Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Hydrogen Hijacked

By Lyn Harrison, Editor, Windpower Monthly
November 15, 2004   |   26 Comments

Do you like this opinion & commentary?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"Make no mistake about it, the visions being mapped out for a hydrogen economy on both sides of the Atlantic provide an excuse for the revival of nuclear and give environmental legitimacy to fossil fuels."

- Lyn Harrison, RE Insider

The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.

26 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 26
November 15, 2004
There is no reason to produce a Kg of hydrogen, for the power market, until there is a surplus of renewable power. robert_preston@ml.com
Comment
2 of 26
November 16, 2004
Well, This is an interesting perspective with some valid points indeed. I appreciate your blunt approach and your courage for shaking loose some of the hype swirling around hydrogen issues. I won't argue the points about the oil companies. They are smart, agressive and will do what ever is necessary to protect their pot of gold. Their sharehoders demand it. The world runs on it. Look around and find just one thing in your field of view that does not have oil associated with it. The crux of the matter is that regardless of the environmental aspects of fossil fuels, there will not be sufficient oil to provide for all the worlds children, let alone grandchildren. An alternative has been "found" and it should be hydrogen. It is the most efficient, environmentally sound way to STORE the energy generated by renewable sources.
If the energy is needed immediately, then by all means, use it. That is the most efficient means of utilizing the power but, if you want to store it for later use, hydrogen is the only viable means that I know of today.
Do we need more more renewable energy sources? Absolutely! Billions of kW would be a good start. Do we need a means to store that energy? Absolutely! Millions of renewable powered electrolysers would also be a good start.
Comment
3 of 26
November 16, 2004
Lynn,
You are off base on a lot of issues. The first one is that there is some type of collusional paranoia that is gripping the "large" oil concerns. It is a fact that gas and oil prices will be out of most consumer´s financial reach within a few years. If I were the oil companies, I would be investing in the next sustainable energy source, hydrogen. That is exactly what´s happening. I don´t have the time to go into other thoughts of yours I disagree with wholeheartedly, but you quoted an old adage about something being too good to be true and I will quote the following, "the only true meaning of insanity lies when one will ignore the facts presented and believe instead in a conspiracy based on nothing more than a personal vested interest"
Comment
4 of 26
November 17, 2004
Lynn , forget about hydrogen. Biofuels are gonna be the Home-grown energy of the immediate future. And not just because of the price of oil but because of global warming IE: politics, reality, and the carbon life cycle.
Comment
5 of 26
November 17, 2004
To store energy in hydrogen, one commonly proposes the electrolysis of water. But water is rather stable and there are much easier things to electrolyse to produce hydrogen. One is nickel hydroxide, which offer >90% energy recovery capacity. You store the hydrogen in a metal hydride. But - that's a NiMH battery, they have been around for years, and we all know they aren't very good stores. So by the same argument, neither will hydrogen tanks and fuel cells be. The best rechargeable stores for renewable energy - and I disagree with Lyn that storage is not important, it depends where you are - are lithium batteries. When these come down to realistic prices, which will be less than hydrogen tanks and fuel cells, then we can fit them to electric vehicles and use them as our stores. Only an energy store that can do two things at once will be cheap enough to deploy commercially.
That will be the answer to intermittency in renewable energy supplies in many (not all) parts of the world. And there won't be any hydrogen in sight.
Comment
6 of 26
November 17, 2004
It is very apparent to me that Lyn's comments are very valuable. I am a strong adherant of using renewable energy, I even have a 10kW grid tied Solar PV installation on my roof.

It does break even on my power costs by producing about 83% of my needs with over 1/2 of that produced in PEAK load periods (more credit then) Solar power is not cheaply stored, which is the reason I am tied to the grid.

I like wind power as a renewable source, but like solar, it is not always available when you want it. It also is not as good a neighbor in a urban setting as it should be (for esthetics or noise). It is also more efficient in larger scale.

My question is common to all renewable energy sources even including hydro. Hydrogen is easily produced from water wih electricity but is not easily stored or handled in the gaseous or even the liquid state.

