Electric energy can be converted into hydrogen by simple electrolysis, and the back conversion can be done by fuel cells.
Vehicles can carry much more energy in the form of hydrogen than in the form of (even lithium-) batteries.
Hydrogen is also a regular resource in the chemical industry, used in making fertilizer for instance, and has usually been produced from natural gas, which releases carbon-dioxide.
AKZO/Nobel and the national gas company are going to build a hydrogen generator driven by wind energy in Delfzijl, the harbour of Groningen on the Ems estuary.
The capacity of what is called a trial factory will start at 20 MW, to be enlarged to 100 MW.
Part of the hydrogen will be used in regular chemical processes, another part will be delivered at fuel points for use by vehicles, starting with provincial bus services.
Delfzijl is the landing point of major North Sea Wind Farms, and a 700 MW high voltage DC power line to Norway, where mountain reservoirs buffer Dutch electricity needs in a daily cycle.
Good for you guys.
I'm jealous for a change.
January 9th, 2018 5:50pm
The big problem, as I understand it, is "Carrying Hydrogen Around".
Rockets do this by super-cooling it into a liquid -- but that requires continuous cooling to a very low temperature.
I'm not saying you can't do this, just that this is a "difficult" part of the process.
January 10th, 2018 8:36am
Whereas lithium is a solid at room temperature.
January 10th, 2018 9:00am
Hydrogen compressed at 700 bar (common for hydrogen tanks in vehicles now) contains considerably more energy than lithium.
This makes hydrogen more suitable for longer range transport.
Lithium batteries are a quick and (very) dirty solution now, but in a complete renewable production cycle I think hydrogen is more promising. Although the fuel cell catalysts do have their own problems. Hydrogen can also be used in an almost regular piston engine.
So they're going to convert perfectly usable and easily transmissible electricity at some godawful efficiency into hydrogen which then has to be either liquified or highly compressed and physically moved around, so it can then be converted back into electricity at some godawful efficiency?
The only reason some companies promote hydrogen is it gives them more power (and therefore more profit) over the distribution.
January 10th, 2018 11:03am
Zaq, you do know that storing electricity in a lithium battery and then retrieving it also comes with a considerable loss?
In most cases, a battery-powered vehicle infrastructure is almost 3 times more efficient than even the most efficient hydrogen fuel cell infrastructure.
January 10th, 2018 11:26am
> In most cases, a battery-powered vehicle infrastructure is almost 3 times more efficient
Can you explain your definition of 'efficient'?
Because usually you just spout nonsense.
January 10th, 2018 11:38am
What a bullshit article.
It supposes the hydrogen is produced from natural gas.
It also says water is scarce, but that is not true in for instance the Netherlands.
If you actually bothered to look at the diagram you could see quite clearly the figures are for electrolysis.
January 10th, 2018 12:16pm
"Reported working efficiencies were for alkaline in 1996 lying in the 50–60% range for the smaller electrolysers and around 65–70% for the larger plants. Theorical efficiency for PEM electrolysers are predicted up to 94%. Ranges in 2014 were 43–67% for the alkaline and 40–67% for the PEM, they should progress in 2030 to 53–70% for the alkaline and 62–74% for the PEM."
And this was my last reaction to morons like Zaq.
Even if the electrolysis was 100% at some indeterminant point in the future, the overall efficiency would still be half that of EVs, and that ignores improvements in battery technology.
So get off your high horse you arrogant piece of shit.
January 10th, 2018 12:39pm
Actually, electrolysis is quite efficient.
Not sure of the efficiencies of a Hydrogen-based fuel-cell. But I didn't think it converted hycrogen and oxygen back into electricity directly.
January 10th, 2018 3:22pm
>Actually, electrolysis is quite efficient
As already stated, even at 100% efficient, the overall efficiency is half that of EVs.
At 75% electrolysis efficiency, EVs are 3x better.
Electrolysis isn't expected to reach even that until 2030.
Given the massive improvements in both price and efficiency is solar panels, when you will become able to directly recharge your EV for free at home, why the fuck would you want to halve the efficiency by doing it via hydrogen?
January 10th, 2018 3:43pm
One thing I am afraid of: Hydrogen is dangerous if it explodes.
January 10th, 2018 3:44pm
>Hydrogen is dangerous if it explodes
Is it any more dangerous than gasoline?
January 11th, 2018 7:19am