Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

[SageBrush]

One of the interesting things about the famed 'S' curve of new technology adoption is that it is a mirage for the ignorant, who imagine that the tech languishes for years and years and then suddenly takes off.

What actually happens is that the YOY growth rate stays fairly constant through the years, but the change is not seen on standard graphs because the absolute annual increases are small for years.

Hydrogen based transport growth has been flat or decreasing for years despite massive Gov subsidy. That is not the picture of the next tech poster child, it is the tell tale sign of technology death. This is not exactly surprising to those that can reason and apply a little arithmetic, but for others, the graph is out there.

 

[GRA]

Both GCC:

Plug Power, Olin JV to produce green hydrogen in 15 ton per day plant in Louisiana

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/04/20220429-olin.html

Olin Corporation, a leading vertically integrated chlor alkali producer and marketer, and Plug Power Inc., a leading provider of turnkey hydrogen solutions, intend to create a joint venture (JV) to produce and market green hydrogen to support growing fuel cell demand in the global hydrogen economy.

The JV is the first of its kind and will provide reliability of supply and speed to market for green hydrogen throughout North America, setting the foundation for broader collaboration between the two companies. The first production plant in St. Gabriel, Louisiana will produce 15 tons per day (tpd) of green hydrogen. . . .

Under the JV, Plug Power will market the hydrogen and provide logistical support for delivery while Olin will provide reliable hydrogen production and operational support.

Hydrogen produced as a byproduct from chlor-alkali plants is typically combusted for process heat on site, vented to the atmosphere (i.e., wasted), or sold to the external merchant hydrogen market.

A 2018 study by a team from Argonne National Laboratory (Lee et al.) evaluated well-to-gate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with by-product hydrogen from chlor-alkali processes in comparison with hydrogen from the conventional centralized natural gas steam methane reforming (central SMR) pathway.

They estimated that by-product hydrogen production from chlor-alkali processes creates 1.3–9.8 kg CO2e/kg H2 of life-cycle GHG emissions on average—20–90% less than the conventional central SMR pathway. The results vary with co-product treatment scenarios, regional electric grid characteristics, on-site power generation, product prices, and hydrogen yield.

Despite the variations in the results, it was concluded that the life-cycle GHG emission reduction benefits of using by-product hydrogen from chlor-alkali processes are robust.

—Lee et al. . . .

Plug Power is targeting 70 tpd by the end of this year and is on track to deliver 500 tpd of green hydrogen production by 2025 and 1,000 tpd by 2028.

The joint venture is expected to be operational in 2023.

JAEA and MHI begin hydrogen production demo project using High Temperature Engineering Test Reactor (HTTR)

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/04/20220429-httr.html

The Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA), a national research and development agency, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (MHI), have been contracted by Japan’s Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, part of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), to conduct a Hydrogen Production Demonstration Project Utilizing Very High Temperature, and from this fiscal year initiated a program to produce hydrogen using a High Temperature Engineering Test Reactor (HTTR).

Under this program, a newly built hydrogen production plant will be connected to an HTTR owned by JAEA, with the aim of proving the technology for hydrogen production utilizing the high temperature heat obtained from the HTTR.

The determination of specific renovations necessary to connect the hydrogen production plant, along with the licensing procedure, equipment modifications, and testing, will be conducted in stages.

To support future advancements in technologies for hydrogen production, JAEA and MHI will also examine the feasibility of enlarging certain components to allow for large-scale hydrogen production (such as the high temperature isolation valve), and explore carbon-free hydrogen production technologies in combination with high temperature gas-cooled reactors.

Through this program, JAEA and MHI intend to prove the technology for hydrogen production utilizing extremely high temperature heat from sources such as high temperature gas-cooled reactors, and realize the stable, large-scale, carbon-free hydrogen production.

Background. Japan’s Strategic Energy Plan (Cabinet approval in October 2021) sets as a policy the establishment of elemental technologies for hydrogen production using high temperature gas-cooled reactors. In addition, the Green Growth Strategy Through Achieving Carbon Neutrality in 2050 (formulated in June 2021) sets as a policy the development by 2030 of technologies necessary to produce large-scale, low cost, carbon-free hydrogen by utilizing HTTRs, which have achieved world record-high temperatures. . . .

