I also see vested interests in the H2 market, including Coal and other Fossil Fuel industries keen to be the supplier of the base material to produce the H2. Cheap and easy except when it comes to the by-products, similar concerns about batteries. Holes in the ground, CO2 in the atmosphere, all are bad if not controlled. Let me say I see vested interest in all of them, but do I trust the Fossil Fuel industry? Not a wit.
Perhaps decisions about technology, advances in efficiency, difficulties in getting H2 properly and safely used. Vested yes perhaps but perhaps because the batteries are what they see as a better choice. Certainly from a maintenance perspective it would seem that battery tech is much less impactful on the userâs wallet, nor is there a concern with fluids for engine cooling, lubrication of many moving parts, drive trains etc. Maintenance costs of BEV are below that of ICE engines. Have we worked out how to transport and in what form we store H2 (and they have competing tech in this as well so who will win that).
There is. I am unsure if it is the coal (or gas) industry as hydrogen from these sources will be phased out over time. Much of the research into hydrogen (including likes of CSIRO, Japanese etc) is on renewable hydrogen. Renewable hydrogen is feasible, but currently expensive and inefficient from an energy recovery viewpoint. There is currently promising developments on these fronts and will be interesting then they come into fruition if they can be upscaled and commercialised in the future.
H-vehicle car manufacturers have been lobbying governments around the world for support to develop the infrastructure needed for H-vehicle fleets. The same type of lobbying (potentially louder in the public domain) has been occurring from the E-vehicle manufacturers.
Both E-vehicle and H-vehicle manufacturers know that the success of either technology for the next generation of vehicles will be dependent on adequate infrastructure to support the road fleet. The infrastructure which is rolled out successfully first will give a significant market advantage over other technologies, as the cost to duplicate other infrastructure for the other technology may suppress future successes in that technology. I suspect that this is why some car manufacturers are hedging their car company futures by embracing both technologies rather than focusing on one. These companies are more likely to be successful should it become a one technology dominant fleet in decades to come.
Well not over a decade. The Mirai was released for sale in 2014. But I believe they have barely sold 5000 worldwide in those 6 years. Most of that is in the US, and most of that in California, with hefty rebates for supply of Hydrogen in the first few years.
Compared with millions of battery EVs sold worldwide just last year.
I can clearly see a winner here. For now.
However, I see a problem that HEVs are going to have to overcome. Fuel supply.
Every home and business has existing charging ability for BEVs. Canât see too many setting up their own Hydrogen charging facilities, so it will be basically up to existing petrol / LPG stations to be persuaded to put in Hydrogen tanks.
My memory fails me in relation to Miraiâs first production. It could have been the Honda Clarity (production commenced in 2008) I was thinking of over a decade ago. I knew a major manufacturer had a production H-vehicle model around that time. I have been reading a bit on the Mirai which could have confused by grey matter.
No Sales figures to hand for the Honda Clarity FCEV and Hyundai Nexo.
None have been considered cost competitive against equivalent BEVs. As of March 2021 the first 20 Nexo sales have been announced in Australia.
The greater prospects for hydrogen with road transport are with heavy haulage, where there is an endurance and power to weight advantage over current generation BEV alternatives. Both require infrastructure for refuelling support. High capacity electrical power supplies for fast chargers or hydrogen storage and filling stations.
NSW is also dipping a toe in the water.
The hydrogen plant located in BHPâs Port Kembla Steel Works produces Hydrogen from natural gas. CO2 is the the principal waste gas.
Still, even 10,000 is very insignificant compared to BEVs.
Heavy haulage seems a good fit. Trucks mainly drive up and down main roads where existing refueling geared towards trucks already exists.
Also the space and weight of Hydrogen tanks is not an issue like it would be in passenger cars.
And Diesel fuel with its particulate emissions in addition to various gasses is becoming seen as a pariah fuel to be reduced wherever possible.
There possibly is and there will be public infrastructure to support heavy transport (and possibly public transport - buses, non-electric trains etc) . I suspect when such infrastructure is delivered, H-vehicles will take off. There current demand is curtailed by refilling stationsâŠwhich are as common as hens teeth. When infrastructure is rolled out for heavy road transport, it possibly will as a minimum be like regular truck stop servos in urban areas and regional roads.
