Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower

DOE Continues Hydrogen Focus and Spending

By Jesse Broehl, Editor, RenewableEnergyAccess.com
January 26, 2006 | 26 Comments

Do you like this news?

Bookmark

Feed

Washington, DC [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] The U.S. Department of Energy rolled out a large new round of funding dollars and a research "roadmap" aimed at identifying and overcoming the technical and manufacturing challenges associated with the further development of commercially available hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. This also, however, continues a policy goal that many critics say faces insurmountable challenges and comes at the expense of research and support of renewable energy technologies.

"Hydrogen fuel cell technologies are significantly more expensive than traditional combustion engines and face challenges in energy storage and durability. Both the Roadmap and $119 million in funding announced today seek to address these challenges over the next ten years with the goal of making vehicles powered by hydrogen available in showrooms by 2020."

-- Press Release from the U.S. Department of Energy

The Bush Administration-backed DOE emphasis on hydrogen energy has been a contentious issue in the renewable energy community because it has been the major Federal focal point under the umbrella of alternative energy technologies. Of particular concern is that the DOE has put relatively little emphasis on generating the hydrogen in a clean, zero-emissions manner.

Currently most hydrogen is manufactured through a process of steam-reforming natural gas, already itself a pricey commodity. The few DOE-sponsored efforts to move away from that have been with so-called "clean coal" technologies and even a new fleet of nuclear reactors.

Also, in a climate of increasing budget pressure at the Federal level, funding for renewable energy technologies like solar, wind and hydropower have been cut back considerably to make room for hydrogen energy research.

The funding in this latest announcement totals $119 million. Of this, $100 million will be allocated over four years for research projects seeking to improve fuel cell membranes, water transport within the stack, advanced cathode catalysts and supports, cell hardware, innovative fuel cell concepts, and effects of impurities on fuel cell performance and durability. In addition, the DOE announced the selection of 12 competitively awarded, cost-shared projects that will receive $19 million in federal funding over five years for polymer membrane research.

To identify the research and development (R&D) challenges that must be further addressed, the DOE also unveiled its Roadmap on Manufacturing R&D for the Hydrogen Economy. The 80-page document addresses challenges to manufacturing, storage and production of fuel cell technologies and proposes R&D solutions to overcome such challenges, focusing primarily on near commercial technologies. The plan, according to the DOE, is based on the results of a July 2005 hydrogen workshop made up of hydrogen and fuel cell experts from industry, universities, and national laboratories.

Many serious challenges do persist toward a successful "hydrogen economy," and the DOE's press release is one of the first public acknowledgments of those challenges.

"While hydrogen fuel cell technology has the potential to dramatically reduce vehicle emissions as well as America's dependence on foreign oil, barriers to commercialization continue to exist," says the DOE press release. "Namely, hydrogen fuel cell technologies are significantly more expensive than traditional combustion engines and face challenges in energy storage and durability. Both the Roadmap and $119 million in funding announced today seek to address these challenges over the next ten years with the goal of making vehicles powered by hydrogen available in showrooms by 2020."

Additional Information

Original DOE Press Release

Hydrogen - Fuel Cells

26 Reader Comments

Comment
1 of 26

roy-bauer-40438

January 26, 2006

Thats ok there Charles. Dursun has an oppion of his own. What I would like to say is Dursun have you checked out Angle's Nest Foundation? Robert Plarr and Victoria Peters have not had to pay for gas for there Hummer at all.
If Dursun want's to keep on paying at the pump. I say it's his money out of his pocket.

Comment
2 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 26, 2006

Thank you, Dursun:

May I ask, what is your solution to the 100 million gas guzzling, greenhouse gas polluting automobiles on our roads today?

How do we get them off carbon based fuels?

How do we keep motor vehicles to be built in the future from using carbon based fuels?

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
3 of 26

dursun-sakarya-36606

January 26, 2006

Money down a rat hole!

Comment
4 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 26, 2006

One way to reduce the capital cost and get hydrogen powered motor vehicles on the road much sooner is to start with internal combustion engines converted to run on hydrogen. We should not wait for fuel cells.

Internal combustion engines can be converted to run on hydrogen and a number of other fuels, such as ethanol and gasoline as well as hydrogen. the ability to run on multiple fuels will be very important in the beginning because hydrogen will not always be available.

This will give us experience with the use of hydrogen in vehicles and help build up the hydrogen infrastructure while we are waiting to develop a less expensive fuel cell for hydrogen powered vehicles.