 

[GRA]

One of the interesting things about the famed 'S' curve of new technology adoption is that it is a mirage for the ignorant, who imagine that the tech languishes for years and years and then suddenly takes off.

What actually happens is that the YOY growth rate stays fairly constant through the years, but the change is not seen on standard graphs because the absolute annual increases are small for years.

Hydrogen based transport growth has been flat or decreasing for years despite massive Gov subsidy. That is not the picture of the next tech poster child, it is the tell tale sign of technology death. This is not exactly surprising to those that can reason and apply a little arithmetic, but for others, the graph is out there.

Your ability to ignore all the growth in H2 for transport, as linked in this topic, is noted. Having been through the PV technology growth curve, it was anything but constant. Same goes for wind - Paul Gipe has forgotten far more than I'll ever know about that (see https://www.amazon.com/Paul-Gipe/e/B000APJJIE?ref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share), but I can recall the early phase when the Altamont Pass east of Livermore had the world's largest wind turbine field for several years (early '80s), driven solely by favorable tax credits. Everyone from Hollywood celebrities to early dot-com millionaires was building a few turbines there (forget the maximum output limit), but unfortunately most of them were broken down or missing vital parts (blades, turbines, fallen towers) most of the time, so whenever I'd drive past most of them would be sitting idle even when good winds were blowing. Development shifted to Denmark, who did the first properly-engineered and much larger turbines, and finally Chinese production lowered the cost for wind to really take off. PV underwent similar lulls and surges and Chinese production played a huge part there as well, but as with wind government support was crucial.

Just think what the situation would be now if the various governments had said way back when, "We're only going to subsidize wind (or PV), because we're absolutely sure it will be the ultiamte winner for all purposes."

 

[SageBrush]

Can we NOW kill this inane thread ?
For comparison, 6.75 million plug-ins sold in 2021, continuing an 100% annual growth rate

And ... in terms of vehicles on the road worldwide, to give a flavor for how each tech adoption has fared in the past 10 years:
FCV -- around 5k
plug-in: 16 MILLION

 

[GRA]

Yup, FCEVs have trailed PEVs, for a very simple reason, the cost of H2 (and lack of infrastructure, but that's largely due to the first issue). The cost of H2, especially green and blue H2, is coming down, and it may well be that H2 is cost-competitive if not cheaper than gasoline NOW in some European countries thanks to current gas prices there. Europe was always going to be the first region to see H2 start to increase rapidly, for that reason.

As a reminder, DoE's goal was for H2 to cost $4/kg untaxed at the retail level in this country in order to be competitive with (then U.S.) gas prices. See

DOE Technical Targets for Hydrogen Production from Electrolysis

https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcel...The 2020 target is based,year is set to 2025.

More recently they've boosted that goal to $1/kg by 2030.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-shot

Of course, just because a goal has been set doesn't guarantee that it will be met, but it does indicate what they think may be technically and economically feasible.

 

[SageBrush]

Yup, FCEVs have trailed PEVs

Funny use of the word 'trailed'
In an 100 yard race, plug-ins would be crossing the finish line while FCEV would be 1.2 inches off the starting line

FCEV are not even a rounding error anymore, and the gap is accelerating rapidly

---
By the way, since you still read about FCEV, perhaps you can answer a couple of questions:

1. How many auto manufacturers had active FCEV program at peak, and what year was it in ? I know the world is at two currently.

2. What is the total annual world-wide Gov subsidy for FCEV and related, such as fuel, fueling stations, fuel generation and fuel distribution ?

 

[SageBrush]

Latest study from Stanford and Cornell about 'blue' hydrogen:

“Perhaps surprisingly, the greenhouse gas footprint of blue hydrogen is more than 20% greater than burning natural gas or coal for heat and some 60% greater than burning diesel oil for heat.”

The study’s authors add: “Our analysis assumes that captured carbon dioxide can be stored indefinitely, an optimistic and unproven assumption. Even if true though, the use of blue hydrogen appears difficult to justify on climate grounds.

