Popular Mechanics - Hydrogen on the Cheap

Last month, we took an in-depth look at alternative fuels. Among them was Earth’s the Universe's most abundant element, hydrogen. Although its future looks bright—the only by-product of a hydrogen fuel cell is water, and experts believe they can one day be used to create electricity to fuel cars—the cost and energy required to create hydrogen has taken it out of the running as a near-term energy alternative to oil. That may be about to change. Researchers at GE’s Global Research lab in Niskayuna, NY, have developed a system that produces hydrogen at a fraction of the cost and could be available commercially in just a few years. The basic process, electrolysis, is nothing new: Combine water with an electrolyte, and run current through the solution, forcing the water molecules to split into hydrogen and oxygen gases. But electrolysis-formed hydrogen has long been hampered by the high capital cost of the metals used in the process, around “thousands of dollars per kilowatt,” says Richard Bourgeois, GE’s electrolysis project leader. GE’s breakthrough comes from a proprietary material called Noryl, a highly chemical- and temperature-resistant plastic developed by the GE labs, that lowers the cost of hydrogen production to hundreds of dollars per kilowatt, according to Bourgeois. Although GE has only built a prototype in their lab, Bourgeois believes that demonstrations can come as soon as the end of next year, and commercialization will follow that. The goal of the project, according to Bourgeois, is to bring down equipment costs enough to take the cost of hydrogen from $8 per kilogram to $3 per kilogram—comparable in energy and price to a gallon of gasoline.Currently, Hydrogen production is also limited to industrial refineries and agricultural areas, where the gas is produced on-site using methane, says Bourgeois. GE’s system—which, at approximately 10’ x 20’, can fit in a small trailer—could be marketed to smaller-scale industries. And one day, Bourgeois sees a future when drivers fill their hydrogen-fuel-cell powered cars from pumps with built-in electrolyzers. If electricity needed to produce the hydrogen is wind- or solar-generated, the entire process is, essentially, emissions-free.—Erin McCarthyRead more blog posts...
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapThe amount of water produced in the exhaust of a fuel cell vehicle is about the same amount of water produced in the exhaust of a gasoline internal combustion engine. The biggest difference of course is the FCV exhaust is of pristine purity, while the gasoline water vapor exhaust is tainted with many pollutants.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapWow, the misconceptions abound... To those worried about drowning the world in hydrogen fuel exhuast water. Don't worry, it takes more water to make the hydrogen than you are going to get by burning it (by a very very small amount). Running out of or drowning due to excess water will never be a problem with burning hydrogen. The kilowatt measurement of hydrogen is the amount of energy released by burning the hydrogen, wich is equal to an exact amount of hydrogren. They use kilowatts so that it's easier to compare with the energy output of other fuels.
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheap1. you generally refer to $/Kw as a measure of construction cost for installed capacity. As in $800/KW means that it will cost $800 dollars per KW capacity of the plant you are building. if the plant you are building produces 10Kw the construction cost is $8000 dollars. Right now, a 5 kW gas generator costs $500.00, or about $100/kw,(don't forget to add operating expenses). The real story is told by the production cost in $/btu (for fuels) or $/kwh (for electricity) - nuclear power is the obvious choice here guys, nothing else produces so much base load power for such a minimal environmental impact - the real advantage of hydrogen comes from effeciency gains. The effeciency of a fuel cell is theoretically much higher than that of a reciprocating engine, making the $/gallon comparison examples nonsense. It's really $/mile that is important - All we're doing in this cycle is taking water, splitting it into hydrogen and oxygen, and re-combining the hydrogen and oxygen at a later date (with effeciency losses). There will be no flood of waters in the surface of the world (unlness we pump groundwater to make H2) because the cycle is closed. all we're really doing here is providing a mechanism for power that is more effecient and convenient than batteries. It's been proven that H2 is NOT easy to ship, so it makes sense to "crack" it locally.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapPeople who question hydrogen as a fuel alternative should remember that hydrogen is already being used in a small scales for transportation. It is not experimental technology, it is EXISTING technology. (of course, as is the case with gasoline engines themselves, there is continual experimentation and development) While there are still certain hurdles to be overcomed before mass production of personal vehicles using hydrogen fuel becomes technologically possible, to question the basis for technology itself today is to be a pseudo-sceptical luddite at best, or an oil-company cheerleader at worse. Be it fuel cells, hydrogen, ethanol, etc, oil is ALREADY the past of energy. And hydrogen, for a whole lot of very compelling reasons, is a main contender. Deal with it. Embrace it. And get it on!
