Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner

EU Hydrogen Week Meet up

6.8K views 134 replies 28 participants last post by  Hobbyist  
#1 · (Edited)
The EU is hosting the EU Hydrogen week in 10 days time in Brussels.
Electrification will be a central subject and a great opportunity to network.

It's a free event upon registration and companies will be showcasing their latest technologies.

It will also be a great opportunity for the skeptics among you to ask tough questions to policymakers and companies investing in hydrogen.

I am open to meet up with anyone interested to discuss points of view, on November 21st, 22nd and 23rd. Drop me a post or PM and I'll be glad to discuss over a beer or glass of wine.

Big players like Airbus, Toyota, Safran, Panasonic are going to be there, presenting and networking.

 
#4 ·
#6 ·
Interesting article: French city that pioneered hydrogen buses will opt for battery-electric in future due to ongoing problems and high costs

This line in it highlights the core problem which won't be solved anytime soon:

"But because hydrogen-powered vehicles have a 30% “well-to-wheel” efficiency because of efficiency losses from electrolysis, compression and refuelling, compared to around 75% for battery-electric alternatives, this has meant a particularly high bil"

I suspect this is why we'll be attending Betamax and Fax conferences rather than hydrogen.
 
#8 · (Edited)
Interesting article: French city that pioneered hydrogen buses will opt for battery-electric in future due to ongoing problems and high costs

This line in it highlights the core problem which won't be solved anytime soon:

"But because hydrogen-powered vehicles have a 30% “well-to-wheel” efficiency because of efficiency losses from electrolysis, compression and refuelling, compared to around 75% for battery-electric alternatives, this has meant a particularly high bil"

I suspect this is why we'll be attending Betamax and Fax conferences rather than hydrogen.
Yeah because when electricity comes from a plug, we can pretend that the gas well in Qatar, the ships that carry the gas to our shores, the gas powerplants that burn the gas into elctricity, they're all imaginary.

It's pointless to compare efficiency of BEV's with hydrogen when you ignore the fact that electricity for mobility is being produced from fossil fuels and burned somewhere at low effiency to create that electricity.

The right comparison will be the efficiency of green hydrogen VS. fossil fuel.

Please look at the big picture and think farther than your plug.
You should definitely go to the event to broaden you perspectives and get rid of that tunnel vision.
 
#13 ·
#20 ·
Stopping at M&S for a prawn sandwich on the way?

To take a moment out and just think about the challenge here, in an ideal world with renewable electricity to either charge a car or indeed produce green hydrogen, the H2 option requires 2 1/2 times as much infrastructure since it has a lower efficiency in conversion (and is mostly a CO2 producer in the process). So while H2 may offer some theoretical advantages it has some significant penalty vs just charging an electric vehicle.

I know this has all been said before, but thought I would add that for a bit of actual discussion., not just poking fun.
 
#22 ·
He's not stopping at M&S for a sandwich he's not an EV so doesn't need to stop! 😂

Well in the UK we get about 1373 hours of of sun a year (national average). In Saudi Arabia they get 3400 hours of sun a year. That almost conveniently exactly 2½ times as much sun.
They also want money and have a relatively poor population and only have 6 million cars, yet we have a relatively rich population who likes to spend money and 33 million cars.
They currently survive by selling us fossil fuels and they need a replacement and that will be green fuels of the future.

Will that mean green fuels powering cars here in the UK? Probably not. Will the gulf states rule the aviation fuel market, almost certainly. We from the west who want to fly the globe will be just as reliant on the gulf states in the future as we are today.
 
#40 ·
But the point you're ignoring is there is no scenario where the demand for them will arise!!

Even with lots of cheap green hydrogen imported in endless amounts you may as well just deliver it as electricity via the grid.

Why obsess with supplying it like petrol to a type of car that doesn't exist meaningfully and has no inherent advantages.
But the point you're ignoring is there is no scenario where the demand for them will arise!!

Even with lots of cheap green hydrogen imported in endless amounts you may as well just deliver it as electricity via the grid.

Why obsess with supplying it like petrol to a type of car that doesn't exist meaningfully and has no inherent advantages.
What's the advantage to supplying it to the grid? Why do we have petrol stations now. Why don't we just send the petrol to a power station to burn to make electricity?
 