“There really is no role for blue hydrogen in a carbon-free future. We suggest that blue hydrogen is best viewed as a distraction, something that may delay needed action to truly decarbonise the global energy economy.”

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/blue-hydrogen-worse-than-gas-for-the-climate-landmark-studys-damning-verdict/2-1-1051084

 

[GRA]

Yup, FCEVs have trailed PEVs

Funny use of the word 'trailed'
In an 100 yard race, plug-ins would be crossing the finish line while FCEV would be 1.2 inches off the starting line.

Not quite that large a spread, and of course plug-ins are nowhere the finish line, more like five or ten yards from the starting block. What's true is that FCEVs are trailing 5-7 years behind BEVs in development timeline.

FCEV are not even a rounding error anymore, and the gap is accelerating rapidly.

As far as passenger FCEVs that's currently true, due in large part to the pandemic hitting when it did, just at the point when production of fuel cells was starting to accelerate. For commercial vehicles, OTOH, fuel cells are starting to come into their own.

--
By the way, since you still read about FCEV, perhaps you can answer a couple of questions:

1. How many auto manufacturers had active FCEV program at peak, and what year was it in ? I know the world is at two currently.

I never totaled it up, so can't say for sure, but it was probably been a half dozen and a dozen. As for now, depends on your definition of 'active'. We have two passenger FCEVs currently available in the US, with several other manufacturers having models under development which may or may not be offered here.

2. What is the total annual world-wide Gov subsidy for FCEV and related, such as fuel, fueling stations, fuel generation and fuel distribution ?

No idea, but probably considerably less than the subsidies for PEVs and charging given the relative scale of each at the moment. Whenever I provide a link to an article in either area which includes info on government subsidies and the amount, I normally quote that section, as I do with the amount of private money invested.

 

[GRA]

Latest study from Stanford and Cornell about 'blue' hydrogen:

“Perhaps surprisingly, the greenhouse gas footprint of blue hydrogen is more than 20% greater than burning natural gas or coal for heat and some 60% greater than burning diesel oil for heat.”

The study’s authors add: “Our analysis assumes that captured carbon dioxide can be stored indefinitely, an optimistic and unproven assumption. Even if true though, the use of blue hydrogen appears difficult to justify on climate grounds.

“There really is no role for blue hydrogen in a carbon-free future. We suggest that blue hydrogen is best viewed as a distraction, something that may delay needed action to truly decarbonise the global energy economy.”

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/blue-hydrogen-worse-than-gas-for-the-climate-landmark-studys-damning-verdict/2-1-1051084

If that becomes the scientific consensus for _all_ blue H2, and includes electricity generation as well as heating, then by all means governments shouldn't count it as net-zero CO2. I'd obviously prefer green H2 only, but am willing to see whether blue H2 can help us get where we need to be.

 

[SageBrush]

If that becomes the scientific consensus for _all_ blue H2, and includes electricity generation as well as heating, then by all means governments shouldn't count it as net-zero CO2.

You can always find a couple bozos who support whatever you want to hear, but this has been scientific consensus for the couple decades that I have been reading about the topic.

Or you can think for yourself. Read the article, it is nothing complicated. And it is not a question of 'net zero', the point is that blue H2 is worse than coal in terms of climate change.

 

[GRA]

If that becomes the scientific consensus for _all_ blue H2, and includes electricity generation as well as heating, then by all means governments shouldn't count it as net-zero CO2.

You can always find a couple bozos who support whatever you want to hear, but this has been scientific consensus for the couple decades that I have been reading about the topic.

Or you can think for yourself. Read the article, it is nothing complicated. And it is not a question of 'net zero', the point is that blue H2 is worse than coal in terms of climate change.

Got time today to read it. Some quotes:

Blue hydrogen has “no role in a carbon-free future” – and is actually up to 20% worse for the planet than burning gas or coal to produce heat, according to what is claimed as a landmark academic study.

Note that I specifically wrote above "_all_ Blue H2, and includes electricity generation as well as heating"; this talks only about heat.


You wrote "this has been scientific consensus for the couple decades that I have been reading about the topic."