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheap"How much water is produced as a byproduct of a hydrogen-fueled system?" As I understand it, the hydrogen comes from splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen. Then, the hyrdrogen is burnt (oxygenated) in the fuel cell, which creates water. So, the net effect is zero.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapFor a prototypic hydrogen fuel system retrofit being trialled in stock vehicles, see http://www.switch2hydrogen.com/h2.htm They report that this system comes with an in-home hydrogen generator that can be run by a solar panel /windmill - i.e., the system is designed to liberate the hydrogen using the energy of sun or wind. (One could also use a tidal generator, or low-flow hydro, or a wave generator . . . .) The prototype is a bright red 1994 Corvette; with 2 sets of hydride tanks, the driving range is over 650 miles per fill. Not much trunk room - which may be why subsequent conversions have involved SUV's and trucks. Converted vehicles can switch back and forth from gasoline. The group is also working on a simpler hydrogen injection system to reduce the gas usage of an engine by an estimated 25% while it is running on gasoline. Unfortunately, while they seem to be efficiently identifying and solving technical problems, it looks as though they've run into a legal snag: "Work on our Hydrogen Fuel System is currently on hold. This is due to the actions of the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) attempting to remove the necessary chemicals used in this system from public use." Rats.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapYou know, if we really wanted to, we could build a nuclear energy plant somewhere on the coast, use the electrical power to release the H2 and O2, and start to solve our oil dependance problems.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapH2 storage for vehicles is accomplished by using metallic hydrides. H2 binds itself to the hydrides and is released by the application of heat. Imagine a tank full of hydrides and H2 mechanically attached to the exhaust pipe to provide the heat to free up the gaseous H2. In the 70's, this system was developed to provide about 150 miles range. For people concerned about the "Hindenburg" problem, NASA tested a tank, shot it with a high powered rifle, and even with a cigarette lighter, couldn't get it to sustain ignition. Think about shooting a gas tank and trying to light it.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapCompare: Use electricity to power battery EV >> efficiency 90% Use electricity to electrolyse H2O >> efficiency ~ 80% which then powers a not-yet-commercial H2 Fuel Cell @ efficiency ~60%. Overall efficency = 48% (or worse burn it @ 17% efficiency >> 14% overall!!) Hydrogen is a dead end with any financial price cut...
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheaphow much does noryl cost to make?
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheapyea gods. 1. Electrolysis is a process that reduces water to its constituent gasses. There won't be any net gain of water from burning hydrogen gained through electrolysis. Sea levels won't rise, and by the standards of our oceans, we won't use all that much water anyway. 2. As we know it right now, it is impossible to see a net gain of energy through electrolysis. The consumptive cycle is a net user of energy and, barring some fundamental breakthrough, always will be. The idea is that energy would be pumped in through some clean technology such as solar, wind nuclear, et. al. 3. Repeat after me: "Batteries suck." From an environmental standpoint they are an awful way to store energy. They produce a goodly amount of heat, they have a very limited life cycle, they generally require heavy metals, they are rarely recycled and their power density (compared to chemical storage) is abysmal. I wish batteries gone and fervently hope they become a niche technology. 4. sorry to rant.
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheapas for the second comment, this article is announcing a break through that could eliminate the need to store the hysrogen. Rather all that would be needed is a tank for water, and then just recycle the water produced by the fuel cell. The cost for hte electrolysis is the only reason why electrolysis isn't the primary source of hydrogen already. But the will change that.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapHydrogen powered cars will introduce LESS water into the ecosystem than fossil fuels, because they just dismantle water into hydrogen and oxygen in one place and reassemble them in your vehicle. They may rarify the oxygen to some measurable degree along major freeways, but nature should be able keep up with it just fine.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapI suspect the "hundreds of dollars per kilowatt" either refers to the scalability of the machine, i.e. a machine that uses 10kw of electricity to make hydrogen would cost in the millions vs the current tens of millions. That would make sense as cost can scale with throughput. Either that, or parts of the machine are consumed in the process, which doesn't seem right. Also, for the people that asked about the amount of water used: they say a kg of H is roughly equivalent to a gallon of gas. Now water is 1/9 hydrogen by weight, so for each kg of H consumed, the car would put out 9 kg (19.8 lbs) of water (~2.5 gallons). Assuming gas mileage equivalency, the car would use put that out over a 20 mile distance (based of 20 mpg using gas). At sixty miles an hour, it would take 20 mins for the car to put out 2.5 gallons of water or it puts out 1/8 of a gallon (1 pint) a minute or mile (interchangeable).