#46 ·
But it wasn't available and isn't now but may well be in the future.
So while you're naval gazing, hoping for the future where someone will produce cheap hydrogen, pay for the fuelling infrastructure and convert their ice engine facilities to fuel cells the rest of the world has just got on with batteries.
I honestly don't see all the reasons for the pushback on it. People are happy to run a BEV on green energy but have some major problems with people wanting to run their cars on green hydrogen.
Because there is no green hydrogen there is in my plug right now 45% wind power produced electricity (its almost flat calm outside). All the infrastructure exists for BEV, it may not be in sufficient volume but its not new tech. The Hydrogen future you are looking for does not and will not exist.
 
#47 ·
So while you're naval gazing, hoping for the future where someone will produce cheap hydrogen, pay for the fuelling infrastructure and convert their ice engine facilities to fuel cells the rest of the world has just got on with batteries.

Because there is no green hydrogen there is in my plug right now 45% wind power produced electricity (its almost flat calm outside). All the infrastructure exists for BEV, it may not be in sufficient volume but its not new tech. The Hydrogen future you are looking for does not and will not exist.
Well I explained why there is no green hydrogen because it's not economically viable yet because oil is more profitable which is why most people are using petrol. Hydrogen based fuels will be for people who want or have to move away from fossil fuel cars in the future.

Ok you have a plug so do many people yet 4 out of 5 new cars sold are still fossil fuel cars today.

I still don't get the push back. If it doesn't affect you why are you so against it. It will mean more green electricity for you to charge your BEV and less congestion at EV chargers. So those are both benefits to you. What's not to like?
 
#68 ·
The Independent - https://archive.ph/Y5dky

Has solution to climate change been buried deep in Earth all along?
Burning hydrogen produces only heat and water, and is attracting billions of dollars in investment

What if the answer to the climate crisis has been tucked away, since time immemorial, beneath our feet?
That is the possibility posed by increasing discoveries of vast, underground deposits of white hydrogen around the world.
Burning hydrogen produces only heat and water, and it’s attracting billions of dollars in investment as countries race to wean themselves off fossil fuels.
But not all hydrogen is created equal, and the energy industry uses a colour-coded, sliding scale to indicate its sustainability. Most common is “gray hydrogen”, made using the fossil fuel, natural gas. “Blue hydrogen” is created the same way but captures the carbon emissions; “green hydrogen” is produced by using clean energy to split water. As the name suggests, green hydrogen is the “greenest” but expensive and produced in smaller quantities.
Then there’s white hydrogen – also known as natural, gold or geologic hydrogen – which doesn’t need to be freed from other elements like oxygen by using vast amounts of electricity.
Until recently, it went relatively unnoticed that white hydrogen was already in real-world operation. Bourakébougou, a remote village in the landlocked West African nation of Mali, has powered its electricity supply with white hydrogen for more than a decade. The discovery was made after a local businessman brought in a Canadian consulting firm to test a water well that had caught fire when a worker lit a cigarette near it.
That company, Hydroma, says the source contains 98 per cent hydrogen gas and is the world’s first electricity production from white hydrogen without any carbon emissions via direct combustion.
Inevitably, there’s a catch – and the hapless smoker in Bourakébougou provides the first clue.
Hydrogen is a lot more flammable than natural gas, and can cause fires and explosions if not handled properly. Because the gas is so light, no known odorants can be added to alert people to potential leaks, just as a sulfur-containing smell raises the alarm on natural gas and propane.
Another unknown quantity of hydrogen, in general, is what impact it has on heating our already overcooked planet.
Hydrogen’s floaty quality means it easily leaks, warned a recent study by the Environmental Defense Fund, so the gas’ warming impact is “both widely overlooked and underestimated”.
“Therefore, the effectiveness of hydrogen as a decarbonization strategy, especially over timescales of several decades, remains unclear,” the researchers noted.
These aren’t the only challenges to overcome. Next comes finding the stuff, as many of the large deposits discovered so far have been hit upon by accident.
The largest accumulation of white hydrogen to date was inadvertently found in France this summer by scientists who were studying methane at a mining basin.