Another quote:

But the Cornell and Stanford researchers claim a first-of-a-kind peer-reviewed study of blue hydrogen’s lifecycle greenhouse gases footprint debunks any notion that it represents an emissions-free, or even low-emissions option, citing the large amounts of natural gas needed to fuel the process itself and the escape of “fugitive methane” from wells and other equipment along the supply chain.

If this is a

first-of-a-kind study

, a

landmark academic study

, then what was this supposedly scientific consensus you claim has existed for decades based on? Personal opinions? Guesses? I've had reservations about CCS and blue H2 for a long time given the numerous ways it could fail, but I've seen no scientific consensus that its bound to do so.

Another quote:

And “while carbon dioxide emissions are lower, fugitive methane emissions for blue hydrogen are higher than for grey hydrogen because of an increased use of natural gas to power the carbon capture.

Clearly a problem, so the obvious question becomes is NG the only way to power the carbon capture? Beats me, but we'd better find out. In my perfect world everything would be powered by RE, but that's not possible especially in the near and mid-term, so it behooves us to find out what is possible. My concerns with CCS are with leakage along the whole chain, plus use of fossil fuels to provide that. I simply don't know whether we can prevent that leakage to a significant enough extent to see a gain - there was a recent study that indicated that methane leaks worldwide were four to five times as high as previously thought. But I think the situation is serious enough that we have to continue with all such research, because it's going to be far more expensive not to try everything we can until it's proven a failure. The latest IPCC report pretty much confirms what I've expected for several years, that our chances of holding warming to just 1.5 deg. C are basically zilch at this point, given how little governments are actually willing and able to do.

 

[SageBrush]

You wrote "this has been scientific consensus for the couple decades that I have been reading about the topic."

Another quote:

But the Cornell and Stanford researchers claim a first-of-a-kind peer-reviewed study of blue hydrogen’s lifecycle greenhouse gases footprint debunks any notion that it represents an emissions-free, or even low-emissions option, citing the large amounts of natural gas needed to fuel the process itself and the escape of “fugitive methane” from wells and other equipment along the supply chain.

If this is a

first-of-a-kind study

, a

landmark academic study

, then what was this supposedly scientific consensus you claim has existed for decades based on?

GWP of methane

The results of electricity generation are much worse than heating.

 

[GRA]

Both GCC:

Nikola announces $200M convertible senior notes investment; approx. $1B cash and liquidity position

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/05/20220503-nikola.html

Nikola Corporation announced that an institutional investor has agreed to make a $200-million investment in Nikola through the purchase of Convertible Senior Notes. Funds advised by Antara Capital LP have agreed to purchase $200 million aggregate amount of 8.00% / 11.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2026. The Notes will bear interest at a rate of 8.00% if paid in cash, or at a rate of 11.00% through the issuance of additional Notes, at the company’s election.

The notes will be convertible at an initial conversion price to be determined prior to closing. The initial conversion price will represent a 30% premium to the lower of Nikola’s volume-weighted average price over a pre-determined time period between this announcement and closing of the Notes and the closing price of Nikola’s common stock on the last trading day prior to the date of this announcement, but will not be lower than 110% of such closing price.

Upon conversion, Nikola will have the right to settle the Notes in cash, shares, or any combination thereof at its election. The Notes will mature on 31 May 2026, unless redeemed, repurchased, or converted prior to such date.

Nikola intends to use the net proceeds from the sale of the Notes along with its other liquidity sources for business expansion in the form of scaling truck manufacturing and tooling setup, accelerating the development of its hydrogen infrastructure, as well as for general corporate purposes. . . .

PG&E launches comprehensive study on hydrogen’s feasibility within gas pipelines; H2[Note: infinity sign following H2; can't post it]

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/05/20220503-pge.html

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is launching the US’ most comprehensive end-to-end hydrogen study and demonstration facility, which will examine the future potential of the zero-carbon fuel hydrogen as a renewable energy source for not only PG&E customers but the entire global natural gas industry.

