In the first blog, the impact of the clean disruption on transmission makers was described. Of course the impact is not limited to transmission makers. Suppliers of batteries, power electronics and electric motors all benefit, but at the same time oil companies and the oil tanker business face a huge challenge.
About 10-15 years ago, the remaining oil reserves and expected future oil discoveries was a concern and the main reason to look into alternatives.
Figure 1. Peak oil.
With concerns on how long supply was still possible, the focus was on alternatives such as hydrogen and synthetic fuels. Synthetic fuels were promoted as the enabler to meet the Euro 6 emission standard (Euro 5 was just in force), just by adapting the fuel. The poor efficiency was of no concern at that time.
Recently E-fuels seem to be the new bio fuels. Claimed to be a much needed alternative to electrification. But is it not just the next media hype, just like we had over the past decades?
Figure 2. Media hypes
Their poor efficiency kill Hydrogen's and eFuels' chances to become a mainstream success in transport
When looking at the overall efficiency comparison in figure 3, it is obvious that neither eFuels, nor Hydrogen propelled vehicles will be found in mainstream applications, as efficiency and cost go hand in hand. eFuels could have a potential in oldtimers or, if legislation allows, in high-end sports and super cars. But in mainstream vehicles it is unlikely that people will be willing to pay about 10 times the cost per km compared to a Battery Electric Vehicle.
Figure 3. Overall efficiency of various alternatives.
Derived from: Transport and Environment, Saul Griffith
Hydrogen is not the solution for a suggested problem that actually is not really a problem
Hydrogen is often brought forward to solve the problem of charging. Typically for cases where existing industries see their Kodak moment nearing quickly, we see the following happening. An at first glance obvious solution to a problem is being promoted in order to slowdown the change or to stay as close as possible to their existing business operations. More on the disadvantages of Hydrogen later.
First, let's take a look on the severity of the problem. Figure 4 shows the cummulation of daily trips and distance in function of the daily trip distance (data from study in the USA in 2021).
Figure 4. Cummulative share of distance and trips. Source: University of Maryland
The figure clearly shows that there is hardly a need for fast charging or filling, given that 99% of all daily trips is within the electric range of most electric vehicles. The suggested "solution" is like shooting a fly with a cannon, because:
The Hydrogen refilling infrastructure is hardly existing. Building up the infrastructure is very expensive. A hydrogen refilling station has the equivalent cost of 40 to 50 fast chargers (both do have additional costs)
The lacking or non-operational infrastructure means careful trip planning and (for now) potential detours that will take time, cost money and create additional emissions too (not to mention a different form of range anxiety - beware, we are discussing Hydrogen here).
The additional emissions, occur at the production of Hydrogen. Currently only 1% of Hydrogen is produced Green. At the production of the remaining Hydrogen, at least 11 kg CO2 are produced for each kg of Hydrogen. With about 1 kg Hydrogen needed per 100 km, its true emissions are over 11kg CO2/100 km or 110g CO2/km. That is significantly worse than a Battery Electric Vehicle with the energy mix in Europe (which continues to improve and will have BEV emissions at around 50g per km at the moment).
The lack of efficiency of Hydrogen does not mean there are no issues with Battery Electric Vehicles when it comes to charging. Not everybody can charge from home and improvements need to be made in infrastructure and cost of public charging. The measures needed for this are significant as well, but do contribute to a real reduction in emissions and should be prioritized.
EU resting time regulations combined with fast charging eliminate the need for Hydrogen in long haul transport
So all in all Hydrogen is not a real solution for not a major problem (range/recharging times). So what about Electric Trucks then? With the EU legislation for resting times, and the upcoming fast chargers, even for long haul there will be sufficient time to fill the truck up again. That does not mean there are no application where GREEN Hydrogen can be useful, but not in cars and not in most trucks.on the road.
For applications where trucks need not be operational for 24/7, Hydrogen fuelled trucks will not be competitive in this segment, where margins are in percentage range. For cases where the vehicle needs to be operational 24/7, the situation might be different. But then too, alternatives might exist in the form of battery swapping.
Where the deep dive above focussed on the business aspects, there is a sustainability issue with Hydrogen as well. Despite its green or colorful sound (see figure 5), the reality is and will be for a long time not so bright. Voices bringing this forward gain momentum and their impact might hurt the image of a company that chooses Hydrogen over battery propulsion. Subscribe to the newsletter to get updated on this aspect.
Comentarios