Has anyone considered chemically recombining Hydrogen and Carbon into some of the more useful simple Hydrocarbons like Propane and Butane?

I think this would be more appropriate than trying to build a whole new infrastructere around Hydrogen, and could be located where needed to reduce transport costs.

Yours Jim Baber
See our 10kW grid tied solar system at "www.baber.org"
Comment
7 of 26
November 18, 2004
In my opinion we will never see hydrogen economy nor fuel cells cars. The new generations of batteries that will come in the next 5-10 years will overshadow the foolish hydrogen mith. EVs now are capable of going 200+ km and some of them have very efficient diesel generator that will be running on biodiesel. And in 5 to 10 years EV will have 500+km range and regarging more than 20 km per minute. So I totally agre that this is another s**t from the oil companies. But their end is near. I hope near enough.
Comment
8 of 26
November 18, 2004
I disagree with Ms. Harrison in that I do believe that Hydrogen is the future but I do believe that the oil industry, as well as the electrical generation and distributing Cos. are worried and doing their best to slant things their way. Take for example B.P. Inc., they are involved in hydrogen and fuelcell research but at the same time they are involved in a multimillion dollar pipeline from Russia into and through Turkey to the shore, They are also involved in Prudo? bay and are partners in the Alaska pipeline. They are only one of the many cos. that are playing games.
The final solution is onsite generation of hydrogen into a fuelcell for generation of electricity both for mobile {transportaion} and stationary use. We have the technology now, the only problem is that too many people are going in so many directions including wind, solar & hydro. and the above industries are adding their own spin to this research.
I give you two US Patent numbers which you can look up and check out, they are 1 [US Patent No. 2,006,676, dated July 2 1935] and 2 [US Patent No. 6,468,499] assigned to the Argonne National Laboratory, none of the people involved in these were or are fly-by-nites, they had and have substantial backgrounds in their fields.
For more information on hydrogen and fuelcells there two excellent websites, 1 [ch2bc.org] & 2 [fuelcells.org], plus, punch into your search engines ''Hydrogen from water'' & just ''Hydrogen''
Comment
9 of 26
November 18, 2004
Lynn, Very good artical. Petroleum derived hydrogen funds politics and makes use of existing delivery systems. It will be a struggle to minimize this approach. I see it as bridging the gap to further advance true clean energy technologies. We are working hard in NJ to facilitate and advance all forms of sustainable clean energy production and delivery. Hydrogen will most likely be in the mix for a while.
Comment
10 of 26
November 18, 2004
Renewables of all kinds should be used for production of electricity , and energy surplus to the production of electricity , should be used to produce transport fuels of various kinds .. Hydrogen and compressed air may both be suitable pollution free transport fuels if produced from renewables ..In this way renewable infrastructure can be used to the maximum , both for production of electricity and transport fuels ,thus maximising the economic return on plant .Gas and oil corporations should be shown that this route is more profitable than current energy routes ...
Nov 18/04 Frederick Sunny Adelaide South Australia
Comment
11 of 26
November 18, 2004
<I have been involved with Solar energy a bit and also have read some books on Hydrogen and they said that it is combustable and so it was not a choice. Believe it or not, Here in Florida of course, Solar is a good thing to harness. I dont see anything much on our rooftops or any towers yet but the receivers that were put on the rooftops here by Gov. Jeb Bush were not tethered by this summers 4 hurricanes? He has a whole bunch of information at his web site for Solar. I am astounded at Arnold Schwarthzzenneger about his thing for the hydrogen car in California, I guess he dosnt know about splitting the atom of water? too?What is the scoop with that and the hydrogen car? I am not from Austrilia like he is and I do know that Solar is American and Hydrogen is some kind of European invented? So anyway Im glad to see someone else saying something is dangerous about Hydrogen, because I really don't know except I read it in a book? Solar is clean and safe for us that have the sun and wind is obviously good for the UK and so is coal. Jeb is using coal here in Florida, but if we soon switch to solar, then you could have our coal!!! Before we use it all up. They have a cleaner way of using it too. You should check out his home page>
Comment
12 of 26
November 19, 2004
Nice article, Lyn, but Hydrogen may well be a big part of the renewable picture. Take a look at Hydrogen Solar's recent claim of >8% efficiency in converting light into water-split hydrogen (they maintain their cells will be inexpensive, too). This could inspire small-scale use of the technology. Now, hydrogen itself may not be the best fuel (it is a fuel! they use it to power rockets...), but conversion into methane, methanol or ethanol is a potentially efficient process. Plants, by the way, seem to be about 3% efficient overall, in terms of capturing light and converting it into biomass. You then loose another 50% in conversion to ethanol, so 1-2% overall. You gain because of the cheap, large-scale nature of biomass production.
Comment
13 of 26
November 20, 2004