The centerpiece of the study, known as Hydrogen to Infinity (H2[infinity sign]), is a large-scale project that will blend hydrogen and natural gas in a stand-alone transmission pipeline system. H2[infinity sign] will enable PG&E and its partners (Northern California Power Agency [NCPA], Siemens Energy, the City of Lodi, GHD Inc., and University of California at Riverside) to conduct a complete study of different levels of hydrogen blends in a multi-feed, multi-directional natural gas pipeline system that is independent from its current natural gas transmission system.

The dedicated facility will allow for a controlled and safe study of hydrogen injection, storage, and combustion of different hydrogen blends in a variety of end uses. NCPA’s Lodi Energy Center power plant is located adjacent to H2[infinity sign] and will accept a hydrogen-natural gas blend for electric generation in the Siemens Energy 5000F4 Gas Turbine.

H2[infinity sign] will include a new 130-acre facility located in Lodi, Calif. that will serve as a study laboratory that incorporates production, pipeline transportation, storage, and combustion.

Areas of focus within the pilot include:

Technical, operational, and safety needs
Market development
Energy resiliency and flexibility
Commercial and government partnerships
Unprecedented functional test environment for on-going research
Training environment for new technology

In addition, PG&E is contemplating this facility being the centerpiece for a potential Northern California Hydrogen Hub.

 

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

Both GCC:

Nikola announces $200M convertible senior notes investment; approx. $1B cash and liquidity position

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/05/20220503-nikola.html

Nikola Corporation announced that an institutional investor has agreed to make a $200-million investment in Nikola through the purchase of Convertible Senior Notes. Funds advised by Antara Capital LP have agreed to purchase $200 million aggregate amount of 8.00% / 11.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2026. The Notes will bear interest at a rate of 8.00% if paid in cash, or at a rate of 11.00% through the issuance of additional Notes, at the company’s election.

The notes will be convertible at an initial conversion price to be determined prior to closing. The initial conversion price will represent a 30% premium to the lower of Nikola’s volume-weighted average price over a pre-determined time period between this announcement and closing of the Notes and the closing price of Nikola’s common stock on the last trading day prior to the date of this announcement, but will not be lower than 110% of such closing price.

Upon conversion, Nikola will have the right to settle the Notes in cash, shares, or any combination thereof at its election. The Notes will mature on 31 May 2026, unless redeemed, repurchased, or converted prior to such date.

Nikola intends to use the net proceeds from the sale of the Notes along with its other liquidity sources for business expansion in the form of scaling truck manufacturing and tooling setup, accelerating the development of its hydrogen infrastructure, as well as for general corporate purposes. . . .

PG&E launches comprehensive study on hydrogen’s feasibility within gas pipelines; H2[Note: infinity sign following H2; can't post it]

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/05/20220503-pge.html

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is launching the US’ most comprehensive end-to-end hydrogen study and demonstration facility, which will examine the future potential of the zero-carbon fuel hydrogen as a renewable energy source for not only PG&E customers but the entire global natural gas industry.

The centerpiece of the study, known as Hydrogen to Infinity (H2[infinity sign]), is a large-scale project that will blend hydrogen and natural gas in a stand-alone transmission pipeline system. H2[infinity sign] will enable PG&E and its partners (Northern California Power Agency [NCPA], Siemens Energy, the City of Lodi, GHD Inc., and University of California at Riverside) to conduct a complete study of different levels of hydrogen blends in a multi-feed, multi-directional natural gas pipeline system that is independent from its current natural gas transmission system.

The dedicated facility will allow for a controlled and safe study of hydrogen injection, storage, and combustion of different hydrogen blends in a variety of end uses. NCPA’s Lodi Energy Center power plant is located adjacent to H2[infinity sign] and will accept a hydrogen-natural gas blend for electric generation in the Siemens Energy 5000F4 Gas Turbine.

H2[infinity sign] will include a new 130-acre facility located in Lodi, Calif. that will serve as a study laboratory that incorporates production, pipeline transportation, storage, and combustion.

Areas of focus within the pilot include:

Technical, operational, and safety needs
Market development
Energy resiliency and flexibility
Commercial and government partnerships
Unprecedented functional test environment for on-going research
Training environment for new technology

In addition, PG&E is contemplating this facility being the centerpiece for a potential Northern California Hydrogen Hub.