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapWhile not worried about rising oceans, no one has ever told me how much water is produced as "exhaust". What happens on the highways in the winter?
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapWhat about storage? From what I have read, there is currently no technology that can store enough hydrogen in a size and weight that is close to feasible for automotive use. Not that this can't be overcome someday, but that someday may be far off. Better batteries may have less sex appeal, but we are more likely to see them... some day before I die.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapBoth Mazda and BMW are trying to rollout bi-fuel vehicles in 2008 that can run on either gasoline or hydrogen. Ford has a prototype called the Super Chief that runs on gasoline, E85 ethanol or hydrogen. If advanced battery technology, such as ultra-super capacitor comes into its own, much less fuel such as hydrogen will be needed to power automobiles. It's good to see GE getting in the game. Companies such as Air Products and Shell already have the jump on them, though, since they are already manufacturing and distributing hydrogen to hydrogen cars and vehicles at test sites.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapIn the early 60's, NASA was building rockets using H2 and O2 as fuel and oxidizer. During that period, they did several studies regarding the use of H2 as an energy source for vehicles. Hydrogen is the energy carrier in most of the fuels we now use. Gasoline, diesel, Natural gas, and propane are just the mechanisms we use to deliver the energy H2. NASA put out a document stating that H2 would be economically feasible when or if the price of oil ever reached $20.00 per barrel. The question is not how to use H2 for a fuel, any gasoline engine can be detuned, (to accomodate the slower flamefront),to use gaseous H2 as a fuel. The only question should be how to get the distribution system up and operational.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapThs argument over the efficiency of the hydrogen generator is baffling. The unit has to be efficient enough to create not only enough to run itself, but also create spare hydrogen for other uses. In the same way the energy used to pump oil out of the ground is far less then what is generated by the process. If spare hydrogen cannot be created then the other option is to hook up a nuclear reactor to the process as the energy source, then all the hydrogen can go into cars and other devices.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapThere is NO energy gain if the hyrdogen produced is used to power the system. In fact, there would be an energy deficit if that was done as the energy used to split the water molocules does not all go into splitting molocules and the energy obtained by combining hydrogen and oxygen into water is not all captured either!
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapHow much water is produced as a byproduct of a hydrogen-fueled system? Is this water being "created" by binding otherwise free Oxygen and Hydrogen molecules together? Or is it water that already existed as water that is just emitted at the end of the process? If the former, how will the planet tolerate so much excess water created? Imagine an entire "hydrogen economy", with every car and other devices powered by hydrogen fuel cells and emitting water as a byproduct. What are we going to do with all the extra water created and filling the planet, if that's how these fuel cells work? Again, if this is the process, how much would sea-levels rise each fifty-year or one hundred-year period of us "creating" a bunch of extra water to add to what the planet has naturally in a hydrogen economy? Does nobody see a problem here?
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapNo matter how you do it, it takes at least as much energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen as you get back when you burn it. Law of Conservation of Energy and all that. You still have to get that energy from somewhere. "Wind or solar generated?" Perhaps some day.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapThis is big news. Richard Bourgeois is right to be excited about this. Hydrogen technology still has some way to go, at least a few years or so, before we see hydorgen cars rolling around the interstates. But a development like this at the level of the basic electrolysis reaction is a huge breakthrough. Congratulations to Mr. Bourgeois and his team at GE!