Thank you for a good article, Lyn. Don Lancaster <http://www.tinaja.com> has a good article on hydrogen including hard facts and figures. Hydrogen as an energy storage medium does not make very much sense when one looks at all of the factors. A better method might be to use excess capacity from renewable sources to pump water into resevoirs at elevation. When demand is high, the water can be used to generate electricity. The resevoirs can also provide water when needed. No system is universally applicable to all regions and many factors contribute and detract from any energy system. Professional analysis and test stations should be applied to any proposal that merits further study. The US Department of Energy funds lots of proposals through grants and matching funds to aid developers from single persons to large corporations researching new energy systems. Any discussions about hydrogen should be supported with hard, verifiable, scientific data from production to end user. Politicians and media organizations have the bad habit of working with selected data.
Comment
14 of 26
November 20, 2004
I think I can see where everyone is coming from. We need new sources of energy. Electricity is a great idea, but it is not as cut and dried as everyone thinks. No matter what you may think, it is not easily stored, and despite common theory, I do not believe that within the next ten years we will double the storage capacity of batteries. I believe Hydrogen is just as plausible a fuel as electricity. I, too, know that hydrogen is a fuel. Anyone every heard of the Wankel Rotary Engine? It was originally designed to run on hydrogen. It doesn't run on hydrogen now, but premium fuel. This is due to the fact of hydrogen production was very limited and expensive, and also that it is EXTREMELY dangerous. The amount of energy released by a chemical reaction of two hydrogen atoms to form hydrogen gas is huge. Hydrogen bombs have been researched, which packed a punch 4 times that of an atomic bomb. The nice thing about that kind of energy in your car or home is that ever there is an accident, you won't feel a thing. Any ignition source or damage to a hydrogen storage device could turn anything into a bomb. Car bombs used now can in no way be compared to something like that.
Comment
15 of 26
November 22, 2004
People, if you want to talk about water splitting, look no further than SHEC Labs. They are at 24 percent conversion with their water splitting and 95 percent with their methane to hydrogen process, all WITHOUT electricity. All they are using is the thermal energy from the Sun. www.sheclabs.com and I have a copy of the engineering report. This is truly the future.
Comment
16 of 26
November 22, 2004
Lyn, hydrogen is a great fuel for internal combustion engines and it's production is becoming affordable. Many companies are pioneering hydrogen producing devices. Avalence is building an elecrolyser that eliminates the need for a compressor by creating high pressure hydrogen with electricity and water. A project in Australia is making hydrogen with sunlite and water, using a Titanium oxide ceramic electrode. Virent is making ODH on demand hydrogen from sugar. CTcare is using Aluminum to create ODH and Aluminum oxide. I am sure there are more people and companies working on low cost hydrogen production. Ford has a large H2ICE or Hydrogen Internal cumbustion Engine program, BMW has been doing it for years, and rotary engines still run great on hydrogen. Mazda has been working on dual fuel rotaries for over ten years. Please check out what we are doing at www.INTERGALACTICHYDROGEN.com But please realize we need all the alternatives to break our addiction to petroleum. We need to stop saying my fuel or energy is better than yours. We need renewable electricity, better batteries,biodiesel, ethanol, CNG, more incentives for solar panel instalations on our homes and Lyn, we need hydrogen too. Contrary to what some people say, hydrogen is safe! Gasoline fires scare me much more than a hydrogen fire. A gasoline fire after an accident is usually a flaming lake below the vehicle. If you do manage to create a leak in a vehicle with compressed hydrogen and it does ignite, the fire will be over your head because the hydrogen is lighter than air and it has to mix with enough air to burn. Visualize a ceiling of fire fifteen feet above the leak. That is how it works. Please continue promoting wind generators, they are a great source of renewable electricity for hydrogen production.
Comment
17 of 26
November 23, 2004
A most interesting discussion. When I was in graduate school we studied both the past and any number of projections for understanding energy, energy production and energy markets. In his 1978 book The Control of Oil, John Blair outlined the relationships between the middle eastern governments, western governments and oil companies that have morphed into our modern Big Oil. Data exists documenting that be it covert, accidental, implicit or by mutual consent, Oil companies and utilities continue to control our energy future by maintaining and increasing their lock on production and distribution using any means possible. Centralized power production no mater what its source has left us vulnerable to: corporate control and profit for this quarter, governmental control, interruptions on a massive scale and a governmental energy and climate policies based on opinion and myth not science. At this point in time, we have a need to push for extreme changes in our current energy mix. All alternative fuel sources (non-polluting) must be pursued equally. However, it seems that our efforts are disjointed and lack the focus of big corporate interests. What if all PEOPLE who ever bought, wanted to buy, support, thought about buying or even want to learn about alternatives formed ONE, non corporate cohesive voice? What would we say?
Comment
18 of 26
November 23, 2004
Lyn - let's keep pushing wind power. No question it's needed.
In fact we need to develop as many energy options as possible. Your own interests are clear, but future energy will be sourced from a wide range of processes. Wind currently has a good market drive in the UK - it's great how fast it's growing - and legislators seem to be at last on our side.

