H2 fuels cells are 50% efficient) in a simple Port Fuel Injection Turbocharged high Compression Spark Ignition engine and meets the tough Tier II New Low Emission Vehicle requirements. Easy to store & transport. Can be mixed in all proportions with ethanol & gasoline to facilitate a gradual change away from oil products. Six times the energy per liter of H2 compressed to 3000 psi. Whereas methanol is sold in grocery stores in flimsy plastic containers (they wouldn?t let you buy gasoline in those packages). People use it routinely in Northern Countries to add to their gas tanks to prevent gas line freeze-up. It would save many lives and the destruction of property in accidents, since it burns with a very cool flame. (that is why racing cars are required to burn it or a mix with ethanol). Also dissipates to atmosphere in a spill quickly, or can easily be washed down (mixes with water) no environmental damage, unlike petroleum. A far superior way to transport Natural Gas than LNG, safe and environmentally benign in a spill.
There is nothing green about using water to produce power of any kind in Las Vegas because water is the most scarce natural resource in Nevada. The outlook for future sources of additional water are absolutely nonexistent. So what the hell were they thinking when they built a fuel plant which requires even more water usage to produce that fuel? OH, I wasn't thinking. The grant money was there, so they needed to be the ones to spend it.
How many miles do we get out of it?
Do we need little green tanks to carry it out
to the freeway in case we run out of it on the
road?
just pure air. It would be easier to set up, no transportation of
gases.
If we could build these vehicle and sell them at a little
profit,don't get greedy, we could go a long way in changing the
world. It would be the greedy part that has to be eliminated.
Keep the cost down, maybe under $8,000, so everyone could
afford one. I know it is a dream.
With existing cars, hydrogen is the way to go, probably the only
way. Convert them to burn hydrogen, maybe a on- demand unit
where it produces as you go.
requires no cryogenic treatment. Its pressure is
less that 200 psi and has been safely used and carried by tank trucks and pipelines for decades.
It requires relatively little energy to break down
to nitrogen and hyrdogen gasses.
But why do we not also develope an engine that is designed to run on pure hydrogen?
- Hydrogen as a car fuel
- by bluegoosefeathers April 12, 2008 6:48 AM PDT
- I think it is rather obvious that using hydrogen to fuel automobiles is not very practical. But I do think there is something to be said for using hydrogen for heating houses and hot water. I would suggest we concentrate on developing point-of-use hydrogen generation. Using photovoltaics and wind a block of houses could generate enough hydrogen and store it at low pressure for this purpose could they not. And by eliminating natural gas we cut carbon emissions do we not? And since hydrogen is non toxic you elimnate carbon monoxide dangers. No venting necessary to burn hydrogen in an appliance so heating efficiency goes up considerably. And by using such point-of-consumption production you eliminate the need for expensive infrastructure. So lets do it. Unfortunately I have not found a single article that discusses how to convert any appliance to hydrogen. This is the practical hydrogen economy not automobiles and expensive infrastructure.
- Reply to this comment
-
(19 Comments)