This updated WA project proposal to deliver energy as hydrogen through ammonia was rejected very promptly. The Federal Environment Minister Susan Lae is reported as rejecting the proposal without discussions on âenvironmental groundsâ.
Fair enough? There is an environmentally low impact gas led recovery and LNG exports to fall back on. NOT all will agree! And a clear vision for how Australiaâs economic and energy future is evolving?
The proponents of the WA Govt supported project indicated they will seek to modify the proposal and resolve the Federal Ministerâs objections.
The refusal has nothing to do with gas. It was refused because of its potential impact on MNES under the EPBC Act.
It is worth also noting that this is the same consortium that had planned to construct and operate a HV underwater cable to SingaporeâŠwhich proved to unfeasible on a commercial and technical level. The production and piping of ammonia though WA was explored after the HV cable option fell over last year. Looks like they will have to go back to the drawing board again to see how it can develop a renewable H/ammonia operation without the significant impacts.
In addition to the above news articles, NSW is also taking the hydrogen initiative as well. Looks like welcome to the hydrogen energy future to replace fossil fuels in most applications:
In addition to delivering an already committed $70 million to develop the stateâs hydrogen hubs in the Illawarra and the Hunter, the strategy includes:
exemptions for green hydrogen production from government charges;
a 90% exemption from electricity network charges for green hydrogen producers who connect to parts of the network with spare capacity;
incentives for green hydrogen production;
a hydrogen refuelling station network to be rolled out across the state.
The second dot point is interesting with the proposed 90% exemption from electricity network charges. Can consumers assume this will be delivered by a State Govt subsidy?
The closing comment in the article may be a cause of concern for some.
Walton also claimed that the technology to produce pure green hydrogen at a commercially competitive price âsimply does not currently existâ, and that the industry must therefore get a foothold by producing âa mix of blue and green hydrogenâ until the technology permits otherwise.
âIf we allow purists to insist that governments and industry focus solely on green hydrogen, the sector will remain in stasis for many years,â Walton said.
For those asking what âblue hydrogen isâ it is commonly produced from natural gas. One suggestion of the pathway to âgreenâ hydrogen production is to produce blue hydrogen to kick off the industry to develop and support the infrastructure required. As green hydrogen comes down in cost it would be introduced, added to the blue hydrogen.
The Nikkei Asia offers an less impassioned assessment than we might find from the local proponents.
Edit: added link to more detailed explanation of âblue hydrogenâ.
Will hydrogen and straight electricity end up head to head as power sources? Will there be a battle of the subsidies or will our fearless leaders refrain? I may be locked in VHS/Beta thinking but I canât get away from the idea that the one that fills in all the boxes first and gets the first big growth spurt wins.
Itâs open ended as to consideration of the differences of the cost of each type of vehicle, added weight of batteries vs fuel cell systems with storage, or range.
The future target production cost of green hydrogen is often touted as $2 per kg prior to distribution and retail costs. The future cost of renewable electricity retail equivalent is only forecast to fall by a few cents.
It may be that battery-electric solutions suit some needs better and hydrogen based fuel systems others.
The ugly sister:
Using current technology and processes brown hydrogen (from coal or methane etc) in industrial volumes has anticipated production costs of AU$2.50 per kg. This compares very favourably with the CSIROs estimates for the production of the green hydrogen most of us would prefer at AU$6.08-$7.43 per kg in 2018.
Note:
The cost of production of hydrogen and renewable electricity is far removed from the retail price paid by consumers. Hydrogen as a fuel is likely to be taxed as is petrol/diesel today. With transport, distribution and retail margins added $2 hydrogen could become $10 at the filling station.
BEVs can be most economically charged direct from solar at home. One way easy way to estimate the cost is to use the feed in tariff foregone when charging and add 10% for losses. EG 8c-22c per kWh. Not included in this is any future mileage or toll charges added to the use of BEV to compensate for the loss to revenue from road use by Petrol and Diesel vehicles.