Hydrogen is one of the least well understood parts of the process. It offers many solutions to the future energy model. It's not simple and there's work still to be done. With no market drivers as yet it relies on funding. Furthermore, there's a lot of confusion thanks to typical sensationalist reporting, that range from "Hydrogen saves the world!" to "H-bomb in your neighbours car!" This doesn't help to clarify!
Subsidies do need to be better shared out, but we must not be too aggressive to other parts of the whole model.
I'm afraid I can't give you that model (yet). Only time will really tell, and a lot of heavily funded projects will reach dead-ends.
Fuel Cells and H2 production may not be efficient. Some technologies will cost more than others. The market will find its winners.

Oh and Darren - don't lose too much sleep over H2 bombs in cars!
Comment
19 of 26
November 28, 2004
Stan Meyers.

He invented a highly efficient means of producing Hydrogen from water.

In fact, it is so efficient, it seems to violate the law of conservation of energy.

Impossible? Hardly. Remember the world was once flat, man couldn't fly, images and sounds could not be recorded or broadcast, and it was impossible to build a bomb that could level an entire city.

The oil companies are very afraid. That is why they have gone out of their way to create global confusion and disunity. As long as 'the people' are at each others' throats, Big Oil will have all the power.

Believe in change. Become the change!
Comment
20 of 26
November 29, 2004
I've read the "hydrogen is not a fuel, it's a way of transferring energy" line in a couple of places. Is this only being said because of the difference between hydrogen and molecular hydrogen? Hydrogen being protons and molecular hydrogen being a fuel? Can someone clarify this for me? TIA
Comment
21 of 26
November 30, 2004
</i>Hydrogen and oxygen tend to combine with each other, releasing energy, forming water. When it burns in air, that's what's happening. The released energy can push a piston or set up <a href=http://ncsp.tamu.edu/reports/CCOHS/record1469.htm>shock waves</a>.

<p>If you have water and energy, you can reverse the process, freeing oxygen and hydrogen, which then carries some of the energy. Not all of it, for it takes energy to move energy. Usually you needn't carry the co-produced oxygen, for there will be air oxygen all along your route.

