CHAPTER 1 Why Hydrogen?Why Now?
-':,.
hen I first came to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in W1993 to help oversee research and development (R&D) in clean energy, hydrogen R&D did not even have its own separate budget line but instead was nestled inside the renewable energy budget. For the previous decade, hydrogen research funding had lan guished in the $1-$2 million per year range, some one one-hundredth of! percent ofthe overalldepartmental budget-a penny in every$100. Only ten years later, all the major car companies had hydrogen vehicle programs, the major oil companies had hydrogen produc tion programs, dozens of new companies had been formed to develop hydrogen-related technologies with venture capital fund ing, and President George W. Bush had announced a major hydro gen initiative in his January 2003 State of the Union address:
Tonight I'm proposing $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen powered automobiles. A single chemicalreaction between hydro gen and oxygen generates energy, which can be used to power a car-producing only water, not exhaust fumes. With a new national commitment, our scientistsand engineers will overcome obstacles to taking these cars from laboratory to showroom, so
II Why Hydrogen? Why Now? THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN
that the first car driven by a child born today could be powered Further, these hardware hurdles are all quite separate from the by hydrogen, and pollution-free.1 way in which the fuel for fuel cells-hydrogen-would be pro duced and delivered to the vehicle. Hydrogen, first and foremost, What caused this sea change in ten short years? I believe there are is not a primary fuel, like natural gas or coal or wood, which we can three reasons: a series oftechnological advances in the fuel cellsmost drill or dig for or chop down and then use at once. Hydrogen is the suitable for cars; growing concern about a varietyofenergy and envi most abundant element in the universe, true enough. But on Earth, ronmental problems, especially global warming; and advances in it is bound up tightly in molecules of water, coal, natural gas, and technologies needed for greenhouse-gas-free hydrogen production. so on. To unbind it, a great deal of energy must be used.' For allthese reasons-plus the sharp drop in both the price of oil and government funding for alternative energy-hydrogen fuel cell Advances in Transportation Fuel Cells vehicles received little attention through most of the 1980s. Still, a few government and industry laboratories (together with a small Fuel cells are one of the Holy Grails of energy technology (see and ardent group of hydrogen advocates and state energy experts) Chapter 2). They are pollution-free electric "engines" that run on kept plugging away, particularly on proton exchange membrane hydrogen. Unlike virtually all other engines, fuel cells do not rely on the burning of fossil fuels. Hence, they produce no combustion (PEM) fuel cells. PEM fuel cellswere developed in the early 1960s by the General by-products, such as oxides of nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, or particu Electric Company for the Gemini space program. Fuel cells require lates- the air pollutants that cause smog and acid rain and that have catalysts to speed up the electrochemical reaction, and PEM fuel been most clearly documented as harmful to human health. cellsuse platinum, a very expensive metal. An early 1981analysisfor Fuel cells have been reliably providing electricity to spacecraft the DOE had presciently argued that PEM fuel cells would be ideal since the 1960s, including the Gemini and Apollo missions as well for transportation if the catalyst loading could be significantly as the space shuttle. The leading manufacturer of fuel cells for the reduced.' By the early 1990S, Los Alamos National Laboratory (and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), United others), did succeed in cutting the amount ofplatinum by almost a Technologies Corporation, has sold commercial units for stationary factor of ten, a remarkable improvement. This still did not make power since the early 1990S, with more than 200 units in service. PEM fuel cells cost-competitive with gasoline engines-we are a But finding a fuel cell with the right combination of features for long way away from that- but it did dramatically reinvigorate powering a car or truck has proved much more difficult. Why is that interest in hydrogen-powered vehicles because PEMS were exactly hard? To begin with, you need a fuel cellthatis lightweight and com the kind oflow-temperature fuel cell that could be used in a car. pact enough to fit under the hood of a car but that can still deliver In 1993, DOE funding for PEM fuel cells was just less than $10 the power and acceleration drivers have come to expect. You also million. Within days of my arrival, I was briefed on Los Alamos' need a fuel cell that can reach full power in a matter of seconds after PEM work and began pushing for increases in funding for PEM fuel start-up, which rules out a variety of fuel cells that operate at very .~ cells as well as for the development of a transportation fuel cell high temperatures and thus take a long time to warm up. You also strategy. President Bill Clinton's entire team was very supportive of . need cost and reliabilitycomparable to that of the gasoline-powered R&D for fuel-efficient technologies, including PEMS. Funding for internal combustion engine, which is an exceedingly mature tech hybrid vehicles, including fuel cells, was significantly increased. So, nology, the product of more than a hundred years of development and real-world testing in hundreds of millions of vehicles. roo, was funding for hydrogen R&D.
