Reason think tank: Hydrogen cars will do exactly squat for greenhouse gas emissions
The libertarian Reason Foundation released a report this week that puts hydrogen vehicles in their place. The "soundbite" quote is this: "Instead of depending on Middle Eastern oil, we would be reliant on the Middle East's natural gas." Reason Foundation's vice president of research, Adrian Moore, says, that the production challenges to a hydrogen economy too (conventional) energy intensive to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases, adding that "Hydrogen isn't the quick-fix we've been led to believe it could be." Huh? Who has ever claimed hydrogen was a quick fix?
William J. Korchinski, the study's author, says scrap the plans to build the infrastructure for the hydrogen economy and instead put money into solar, wind and "safe nuclear power." You can download the full report from here.
Reason makes the point that in order to supplying the hydrogen for fuel cell cars in the U.S., would "significantly increase the need for foreign-produced natural gas. The countries with the largest natural gas reserves are Russia, Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates." That's a pretty pointed list, and it is true that the Middle East and Eastern Europe do have the most natural gas reserves, according to the Department of Energy. NaturalGas.org makes the point, though, that there is plenty of the irreplaceable fossil fuel in America, at least for now. Plus, there are other ways to make hydrogen (electrolysis), as our readers surely know.
UPDATE: I wrote this post before I saw a note from tipster Domenick, who writes: While I may agree with some of their thoughts on the subject, it is always good to remember where some of these foundations get their money. "Reason Foundation has received $381,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998."...according to http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=63
[Source: Reason]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Robert 2:08PM (11/12/2008)
Lets say this is allready fact. All autos, ships and planes are now hygrogen powered. The only emission is water vapor. Has anyone thought of what that much new water vapor in the atmosphere will do to weather patterns?
Reply
Chris M 8:19PM (11/12/2008)
That's not a valid argument either for or against hydrogen fuels, as the hydrocarbon fuels used already for all of those applications also contain hydrogen atoms, and when burned they produce substantial quantities of water vapor. In fact, due to the low efficiency of heat engines compared to the efficiency of H2 fuel cells, the autos, ships and planes now fueled by petroleum based fuels generate more water vapor than the same vehicles powered by H2 fuel cells. Of course, IC engines running on H2 would produce even more water vapor, but their poor efficiency combined with bulky H2 fuel severely limits their range and usefulness.
Valid arguments against H2 fuels are to point out the extravagantly high cost, the inefficiency compared to some other options, the environmental hazards, and the safety risks.
Robert 1:30PM (11/15/2008)
Thanks Chris. I was unsure and wanted to know.
Moshi 12:18PM (11/03/2007)
I live in CA where there are lots of hydrogen fueling stations and for the longest time have been wanting to get the new bmw 760hL hydrogen model. Now I'm second guessing myself and I'll probably stick with a hybrid! the m3 I drive now drinks too much :(
-- Moshi
http://m3blog.net
Reply
TX CHL Instructor 1:28PM (11/03/2007)
"Hydrogen cars will do exactly squat for greenhouse gas emissions"
It's much worse than that. H2 is the most potent ozone depletion agent ever produced by man, and it is basically impossible to 100% contain it because it will seep through *anything*.
Reply
kballs 2:08PM (11/03/2007)
Producing hydrogen from water electrolysis is less efficient and more costly than getting it from natural gas or oil, so they are correct in their analysis to assume any near-term hydrogen economy would be sourced mostly from oil and gas.
Hydrogen DOES leak easily because it is a really tiny molecule (helium is the only other gas that compares) and will leak through very tiny gaps. They use helium to leak-test things for air-tightness (space capsules, vacuum chambers, etc.)... they would probably use hydrogen except for it being volatile/dangerous (helium being inert).
It is likely that the cumulative amount of hydrogen released from hydrogen filling stations, tankers, storage, production, etc. would not be small, which would definitely have a negative impact on the ozone layer.
Reply
detroit9000 3:24PM (11/03/2007)
I dunno. I think we've got a great grid in place to transmit electricity. I think electric cars are where it's at. Tesla is the tipping point. People will see it's now possible.
You're going to have to zap water with nuclear to make hydrogen. Why not just make electricity with the nuke plant?
Reply
Bill 4:29PM (11/03/2007)
Regardless of how you get it, there's no current system to store H2 efficiently for local uses.