Also, this will make it possible to retrofit the 100 million gasoline powered vehicles already on our roads to run on hydrogen when hydrogen is available.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
5 of 26

bill-kreamer-22341

January 27, 2006

The Hydrogen Economy is a despicable piece of energy-industry fiction. Hydrogen is not a primary energy source, and it is not a panacea. Cheap and clean nuclear fusion, if it existed, would make hydrogen use possible, although not practical. But fusion remains a remote prospect.

Hydrogen will always be more expensive than the energy used to produce it. Its function is similar to that of an electric battery. It is clean to use, but never efficient to make.

Hydrogen forms tight bonds. It must be wrenched energetically from its naturally ocurring compounds by applying high quality, high-intensity energy.

Current production methods use electricity from fossil fuels. But whether from fossil fuel or solar energy, using energy to release hydrogen is always less efficient and more costly than using the energy directly, without involving hydrogen.

Comment
6 of 26

guest-user-0

January 27, 2006

Hydrogen is a lost cause, hard to handle requiring all new infrastructure, and is costly to make energywise. The use of bio fuels and with use of minimal quantities of existing oil in plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, would allow the use of current technology and infra-structures to transition from insecure foreign oil NOW, not in 50 years. This would stop us from having to buy oil from those who wish to destroy our form of gov't.

More importantly, bio fueled electric hybrids would help to return our sagging auto industry to a prominant place in the world economy with an edge they need. Unfortunately, the industry is neither flexible nor prophetic enough to take advantage of this technology. It wasn't invented in Detroit and the oil industries' do not have any interest in reducing the level of use.

I would agree to buy a PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle) in 2 years today. I do have to admit to having a surplus of home generated electricity to plug in to.

Comment
7 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 27, 2006

Thank you, Bill:

Unfortunately to produce the amount of ethanol required for motor vehicle transportation using cellulose would result in a substantial amount of damage to the environment.

Windpower used to generate electricity to produce hydrogen for motor vehicles will have much less negative impact on the environment than the production of ethanol from cellulose.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
8 of 26

bill-yerkes-9865

January 27, 2006

I agree with Dursun, but the government is full of rat holes. Farmers across America are working and investing on the near term solution, E85. Oil companies, like Shell, are investing in ethanol from cellulose plants working with IOGEN and VW to demonstrate that it works NOW. The USA has forests growing from the Atlantic to the Pacific, a DOE study pointed out we can fuel 75% of our vehicles with ethanol from cellulose without disrupting the food chain. Go America, lead the way.

Comment
9 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

We are going to have a transition period while we are building up our infrastructure to refuel vehicles with hydrogen.

During this transition period it will help consumer acceptance to have vehicles that are capable of running on multiple fuels when hydrogen is not available.

Also, with respect to efficiency, we are capturing only a tiny franction of the wind energy that is available to produce electricity.

If we capture that wind energy to produce the electricity needed to produce hydrogen for motor vehicles that is an improvement over our current state of affairs, even though the hydrogen is used in a relatively inefficient manner. The alternative is that gasoline, a fossil fuel and greenhouse gas producing fuel is used in a relatively inefficient manner, instead of hydrogen produced by a renewable energy source.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
10 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

Thank you, Dr. Faur:

Yes, conatining hydrogen is very difficult, much more so than other gases, such as compressed natural gas, however James Heffel does appear to have the problem solved.

Yes: internal combustion engines are not as efficient as fuel cells, however we have 100 million automobiles on our roads today. It is not economically feasible to convert them to use fuel cells, however it is economically feasible to retrofit them to use multiple fuels, one of those fuels being hydrogen.

Those internal combustion engines are just as inefficient on gasoline as they are on hydrogen.

Also, a fuel cell with enough capacity for an automobile today costs at the minimum $100,000, and that is for a light economy car. Larger fuel cells for bigger cars are $200,000 and more. Plus, when hydrogen is not available you cannot operate them on any other fuel.

(continued)

Comment
11 of 26

mircea-faur-ph-d-41515

January 28, 2006

Charles,

I have to agree I'm not an expert in engines. I knew some US company was involved with China for their project, but indeed I didn't know any more details as you seem to. You might be right the temperature factor can be solved using ceramic materials.

But, because of Carnot, any internal combustion engine will have a limited efficiency to say: max. 25%, while the fuel cell will easily give you an efficiency in excess of 75%. Plus, I'm not sure about the safety of burning pure hydrogen. In the old days as part of my solar to hydrogen pilot project we designed a hydrogen (mixed with gas) burner, and our conclusion was that it was too risky to use anything above 4% H2. We chose instead to use a catalytical burner. Hydrogen as you know leaks very fast and as such having it contained is quite difficult.

Thanks for the info.

Comment
12 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

Today, James Heffel, who is now one of the principals of the Hydrogen Car Company in southern California will retrofit your gasoline powered car to run on pure hydrogen or he will sell you a new one with the gasoline powered internal combustion engine retrofitted to run on pure hydrogen.

He wil also retrofit the engine to run on multiple fuels when hydrogen is not available.

James Heffel will do that today, and is doing that today for people who are interested. You do not have to wait 10 or 20 years from now.

James Heffel is the reasearcher who solved the problems of retrofitting a gasoline powered internal combustion engine to run on hydrogen that you cited.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
13 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

More for Dr. Faur:

I think that it is interesting that you cited the use of a 4% mixture of hydrogen, yet you say that an internal combustion cannot be made to run on pure hydrogen. Do you know who it was that developed that process to run on a 4% mixture?

You probably do not know, otherwise you would not have made the response that you made, so I will give you the answer.

The 4% mixture was an early solution developed by James Heffel, principal research engineer for the University of California, Riverside, College of Engineering-Center for Environmentsl research and Technology Advanced Vehicle Engineering Laboratory.

(continued)

Comment
14 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

In fact, I find it interesting that one of the authors of articles that are often cited to me as reasons why an internal combustion engine cannot be converted to run on hydrogen is one of the founders of one of the companies that makes the conversions to run an internal combustion engine originally designed to run on gasoline, run on hydrogen instead.

In the early literature he listed all the obstacles that needed to be overcome. He did the bulk of the research to overcome those problems and now makes money doing the conversions.

People still cite to me his old articles of all of the reasons why it can't be done, when the author of those articles is actually the one who developed the industry making the conversions today.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
15 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

Dr. Faur:

With all due respect: You can buy an automobile with the internal combustion engine converted to run on hydrogen or you can have your automobile converted to run on hydrogen today.

In fact one of the people who first developed the idea to run an automobile with a small percentage if hydrogen is one of the founders of one the companies that makes the conversions.

Your objection that the combustion temperature will be too high sounds like you are reading material that is ten years old or older. Yes there were a great deal of problems to be overcome. Thiose problems are listed in the literature and are often cited as reasons why a gasoline engine cannot be run on hydrogen.

Those problems have been solved in the last few years.

(continued)

Comment
16 of 26

mircea-faur-ph-d-41515

January 28, 2006

Re: "An internal combustion engine that is designed to run on gasoline can easily be retrofitted to run on hydrogen alone, or as a dual fuel vehicle ....."

Charles,

With all due respect, this is not doable, because: (i) the temperature will be too high for any engine to handle, (ii) the efficiency of internal combustion engines is too low, and (iii) you'll be driving a bomb.

A good first solution is to mix a small percentage of hydrogen (<4%) with natural gas (or biogas), which will: (i) noticeably improve efficiency, and (ii) significantly reduce pollution. China will use this approach to retrofit the whole fleet of buses in several towns before the Olympic Games in 2008.

When the need truly arrives (and it won't be too long), enough money will be spent by the car makers themselves to develop reliable, low-cost fuel cells, and hydrides hydrogen storage units, that will provide: (i) good efficiency, (ii) safety, and (iii) enough mileage.

Comment
17 of 26

mircea-faur-ph-d-41515

January 28, 2006

Joules Verne in his "The Mysterious Isle" novel predicted (in 1860's - when petrol was just staring to be used) that when all fossil fuel sources will be exhausted, hydrogen is going to replace them. He's visionary prediction will come to become a reality sooner than most people think.

From 1980 to 1983 (to early in the game), my small team has designed and installed the world first solar (PV, and wind generators) to hydrogen pilot production facility.

Hydrogen as an energy storage carrier makes a lot of sense, especially in connection with renewable (e.g., solar: PV, and wind generators), and alternative energy (e.g., nuclear).

For a pertinent review, see:

http://www.ilea.org/downloads/MazzaHammerschlag.pdf

Dr. Mircea Faur, R@D VP
SPECMAT, Inc.
Cleveland, OH

Comment
18 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

Also, Bill, you made up some red herring issues that have not appeared in these columns merely so that you would have an easy issue to knock down rather than address the more difficult issues actually discussed in these columns.

If you read these columns regularly you would know that nowhere in any of these columns is hydrogen discussed as an energy source.

I recommend that you address the issues actually raised in these columns, do not make up something that nobody has ever said in these columns.

When you make up red herring issues, that merely indicates to us that you do not know what you are talking about. You are doing nothing more than making an uninformed emotional rant.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
19 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

Hydrogen can be, and is being used as a motor fuel today. You do not have to wait 50 years, or even 10 or 20 years.

An internal combustion engine that is designed to run on gasoline can easily be retrofitted to run on hydrogen alone, or as a dual fuel vehicle to run on hydrogen or gasoline when hydrogen is not available. You do not need to wait for fuel cells to come down in price, in fact while the refueling infrastructure for hydrogen is being built it is desirable to have vehicles that can run on either hydrogen or gasoline when hydrogen is not available. That will help with the consumer acceptance, and will make it possible for the necessary infrastrusture to be built once you have the demand for hydrogen refueling stations.

(continued)

Comment
20 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 28, 2006

Thank you, Bill:

You seem to have some misconceptions about hydrogen as an energy carrier.

Hydrogen generated electrolytically using electricity generated by windpower costs approximately $2.50 to make an amount of hydrogen equal in energy content to one gallon of gasoline. (It takes approximately 50 kilowatt hours of electricity to produce an amount of hydrogen with an energy content equal to one gallon of gasoline. It costs about 5 cents per kilowatt hour to generate electridity using wind power.)

Hydrogen is a very effective way to store the energy produced by windpower until it is needed as a motor fuel, for example.

(continued)

Comment
21 of 26

roy-bauer-40438

January 30, 2006

Thank you Tom and Charles and everybody that is what I was looking for. Keep up the good work.

Comment
22 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 30, 2006

Thank you, Tom:

Also, James Heffel, the researcher who solved many of the challenges of retrofitting an internal combustion engine to run on hydrogen is one of the Principals of the Hydrogen Car Company in Southern California..

They will sell you a new car with an internal combustion engine retrofitted to run on hydrogen and other fuels as well when hydrogen is not available. Or they will retrofit your current gasoline powered automobile to run on hydrogen.

You do not have to wait for a vehicle retrofitted to run on hydrogen. You can buy one today, or have your own vehicle retrofitted today.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
23 of 26

tom-treadwell-43191

January 30, 2006

If you will go to the web site of QTWW that is a US company that is manufacturing hyd. engines for the army now and will sell you an engine for your car that works. There is also a company that is in the process of supending hyd. in a slurry mix that will use only 8% more space than a regular fuel tank and can use the same infructure of gas statinons for fuleing . Please gentleman have a look before you state any more non facts.

Comment
24 of 26

charles-butterfield-36244

January 30, 2006

Thank you, Roy:

Yes, you make an excellent point!

Yes, it seems to me that the history of the use of renewable energy sources is that we are told that we have to do more research first before we can get started, and then 10 or 20 years down the road we will have a renewable energy utopia!

I first heard that in 1963 when I began researching renewable energy sources. I have come to suspect that these calls for more research before we can do anything are merely procrastination tactics on the part of politicians to get us off their backs rather than true efforts to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources.

Although research and development is critically important, that does not mean that we should not get started, even though today's technology is less than perfect.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
25 of 26

craig-morris-42650

January 30, 2006

The article is incorrect about the recent DOE press release being the first DOE statement noting significant challenges to a hydrogen economy. A variety of documents posted at the DOE website detail many such challenges with the recently announced funding targeting some of them. I can understand the frustration about lack of comparable funding for renewable technologies, and I agree there should be much more; but I cannot comprehend pessimism about supporting research on hydrogen as an energy carrier to eventually replace fossil fuels. It's a glass half full, not half empty, folks.

Comment
26 of 26

roy-bauer-40438

January 30, 2006

Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFV) are already out there. The problem lies in trying to get the manufactures and dealers to increase production. Mostly they still want more R&D to be done on the vehicles. That is were costs keep going up. I say stop with so much R&d and start developing more for the consumer and get them on the road.
I understand that it might be becuase of safty or emitions. But when it comes down to product reliability every thing slows way down to a creap and crawl before anything hits the road.

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!