13 12
...._-_...._...~------THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Why Hydrogen? Why Now?
In mid-I995, I moved to the DOE'S Office of Energy Efficiency spawned by that funding, has spurred private sector interest, much and Renewable Energy. I was principal deputy assistant secretary, as similar support does in medicine and national defense. Since the the number two slot, in charge of all budget and technology analy late I990S, hundreds of millions of dollars from venture capitalists sis. In that capacity, I was able to work with other fuel cell advocates and investors in the stock market have flowed into start-up compa in and out of the administration, especially my DOE colleagues nies and divisions of existing companies, all working to develop Brian Castelli and Christine Ervin, to keep the PEMfuel cell budget hydrogen-related technologies and fuel cells, although, as discussed creeping upward even as the entire budget for the office was cut 20 in Chapter 3, this investment funding has proved as erratic as the percent by a I995 Congress that was extremely skeptical of all stock market. energy R&D.4 The U.S. government was hardly the only source of funding for It seemed likely that long before PEM fuel cells would be cost hydrogen and PEM fuel cells. Governments in Europe and Asia effective for powering cars, they would be cost-effective for provid have major progran1s, as do Japanese car companies such as Toyota ing electricity and hot water to buildings. Yet Congress had repeat and Honda. Canada has a significant program because of the lead edly rejected our office's request to start a small ($I million) pro ership of Ballard Power Systems Inc. in PEMtechnology. gram to advance the effort to put fuel cells into buildings. In I997, when I was acting assistant secretary, we managed to launch the program for stationary PEMfuel cell research, the budget for which Growing Energy Risks ultimately grew to several million dollars. Many other trends have driven the renewed interest in hydrogen. By I998, the year I left the DOE, the hydrogen budget was ten At the top of the list are worries about oil consumption and air pol times larger than in I993, and the proposed PEM fuel cell budget lution, including global warming. America's dependence on was more than three times larger. The investment paid off: The cost imported oil has accelerated since the mid-I990S, as many people of fuel cells (PEM and others) had steadily declined as performance predicted- including Charles Curtis, then deputy secretary of the increased. Harry Pearce, vice chairman of the General Motors Cor DOE, and me in a I996 Atlantic Monthly piece titled "Mideast Oil poration, said at the North American International Auto Show in Eorevcrr'" By 2002, we were importing more than halfour oil, an January 2000, "Itwas the Department of Energy that took fuel cells outflow of $roo billion per year to foreign governments, including from the aerospace industry to the automotive industry, and they those in the politically unstable Persian Gulf region. should receive a lot of credit for bringing it to us." The terrible September II, 200I, terrorist attacks heightened this There were promising developments in hydrogen production concern. Less than two weeks later, the DOEwas commenting pub and storage. Hydrogen budgets were ballooning everywhere in a licly. "It is clear that our reliance on imported oil- 56% of the oil we race for patents and products. William Clay Ford [r., chairman of use-has complicated our response to the terrorist attack;' noted the Ford Motor Company, said in October 2000, "I believe fuel David Garman, the Bush administration's assistant secretary for cells will finally end the roo-year reign of the internal combustion energy efficiency and renewable energy, on September 24, '200L engine"- a poignant statement from the great-grandson of the man 'There is also little doubt that some of the dollars we have exported whose manufacturing innovations had begun that reign a century in exchange for foreign oil have found their way into the hands of ago with the Model T.6 terrorists and would-be terrorists." The federal government's increasing commitment to hydrogen These seismic problems, together with worldwide population and fuel cells, together with the technological successes already growth, economic growth, and urbanization, will dramatically