<p>--- Graham Cowan<br>
<a href=http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/Paper_for_11th_CHC.doc>how individual mobility gains nuclear cachet</a>
Comment
22 of 26
December 3, 2004
I think we all need to take a big step back and look at the whole situation. Global scale wind deployment to power all of our needs, at our current consumption rate will destroy out environment as surely as fosil fuels will. Environmental models suggest that such an increase in air resistance would literally slow the trade winds, causing a never ending El Nino. Clearly the answer is not wind. Similarly the answer is not solar, because we would change how much energy the earth absorbs from the sun with a couple of terawatts worth of solar panels, and we would actually increase global warming. Geothermal has definate advantages, but is not available everywhere. Hydroelectric power is also nice, but still is not available everywhere, and destroys fertile habitats.

The answer is a diversified approach, using multiple sources of renewable energy, until nuclear fusion becomes a reality, and once that happens, electricty will be to cheap to meter, and will be our primary power source
Comment
23 of 26
December 21, 2004
Stephen Grinwis,
You seem to understand the potential of renewables - but if you shout loud enough you might hinder their progess.
Do you really beleive it's time to warn the word against too much wind or solar power? The impact levels we're looking at are relatively very low, at least for the next 50 years. Reducing the earth's solar gain? It would be very optimistic to beleive we could counter global warming/uv promblem by using more solar. Do you realise growing trees in the desert would also increase the earth's sunlight adsorbtion?
And somehow that increases global warming?
Such heavy tabloid-reader-aimed rhetoric with no basis other than "environmental models" is not likely to help anyone.
At least we agree on your conclusion.
All level-headed arguments are welcome to the debate.
Comment
24 of 26
March 26, 2005
Lyn is obviously bias, as is anyone that refuses to consider other options for any area of life. In regards to renewable energy no one method is right, but a combination of methods to match the users particular needs is correct. The considerations are many, cost of installation, kWh savings/cost, maintenance cost, kWh needs of the site, the availability of other energy sources as backup. In rural communities where the reliance on energy is through extended power lines to remote power stations, the cost is higher, as well as the possiblity of loss of power due to failure of systems. Placing a hybrid renewable energy source, that meets 80% of your needs, and a way to store energy for emergency use is very pratical. So all the naysayers of gloom and doom, try to review the facts before you spread your hysteria about the energy sky is falling, or the H-Bomb energy solution in your back yard.
Comment
25 of 26
March 31, 2005
I saw some references to the H-bomb in the comment above. It seems the writers miss some basic scientific knowledge. <br>
The process required for a hydrogen economy is using some energyform to split water in hydrogen and oxygen, Storing and possibly transporting the hydrogen and burning it again at the time and place you need the energy again. This are all simple and well controllable chemical processes<br>
In the H-bomb and in fusion powerplants (which don't exist yet) hydrogen atoms are fused to Helium atoms. This is a nuclear process. The conditions for this process to take place are very difficult to create and will not happen in even the nastiest car-crash. <br> Here endeth the lesson.
Comment
26 of 26
July 16, 2005
Roland,

I am only proposing that renewable engery be implemented in a diversified and managable way. In saskatchewan, where they implemented a massive wind farm, they actually managed to slow the wind down! Now think if everyone did this! Potentially dangerous!

As for the references to the H-bomb, well... fusion is very safe. In the event that the magnetic field fail, the plasma drops, the reaction stops, and the walls heat up a little. Then the operators hit the restart button. My thoughts were in the form of ITER(www.iter.org). Read up. They have plans to implement nuclear fusion, on a small scale, as a proof of concept, and to optimize future reactors. By 2100, we should be able to start building multi-gigawatt reactors, that burn one lb, of hydrogen, and harness the same eneregy as 10,000,000 lbs of fossile fuels.
Here endeth my lesson.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

EISENMANN Corporation AltaTerra Research Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition 350 Media HelioSage Konica Minolta Sensing Americas, Inc Das Haus: Innovation in Renewables and Energy Efficiency
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters