The previous blog already touched on the Hydrogen Hype. This blog is provides a bit more background data on Hydrogen. Although Hydrogen combustion leads to water, the production of the needed Hydrogen is actually the real issue. Although Hydrogen is available around us, it is not automatically flying into designated tanks, instead it must be produced.
Issue #1 About 1% of the Hydrogen is green.
That's right. Even though current hydrogen is mainly used for making fertilizers and in the industry, only 1% is made from renewable energy and can be called green.
Today the world produces about 120 million tonnes of Hydrogen annually. 98.7% of this is made from fossil fuels – natural gas, coal or oil – without CCS. The CO2 emissions accompanied with the production of this (not so green) hydrogen is similar to the emissions of global aviation combined. Before introducing hydrogen to other use cases, we'd better be focussing on increasing theshare of green hydrogen. The EU has a 4% target for 2030, but the needed investment in the required electrolysers is lagging behind.
Today the world produces 120 million tonnes of Hydrogen annually. 98.7% of this is made from fossil fuels and emits around the same emissions as the global aviation industry every year (Hydrogen Science Coalition)
Issue #2 Poor efficiency
Let's assume, there comes a point in time where the required amount of electrolysers is available. At that time all hydrogen could be produced green, under the condition that sufficient amount of renewable energy is available. Luckily the speed in which renewable energy sources are being added is increasing year by year, it will mean an additional investment in solar and wind power (and CO2 emissions at their production).
The efficiency in transport is about 3 times worse than with a Battery Electric Vehicle. In heating it is about 5-6 times worse than using a heatpump. Given the fact that this is mainly determined by the Laws of Thermodynamics, there can simply not be a major improvement. For a good guideline on where to use Hydrogen and where to look for alternatives, take a look at the Clean Hydrogen ladder.
Issue #3 Cost
Being sustainable often starts with becoming more efficient. Using LED lights reduces energy consumption and reduce costs. Hence being inefficient leads to much more cost. Given the examples mentioned under Issue #2, Hydrogen can never be a winner in road transport or heating. Subsidies might take away the big gap there is between the real costs, but at the same time, long term subsidies are just not sustainable. The notice of cost is getting to the purchasers and decision makers, given the fact that the world's first hydrogen train is already discontinued within a year and that several cities already exclude Hydrogen powered vehicles from their tenders.
There are however counter arguments to the cost topic. Both arguments state to get the Hydrogen at places where it can be produced cheaper. Places with more sun or wind, or where Hydrogen can be won in its pure form. We then need to drill for the so called white Hydrogen.
More wind will indeed generate more energy from the windmill and longer access to sunlight will provide more solar energy, so there is definitely a certain improvement in efficiency and getting white hydrogen almost for free is of course even better. As white Hydrogen is not yet commercially available, let's focus on the other. According to Fraunhofer, Green Hydrogen could be produced in sunny areas at a cost of just over 1€/kg. That's even below the cost of Grey or Black Hydrogen, but then it is still to be transported. Cost for this are estimated by Spitfire Research at about 6 to 7€ per kg. So what have we won then?
Cost comparison between BEV and FCEV.. In the green area BEV are cheaper, in blue H2..
Given current electricity and Hydrogen prices in Europe (Hydrogen, where available), we see typically home charging costs at about 0,28€/kWh or about 4,50€/100 km. Fast charging prices can vary and are around 0,50€/kWh or 8€/100 km (a BEV typically uses about 0,16kWh/km). Prices for Hydrogen at the fuel pump vary in Europe between 20 and 30€/kg, meaning 20-30€/100 km (a FCEV typically uses about 1 kg H2 per 100 km). A significant difference.
Locally, fast charging can be more expensive and Hydrogen can be subsidized, which could mean that Hydrogen comes closer or is even cheaper than electricity. However subsidies are not sustainable and once removed Hydrogen will become the more expensive solution again. So what have we won?,
Issue #4 Cost (again)
Again cost. This time infrastructure. For the cost of a a Hydrogen filling station (about 1M US$), you can also get 21 Tesla fast chargers or over 500 home chargers. This of course reflects in the pricing (see Issue #3). On top of that we need about 3 times the renewable energy generation infrastructure compared to for battery Eeectric propulsion.
Issue #5 Safety
Hydrogen is used in industrial applications. These installations are stable and well maintained. Bringing 700 bar compressed hydrogen to fuel pumps and vehicles is a different situation. Of course engineers can do a lot in terms of safety, but production issues and errors will occur, so why evengo there?
Issue #6 CO2 as an indirect green house gas
Although Hydrogen is not causing a warming effect on its own, it is considered an indirect greenhouse gas because it interacts with airborne molecules called hydroxyl radicals to prolong the lifetime of atmospheric methane (a highly potent greenhouse gas) and increase the production of ozone, another greenhouse gas. The impact of Hydrogen varies over time after emission. It can peak by being 100 times as strong as CO2 on shorter term (10 years) to about 11 times after 100 years. Why is this relevant? Because Hydrogen as the smallest atom, leaks from its tanks.
Issue #7 The water needed for Green Hydrogen
According to WWF at the current consumption rate of water, by 2025, two-thirds of the world’s population may face water shortages. And ecosystems around the world will suffer even more. Electrolysing water to get Hydrogen might not be a step in the right direction, but the impact would be relatively small.
With the transition towards renewables,there is also less water is used in the energy production where fossil fuels are burnt.
In most claimed sunny areas for cheap production water is not necessarily available (think deserts), so additional measures are needed. Use of sea water and infrastructure need to be added.
Is Hydrogen completely useless then?
During CTI 2023 in the USA, P3 USA presented their view on which technology provided the best chances. Some refinements are necessary though:
At least in Europe with its resting time regulation and upcoming fast chargers for trucks, Hydrogen vehicles lose any benefit and face the cost penalty. In the heavily competitive transport sector, Hydrogen can simply not survive.
Also the mining industry indicated to move towards BEVs, where P3 USA still assumed it would be Hydrogen ICE.
Also for Agriculture and Construction, P3 USA indicates Hydrogen ICE as the best (not perfect) fit. It will be worthwhile monitoring these sectors.
An addition is made for large forklifts, which also includes container handlers. Key issue for the use of Hydrogen and Fuel Cells is the lack of time to recharge a battery. The vehicles need to operate 24/7. Also battery weight is considered an issue.
In the coach segment, there is actually not a single solution that provides a satisfactory solution. Both batteries as well as Hydrogen tanks take too much luggage space.
Infographic based on presentation by P3 USA at CTI, updated with actual info.
The picture above clearly shows that BEV is the solution for most segments. Exemptions are found in segments without local recharging possibilities or a lack of time for recharging. The mining sector, however shows that the cost is a huge driver to find solutions for this. One such a solution could be battery swapping. For coaches, we might need to start from scratch to define a solution for these vehicles.
So there is a small number of cases where Hydrogen is currently considered to be the best option. It is however, in no segment a fully satisfactory option and driven by cost, certain segments are already turning away from Hydrogen and towards Battery electric solutions.
So with all the issues listed, but especially with such a long way to go to get 100% low carbon or green Hydrogen, why would we even go through al this trouble. It might be much better to not base our future solutions for agriculture, construction, large forklifts and coaches on how we have been building them for decades. Instead start from the requirements and define a solution, without limitations. If we can do that, there really is no need for Hydrogen in vehicles and the results can be expected to be more sustainable and more competitive.
Comments