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapThe ultra-super capacitor, if it works out, will store energy at less than 25% of the cost fo the GE hydrogen generator. It will be tested this summer. See EESTOR inc.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapAs to cars, BMW has a test model which they had up to 186 mph last year. There are a few hydrogen filling stations already on line in Europe, including at the Munich airport.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapHydrogen is wonderful, but if it is made from electricity why not just use the electricity in an electric car? It seems to me there is a bright future for modest range electric "errand" cars and plugable hybred cars that charge up at night at home and then drive the first 30 or more miles the next day on batteries alone. Critical to some of this is getting homeowners commercial off-peak electrical rates for charging at home. The electic companies should love this, they get to sell more power. The electical infrastructure (the wires)is in place, the generators are spinning listlessly at night, just waiting, and the MPG for hybreds could jump over 100. Plug em in move em out.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapThe importance of reducing the cost of the electrolyzer is that it makes it more reasonable to operate the electrolyzer at low duty cycle. You can begin to think about using the electrolyzer only when electric rates are low, such as at night. This could greatly affect the cost of the hydrogen. This kind of demand dispatchability is prized by operators of the electric grid. But who makes, or is planning to make a car that will run on hydrogen? The US currently makes 9 million tons of hydrogen per year; it will be quite a while, if ever, before automotive demand is anywhere close to that. By the way, cheap electrolyzers also have nuclear proliferation implications -- they'll reduce the cost of making heavy water. Electrolysis has a large separation factor for deuterium, and by tacking on a hydrogen/water exchange column you can cause the cell to accumulate nearly pure heavy water. This process, CECE, becomes the lowest marginal cost method of making heavy water if you are doing electrolysis anyway.
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheapwonderfull news - if it can be mass produced for "cheap" - one thing though. the world has changed, this opportunity opens up a whole new world for your basic back-yard terrorist - or am i missing something??
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapMazda has a prototype version of the RX-8 that runs on hydrogen OR gasoline. It turns out that the rotary engine is a reasonably good design for using hydrogen. I don't think that PM has done an article on it, but search google with "RX-8 hydrogen" and you'll find info.
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheap"What is the energy gain, if any, if the system powers itself? That is, does it produce enough excess hydrogen to be useable if its own hydrogen is used to power the generators that split the water?" Think about it - best you could hope for with 100% efficiency on the generators would be to break even (well, really not even then, but then we're into serious geek territory), but of course the 2nd law of thermo says even that can't happen.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapIn this case, "kilowatt per hour" refers to the capacity of the device to use electrcity, not its output of hydrogen. As I understand it, in electroylsis, the output of hydrogen per kiolwatt hour is essentially fixed. The innovation here is in making cheaper electrodes, thus making the devices cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to buy.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapIt doesn't seem possible to have any sort of energy gain with hydrogen (to the commenter that asked it). There's an automatic net loss, because the element is coming from the same thing that it's in turn turning into (water into hydrogen and ultimately into water). Then there's the energy required to produce the electrolyte and to initiate the process itself. Hydrogen will never be able to be an innate fuel in itself- rather, it's an energy storage mechanism (keep in mind that gasoline only seems gives a power gain because the earth has provided the pressure and heat necessary to make oil- if we were to synthetically make oil, there would be an energy loss). There's been a lot of crying about how hydrogen isn't a true fuel source, and I suppose if humans getting more energy than they put in is the definition of a fuel source, then that's true. The fact is, however, that it's not intended to be- anyone educated on the issue knows that additional energy will have to be put in, but the political costs make that worth it for a lot of people. And if a relatively clean fuel source can be used, then emissions issues will improve.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapHydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe as a whole but on Earth oxygen is some 329 times more common. See the link below: http://education.jlab.org/glossary/abund_ele.html Remember, most of the Earths' crust is composed of silicates (SiO4), oxides etc.
Re: Hydrogen on the Cheapthat lowers the cost of hydrogen production to hundreds of dollars per kilowatt What the heck does that mean? Let's see, $200/(1KW x 1ns) = $200,000,000 per joule. Doesn't look good from here.
As in, per kilowatt rating of the actual electrolysis machine - we're talking capital cost over size of the system, not run cost over volume produced. -Ed.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapGreat. But what is the meaning of "per kilowatt" in manufacturing hydrogen? Is it per kilowatt of the engine power derived from burning the hydrogen? And if so, what kind of engine?
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapBut who makes, or is planning to make a car that will run on hydrogen?
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapWhat is the energy gain, if any, if the system powers itself? That is, does it produce enough excess hydrogen to be useable if its own hydrogen is used to power the generators that split the water? This energy balance would be useful to know.
Re: Hydrogen on the CheapI'm a little lost at how you can "lower the cost of hydrogen production to hundreds of dollars per kilowatt". A kilowatt is a measure of power, not energy. Is this speaking only of the capital equpment investment and not the energy use? In the subsequent paragraph, it then morphs into energy cost. How does a change in electrodes reduce the energy cost of electrolysis?