Ho hum. Another day, another set of GRA's propaganda.

Let's see, Nikola Corp is being saved by a private investor (probably, because they can't get money otherwise). Not sure how that is even remotely relevant to hydrogen/FCEV tech, but par for GRA.

Oh, and PG&E is doing a study and launching a demonstration facility that would do wonders for the "entire US natural gas industry", the fossil fuel industry's sidekick. And just after it's already been determined that blue hydrogen (the one that's made from natural gas), makes climate change worse!

Yes GRA, please continue denying that you're not an industry shill. Your actions speak far louder than your words. Even your signature line rings hollow.

 

[SageBrush]

Oh, and PG&E is doing a study and launching a demonstration facility that would do wonders for the "entire US natural gas industry", the fossil fuel industry's sidekick. And just after it's already been determined that blue hydrogen (the one that's made from natural gas), makes climate change worse!

Industry is tripping over itself offering pilot projects in pursuit of Gov money. It will all be for naught, but it will cost billions of taxpayer money and give the political right more fodder for upcoming elections. And as much as it pains me to say it, the Biden detractors will have a good point.

 

[LeftieBiker]

Yes GRA, please continue denying that you're not an industry shill.

Absent real evidence, please don't do this. You can make the same point without the hostility.

 

[SageBrush]

Yes GRA, please continue denying that you're not an industry shill.

Absent real evidence, please don't do this. You can make the same point without the hostility.

Give the man a warning for the double negative. In the pursuit of vacuous, vapid conversation, naturally.

 

[GRA]

GCC:

New liquid hydrogen carrier would transport green H2 from Scotland to Germany

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/05/20220504-cjob.html

C-Job Naval Architects has designed a new class of liquid hydrogen tanker in partnership with LH2 Europe. LH2 Europe will use the abundant renewable electricity in Scotland to produce green hydrogen and market it at a competitive price with diesel. The new tanker will transport the liquid hydrogen to terminals in Germany, with a strategic vision to expand supply to other markets as demand increases.

The vessel is powered by hydrogen fuel cells and will be equipped with three liquid hydrogen storage tanks with total capacity of 37,500 m3—enough to refuel 400,000 medium-sized hydrogen cars or 20,000 heavy trucks. The tanks will have a much lower boil off than those currently used in the maritime industry. . . .

The limited remaining boil off will be captured and directly utilized in hydrogen fuel cells, providing power to the vessel's propulsion systems, resulting in emissions of water only. The vessel itself will have zero greenhouse gas emissions during operations.

The ship is expected to be ready and commissioned six months before the first delivery of hydrogen in 2027.

 

[GRA]

Oh, and PG&E is doing a study and launching a demonstration facility that would do wonders for the "entire US natural gas industry", the fossil fuel industry's sidekick. And just after it's already been determined that blue hydrogen (the one that's made from natural gas), makes climate change worse!

Industry is tripping over itself offering pilot projects in pursuit of Gov money. It will all be for naught, but it will cost billions of taxpayer money and give the political right more fodder for upcoming elections. And as much as it pains me to say it, the Biden detractors will have a good point.

I've posted numerous links showing company money being used to develop H2 projects, often reaching into the billions, yet you ignore that. Naturally, some of these won't ultimately get built, but some will. BTW, how do you feel about that $3.1 billion of U.S. government money being used to build battery production sites in the U.S.? After all, if batteries are so obviously the (only) future, shouldn't private companies be willing to give up the government teat by now, because this will obviously be profitable?

 

[GRA]

{snip]

GWP of methane

The results of electricity generation are much worse than heating.

Source? Or are we talking about the current situation, where methane leakage from multiple sources is allowed to go unchecked? We all agree that IF methane is allowed to leak, that's a problem. The question is whether or not CCUS can reduce or eliminate that so that it's not a significant factor in the real world, i.e. is it both technically and economically feasible to do so? That will require continued R&D as well as a whole lot of monitoring by independent government agencies to make sure the claims are accurate, because we know most private for-profit companies would just as soon not bother and will happily continue to emit as long as it adds to their bottom line.