Proponents talk about 700 bar tanks (10,000 psi - 4x the pressure of current CNG tanks) but they don't yet appear to be commercially available for your car or your home.
Reply
rgseidl 9:26AM (11/04/2007)
@ TX CHL instructor -
(a) H2 can only deplete ozone if it escapes into the atmosphere and actually reaches the stratosphere. Neither is particularly likely in automotive applications.
(b) while hydrogen atoms can indeed pass through virtually all solid materials, hydrogen molecules cannot. They do, however, tend to accumulate at crystal grain boundaries of metals and embrittle them. This is why you need to use special steel or aluminum grades or else composites to contain H2 in structures that are exposed to cyclic loads.
(c) the economic and environmental cost of producing, distributing and storing hydrogen is very high. If you're going to drive around on methane, you might as well burn it directly in an ICE, the well-to-wheels CO2 emissions are almost the same and any NOx produced can be dealt with using a standard three-way catalytic converter. The bulk and weight of the tank, operating range and engine power are all still issues for NG vehicles but they appear far more manageable than anything associated with H2.
Note that getting natural gas from the Middle East or other distant sources to the US as LNG is energy intensive. In spite of the expensive gas separation processes involved, producing methane from biogas might actually be cheaper - especially if you consider the $20-$30/barrel risk premium associated with dependence on imported energy. The sharp cut in CO2 emissions would be a valuable fringe benefit.
Unfortunately, the US is lagging other countries (e.g. Argentina, Italy and Germany) in NG vehicle deployment because it still has significant amounts of domestic oil but not a whole lot of NG. ExxonMobil and others have no incentive to ramp up biogas production just yet.
Reply
Chris M 6:39PM (11/04/2007)
"Reason Foundation has received $381,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998." In that case, they are biting the hand that feeds them, and might not get such largesse from Exxon in the future.
The oil companies, especially Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP are really pushing H2 as the future automobile fuel. After all, the oil companies are currently the biggest producers of H2, they have the cheapest source of H2, and they plan to be the biggest sellers of this lucrative new fuel when the oil runs low. But their plans will only succeed if they can get the rest of us to ignore all the other green options that are more efficient and much cheaper.
Reply
Rex 9:56AM (11/20/2007)
At the National Hydrogen Association, we see progress being made by multiple industries to find solutions for making a hydrogen economy a reality. Even though there is no clear solution to resolving our energy needs, hydrogen remains the most promising alternative. While this report and many news reports are currently focusing on the automotive industry, other industries are making great strides as well. Companies such as Entergy Nuclear, BP, and Excel Energy, all NHA members, are working together to find the best options and to resolve infrastructure concerns.
While this report raises some questions, the foundation fails to take into consideration some important facts and figures. This report assumes that we can instantly replace 20% of the vehicles today without taking into account certain infrastructure developments currently in progress.
The industry is looking to use natural gas as a launching pad to move forward towards a hydrogen economy, but that is only for the short-term. Hydrogen can be produced from sources other than natural gas, including coal, nuclear and renewable sources.
Let’s also keep in mind that the US produces a majority of its natural gas, and imports come primarily from Canada and Mexico. The US does import some liquefied natural gas from countries such as Trinidad and Nigeria. If the US were to only use natural gas as the primary source for hydrogen, imports would only increase by 2%, which would fuel up to 10 million cars.
The report emphasizes increasing energy sources such as clean coal and nuclear, but doesn’t consider the relationship that both sources have to hydrogen production. Nuclear energy can produce high quality hydrogen in large quantities at relatively low cost without any air emissions. Clean coal, which requires carbon sequestration, can also generate hydrogen using a steam gasification process that separates the hydrogen and sequesters the carbon into the ground.
In the long term, together with scientific research and development, the hydrogen community looks to produce hydrogen from renewable resources such as water, biofuels, and alternative energies such as wind, geothermal, and solar.
While this report focuses on the automotive industry, fuel cell technologies have potential throughout a variety of industries. Fuel cells are currently being utilized as a power source for cell phone towers and in specialty transportation such as forklifts. Research and develop is underway for fuel cells to power portable electronics. Furthermore, the hydrogen community is testing fuel cells to power buses and trains.
It is easy to overlook how quickly scientific research can evolve. To lean more about the research underway, the industries that are cooperating together, and more information about hydrogen and fuel cell technology, please visit the National Hydrogen Association website at http://www.hydrogenassociation.org.
Reply