Etc, etc
 
#75 ·
The Independent - https://archive.ph/Y5dky

Has solution to climate change been buried deep in Earth all along?
Burning hydrogen produces only heat and water, and is attracting billions of dollars in investment

What if the answer to the climate crisis has been tucked away, since time immemorial, beneath our feet?
That is the possibility posed by increasing discoveries of vast, underground deposits of white hydrogen around the world.
Burning hydrogen produces only heat and water, and it’s attracting billions of dollars in investment as countries race to wean themselves off fossil fuels.
But not all hydrogen is created equal, and the energy industry uses a colour-coded, sliding scale to indicate its sustainability. Most common is “gray hydrogen”, made using the fossil fuel, natural gas. “Blue hydrogen” is created the same way but captures the carbon emissions; “green hydrogen” is produced by using clean energy to split water. As the name suggests, green hydrogen is the “greenest” but expensive and produced in smaller quantities.
Then there’s white hydrogen – also known as natural, gold or geologic hydrogen – which doesn’t need to be freed from other elements like oxygen by using vast amounts of electricity.
Until recently, it went relatively unnoticed that white hydrogen was already in real-world operation. Bourakébougou, a remote village in the landlocked West African nation of Mali, has powered its electricity supply with white hydrogen for more than a decade. The discovery was made after a local businessman brought in a Canadian consulting firm to test a water well that had caught fire when a worker lit a cigarette near it.
That company, Hydroma, says the source contains 98 per cent hydrogen gas and is the world’s first electricity production from white hydrogen without any carbon emissions via direct combustion.
Inevitably, there’s a catch – and the hapless smoker in Bourakébougou provides the first clue.
Hydrogen is a lot more flammable than natural gas, and can cause fires and explosions if not handled properly. Because the gas is so light, no known odorants can be added to alert people to potential leaks, just as a sulfur-containing smell raises the alarm on natural gas and propane.
Another unknown quantity of hydrogen, in general, is what impact it has on heating our already overcooked planet.
Hydrogen’s floaty quality means it easily leaks, warned a recent study by the Environmental Defense Fund, so the gas’ warming impact is “both widely overlooked and underestimated”.
“Therefore, the effectiveness of hydrogen as a decarbonization strategy, especially over timescales of several decades, remains unclear,” the researchers noted.
These aren’t the only challenges to overcome. Next comes finding the stuff, as many of the large deposits discovered so far have been hit upon by accident.
The largest accumulation of white hydrogen to date was inadvertently found in France this summer by scientists who were studying methane at a mining basin.

Etc, etc
Water vapour is not a free ride in terms of GWP. Burning hydrogen will cause global warming regardless that it “only produces water” (not even true).
Leaking hydrogen also has a warming effect by reduced ability of the atmosphere to break down methane.
 
#76 ·
Meanwhile the world burns, illness caused by tail pipe emissions rise and we wait for green hydrogen.
And to get to the Net Zero (NZ) myth, we have to apparently and will continue to build shed loads of new infrastructure. All seriously CO2 generating. For example Oxford Footy Club want a new stadium and go NZ. Their current one is only 20ish years old, but the lease runs out. So let's demolish a perfectly serviceable stadium, build more concrete stuff where it was, chew up the green belt and build a BIGGER and BETTER stadium to use more concrete and consume more stuff but save on the electricity bill. Or we could build the 4th end stand and increase the capacity a little. Barking mad.
It is the same with BEVs. Yes, through life CO2 emissions are say 1/3 of an ICE. But consumption of general stuff to build is more - just compare tyres of a basic Golf - 195/65-15 and an ID3 - probably 18". And in 30 years any CO2 savings with an increasing worldwide BEV fleet will be completely mitigated by the huge increase in BEV numbers as the nations in the East, 4bn?, buy their own wheels instead of bicycles. So CO2 emissions still warming up the atmosphere at an ever increasing rate.
H0m0 Sapiens is a Ponzi scheme - and we all know how those end.
 
#90 ·
The big issue with HFCEVs is that BEVs are better for anyone who can charge often at home or work, but HFCEVs also need a full fuel distribution network.

So now someone has to build a complete distribution network equivalent to the petrol/diesel one, but to service only 30% of the market (roughly).

Well, perhaps that’s not so bad - after all, the current petrol/diesel distribution network was built decades ato, when there were only 30% of the number of cars on the road, right? In 1980 there were only 13.5m, and now there are 40m ish, and the petrol/diesel market was able to support that just fine.

But there are already 30K EV hanging stations in the UK and charging a modern EV is not much slower than refueling a HFCEV. So a significant proportion of that 30% addressable market will likely just choose BEV because it’s good enough and as cheap or cheaper than HFCEV to run.

So now the HFCEV market is down to perhaps 20% of the total UK car market, and has not real prospect of growing beyond about 30% ever. Which means it just isn’t worth the investment in H2 distribution because there’s not enough volume and not enough projected growth.

Obviously @GavJ and anyone else is welcome to invest money to profit from this ”opportunity“, but I suspect it will be a lonely road.
 
#98 ·
1. A lot and you are taking a single example of what we NEED hydrogen for and ignoring things like steel and cement etc

2. Hydrogen doesn't compete with petrol because there isnt any green hydrogen. your point was about the future where there still wont be any green hydrogen and most of the world will be already in a battery car

3. Its difficult because NO ONE is prepared to take the first step, there has been a decade of FCV sales and the infrastructure is worse today and going backwards. The trouble is no one thinks they can make money, all it is, is a carrot held out to delay the transition away from fossil fuels

4. 4 out of 5 new car drivers are exactly that, they have been fooled into thinking hydrogen will eventually take over. Its a con job that is slowly been show and even Toyota now say its not the answer for cars
They aren't making green hydrogen, thats the point, all they are doing is saying they will at some time in the future make it whilst making billions selling fossil fuels....
Someone driving around in a 15 year old car isnt going to ever own a FCV, they simply cant afford one. They aren't the people new cars are aimed at so totally besides the point.
Hydrogen ISNT green energy, its over 97% made from fossil fuels....
Because hydrogen is always going to be horrifically inefficient and expensive and is just an excuse to not do anything but continue to sell fossil fuels..... Its a joke and the sad thing is that so many people have fallen for it
Wow.
 
#108 · (Edited)
Hydrogen can't be realistically transported, it would take 11 trucks to transport the same amount of hydrogen gas energy as one petrol tanker. Piping it is not realistic.

That leaves electrolysing it and compressing it on site which isn't going to happen. The cost is just too high.

The average petrol car in the UK does 36mpg, which at a price of £1.50 per litre gives a cost of 18.9p/mile
BEV charged on Octopus go at 7.5p/kWh and doing 3.5 miles/kWh costs 2.14p/mile
BEV charged at standard 30p/kWh tariff and doing 3.5 miles/kWh costs 8.6p/mile
BEV charged overnight on a street charger at 48p/kWh costs 13.7p/mile
an FCEV doing 60 miles from 1Kg of Hydrogen at £22 per Kg costs 36p/mile.

The vast majority of BEV's can either charge at home or slowly overnight on a destination charger only occasionally using expensive rapid chargers. They operate at less than half the cost of running on Petrol and less than a quarter of the cost of a fuel cell car assuming the expensive street <7kW chargers.

Battery costs have fallen dramatically and it's projected that BEV's will reach price parity with ICE's in between 2 and 5 years. FCEV's are selling in such small numbers that it would take decades to get down to price parity.

The average ICE car is scrapped after 16 years. I don't see any reason why todays BEV's would die any quicker. What's the life of an FCEV? My bet would be 10 years, who's going to trust H2 tanks regularly pumped to 700 Bar (10,000 PSI) beyond 10 years. There's also the matter of the very large and expensive air filter that will need changing periodically. Fuel cells loose output as they age and get contaminated. Eventually their output will drop to the point where they struggle to provide enough power. How long will they last, perhaps 100,000 miles?

I get that the middle eastern OPEC countries will have to find something to replace their oil revenues but electrolysing water to make Hydrogen that's nearly impossible to transport large distances probably isn't it. Perhaps using the electrical energy to make glass/ steel/ aluminium/ fertiliser or other feeder chemicals would make far more sense.
 
#109 ·
Hydrogen fuel cells have also been shown to fail very expensively too, there was a media article about an early adopter in the USA, who got quoted about three times the purchase price of their car to replace the fuel cell. Think it was KIA, could have been Hyundai. Hydrogen may be clean at point if use but is far more energy intensive in production compared to just supplying the electricity for an EV. It's just a green-washing solution for big oil to continue making vast profits from a production and distribution network which will be obsolete with the rise of BEVs and improving grid infrastructure, a good thing. Not to mention there will likely be a need for a lot of 'blue' hydrogen if demand increased, made by processing fossil fuels, not green at all.