Hydrogen Proponents Now See 2020 As "Breakthrough" Year - Reuters

[hatrack]

LONG BEACH, California - Hydrogen fuel proponents see 2020 as the year it all comes together. Not only will there be affordable zero-emissions hydrogen-fueled cars in every showroom but in 2020 a smattering of houses across the world will be lighted with electricity from hydrogen-powered home generators.

So say the researchers, business people and government officials working to take hydrogen from an expensive experiment to an affordable alternative to petroleum and its polluting products, gasoline and diesel fuel. But to the average person, hydrogen seems closer to science fiction than a reality show.

Even proponents agree there are four major hurdles researchers need to solve before the fuel can be used widely: storage, fuel cell durability, affordability and a delivery system, which some call "wells to wheels."

Consumers also have not shown any ability to break the petroleum habit, which frustrates Alan Lloyd, secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency. "It's disturbing there has been no major uprising against the cost of oil. People are not driving less," Lloyd said in a speech to some of the 1,100 attendees at this week's National Hydrogen Association annual conference at the Long Beach Convention Center.

EDIT

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/35697/story.htm

Sorry, guys, but "a smattering of houses across the world" is not going to do the job.

[HereSince1628]

1. Isn't Ceres/Centrica going into production with their fuel cell boiler?

I think I read that here on DU. IIRC They expect to market a system for about $5000. That looks pretty damned good from an ex-urbanite's perspective.

[tanyev]

2. If they think we can make it to 2020 at the rate we're going,

then they are far more optimistic than I.

[BlueEyedSon]

3. Yawn... where will all that hydrogen come from again?

[Javaman]

13. exactly...

currenlty we have to burn coal to make hydrogen. That's still emitting CO2. Then there is the concept of using Nuclear energy to make hydorgen. Well, until Nukes are safe enough to do that, I'm not holding my breath.

[Squeech]

4. Are you sure?

>Jeff Serfass has been president of the NHA since it formed 17 years ago, and he is still optimistic.

>"Today, people see the hydrogen economy as both logical and probably inevitable," he said.

I don't see anything inevitable about hydrogen. Photovoltaics make way more sense for households, and ethanol and/or biodiesel make more sense for transportation, and in both cases the technical problems are considerably less steep than hydrogen technology.

Also, what BlueEyedSon said: where's the hydrogen going to come from? The administration's proposal is to "generate" hydrogen by stripping it from fossil fuel hydrocarbons-- in other words, it'll still leave us just as dependent on the petroleum industry. (Which is just how Smirky McHalliburton wants it, of course.)

[Trillo]

5. Solar hydrogen is in the works.

Storing hydrogen in tanks would seem easier and less toxic than storing electricity in batteries. Hydrogen could power a microturbine generator for 24-hour electricity.

Whether what is in the works will produce solar hydrogen on a large scale remains to be seen.

[depakid]

6. Proponents have yet to tell me

where they're planning to get the energy to produce the hydrogen on the scale they envision, and why said energy would ever be used (inefficiently) to make hydrogen, rather than be funneled into other competing uses.

Instead, all I usually hear are empty statements like this:

"Today, people see the hydrogen economy as both logical and probably inevitable,"

Quackery.

[buddysmellgood]

7. But...but...only one inch of water from the top of Lake Michigan could

power all our..blah...blah...yadda yadda. Bushco pushes hydrogen because they know it will be made from oil and gas. I'm not against it, I just don't see it as the solution to energy independence. It's going to be a big mix of technologies.

[JohnWxy]

11. Agreed. The Bush & Co. got this from oil and esp. coal industry

masters. They are salivating over producing hydrogen from coal and gas. Extremely expensive and completely contravenes the whole idea of reducing dependence of imported oil. The technology is extemely polluting, but oil and natural gas and coal industry is getting loads of Government support to do research trying to clean up the process!

This is why getting hydrogen from renewable source, such as ethanol is so attractive, along with the fact that ethanol works better than gasoline in the reforming process to produce hydrogen for fuel cells.

But you are right, oil, coal and natural gas producers are pushing hydrogen only because they want to produce hygrogen from their product.

ONe thing they may not have figured on is, as Wind Turbines become more prevalent, the notion of producing hydrogen from electrolysis will beat hygrogen from coal, gas or natural gas in terms of cost (since the Wind Turbines justify themselves just in terms of electricity production the production of hydrogen -, during off demand hours, will be a bonus and therefor much cheaper). Additionally, the electroylisis of hygrogen using Wind Power is completely without pollution!!
Generating hydrogen from natural gas, coal or gasoline/oil can't compete on that score at all!

[Dead_Parrot]

12. If you could skim the oil from it...

...you're probably right. :evilgrin:

[JohnWxy]

8. Alas, the Japanese will beat us again, working with Acta:

http://www.acta-nanotech.com/market/applications.aspx

fuel cells using hydro-carbons to supply the hydrogen (with reformers to release the hydrogen) will likely be the way fuel cells become practical. Thhis is much safer than dealing with free hydrogen and you don't have to spend billions building a unique infrastructure to dispense the hydrogen. You can pump ethanol right out of the gas station pumps it is currently being dispensed out of - albeit out of too few, right now!

http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage2748.html

Fuel Cell Technology Enabler - Acta - Signs First Contract
Acta, the fuel cell technology enabler, today announces that it has signed its first commercial sales and distribution contract with Summit Medichem Ltd, Sumitomo Corporation’s Chemicals Business Unit and subsidiary. The contract covers Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Acta’s breakthrough in nanotechnology catalysts will enable the competitive launch of fuel cells to the mass consumer market.

Under the terms of the contract, Summit Medi-Chem will have exclusive distribution rights to Acta’s technology, moreover it has committed to delivering commercial contracts in the first year.

This is an important first step into the critical Asian market for Acta and the company will be building on this strong foundation by seeking to develop commercial relationships with the leading Asian OEMs over the coming twelve months.

Acta proprietary nanotechnology has enabled it to develop a new, unique family of catalysts called HYPERMEC™ catalysts which breakdown the barriers to the commercialisation of the fuel cells for mass market applications. HYPERMEC™ catalysts use low cost materials, work at low temperatures, enable use of cheap, safe and environmentally friendly fuels and solve other technical issues, thereby creating the possibility of producing fuel cells for consumer products.

Acta’s HYPERMEC™ catalysts are platinum free and perform as well as or better than platinum catalysts depending on which fuel they are working with. In addition, while HYPERMEC™ catalysts can function on methanol and hydrogen, the two most common fuels currently used by the fuel cell industry at present, fuel cells using Acta’s catalysts can also run directly on ethanol, a safe, practical and widely distributed fuel at room temperature, which platinum catalysed fuel cells cannot.

Oh jeez. Looks like we'll be even more dependent on Japan in the future, as oil becomes more and more expensive.

[buddysmellgood]

9. Carbon monoxide is a big obstacle to long term fuel cell use. CO spoils

the catalyst. I wonder if they've found a way around that.

[JohnWxy]

10. That's one of the key benefits to Acta's approach (but this may require

the use of ethanol or ethylene glycol...cleaner source of hydrogen than gasoline). There is more at Acta's site. HEre is a link and I have pasted an excerpt (emphasis my own):


http://www.acta-nanotech.com/technology/benefits.aspx

Key benefits

The catalysts developed by Acta have been subjected to extensive laboratory testing and characterisation and have been demonstrated to offer significant and often unique advantages:

High performance: HYPERMEC™ performs as well as platinum catalysts in most applications
Work below freezing: with ethylene glycol as a fuel, the fuel cell will work at temperatures as low as -12°C

No evaporation: ethylene glycol powered fuel cells suffer no fuel evaporation below 180°C

Affordable: Acta will be able to offer HYPEMEC™ at industrial prices, as products are launched to the consumer market

No alcohol cross-over effect: the catalysts are selective so there is no loss of power if alcohol passes through the membrane

No carbon monoxide poisoning: catalysts last longer and can use more complex hydrocarbons as fuel

Practical fuels: use of ethanol and ethylene glycol can enormously simplify the supply chain for distribution of fuels

Green fuel: ethanol is made from biomass and is therefore completely renewable. Net carbon emissions from this process are nil.

NOte: Acta is saying they think they can bring this technology to automobiles in ten (10) years. This is quite an improvement on the 20+ yrs I have heard for bringing free hydrogen fuel cells to commercial viability. Part of the problem with working with free hydrogen (aside from the obvious safety concerns which must be addressed) is the investment and time to build the infrastructure to dispense the hydrogen (along with of course coming up with a way of producing the hydrogen economically and in a non-polluting way). for these reasons, I don't think free hydrogen approach is going to be the way we will see Fuel Cells become a reality. It will involve supplying the hydrogen using hydrocarbons.

I dont' know if Acta's projection of ten years is optimistic or not, the technology is so new it's hard to know if it is. But, if they start teaming with the Japanese, I wouldn't take that estimate too lightly. The Japanese aren't known for fooling around with a new technology. They have a record of bringing stuff to market while others (i.e. Detroit) sit around talking things over in committee ad infinitum. This is what worries me. I really would hate to see us lose out on this technology. ...could mean the end of the auto industry in the U.S.(in 20 - 30 years).

[rfkrfk]

14. meaningless BS, reformers useless, without a fuel cell

the --> fuel cell <-- is the hard part

what about that?, don't people get

fuel cells for cars, essentially don't exist