14 15 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Why Hydrogen? Why Now? increase global oil consumption in the coming decades, especially power, ralSlng the ultimate prospect of an inexhaustible, clean, in the developing world. If by 2050 the per capita energy con domestic source of transportation fuel. Also, since fuel cells are sumption of China and India were to approach that of South more efficient than gasoline internal combustion engines, hydro Korea, and if the Chinese and Indian populations increase at cur gen fuel cell vehicles are, potentially, a double winner in the race to rently projected rates, those two supergiant countries by themselves replace oil. would consume more oil than the entire world did in 2003. 9 Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles would seem to be the perfect answer Since oil is a finite, nonrenewable resource, analysts have to our burgeoning and alarming dependence on imported oil. For attempted to predict when production will peak and start declin some, like Peter Schwartz, chair of the Global Business Network, ing. Some believe this will occur by 20IO. The Royal Dutch/Shell they are almost the deus ex machina-i-rhe quick, pure technologi Group, probably the most successful predictor in the global oil cal fix-that will avoid the need for difficult policy choices, such as business, adds fifteen to thirty years to that gloomy forecast. Worry federal mandates for increased vehicle efficiency.10 That is overopti about oil supplies is one of the factors behind Shell's growing mistic hype, as we will see. research into hydrogen (see Chapter 7). This debate will not be The pollution generated by internal combustion engine auto resolved here, but it does appear credible that oil production will mobiles is another key reason why so many people are drawn to peak in the first halfof this cenmry and will possibly decline at a rel hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. The transportation sector remains one atively rapid rate thereafter, even as demand increases. Thus, delay of the largest sources of urban air pollution, especially the oxides of ing action until we are past the pealemay put us at significant risk. nitrogen that are a precursor to ozone smog and the particulates that do so much damage to our hearts and lungs. Vehicle emissions of such pollutants, however, have been declining steadily, and, by Growing Environmental Risks 20IO, federal and state standards will have made new U.S. cars A Whopping two-thirds of u.s. oil consumption is in the trans exceedingly clean. portation sector, the only sector of the U.S. economy wholly reliant Yet, even as new internal combustion engine vehicles dramati on oil. The energy price shocks of the 1970S helped spur growth in cally cut me emissions of noxious urban air pollutants by automo use of natural gas for home heating and drove the electric utility biles, their contribution to global warming has begun to rise. In the sector and the industrial sector to reduce their dependence on 1990S, the transportation sector saw the fastest growtl1 in carbon ) petroleum. But roughly 97 percent of all energy consumed by our dioxide (co 2 emissions of any major sector of the U.S. economy. cars, sport utility vehicles, vans, trucks, and airplanes is still petro And the transportation sectorisprojectedtogenerate near~'Yhalfofthe40 11 leum-based. percent rise in US. cO 2 emissionsforecastfir 2025. Not surprisingly, a high priority of R&D funding by the United When the United States takes serious action on global warming, States-and by any cOlmtry, state, or company that takes the long the transportation sector will need to be a top priority. The two view - is to develop both more fuel-efficient vehicles and alterna most straightforward ways to reduce vehicle cO 2 emissions are, tive fuels. Only a limited number of fuels are plausible alternatives first, by increasing the fuel efficiency of the vehicles themselves and, "- for gasoline, and one enormous benefit of hydrogen over others is second, by using a fuel that has lower net emissions than gasoline. that it can be generated by a variety of different sources, thus poten Again, the attractiveness of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is that they tially minimizing dependence on anyone. Most important, hydrogen afford the possibility of pursuing both strategies at the same time: can be generated from renewable sources of energy such as wind Fuel cells are more efficient than traditional internal combustion
16 17
in
gas
my
the
not
sta
then His
con
giant
These
power
multi
pollu
major
vehicles
sources
the sce
not
14
of
8).
seem ro
emissions
and
stored
generating
substantial
2
and
be released
around
and
conclusions
for address
a
wind
policy is
gas
from
giant,
gases.
7
were a
cO
and
warming.
subject
include
would
not
the
greenhouse
hydrogen
as it was
we are to achieve
when
of
and
made
if
production.
also
will almost certainly energy
strategy
fuel cells
projects
that
in such
is the effort to explore this
hydrogen-fueled
oil
Economy
most,
would
may well be the essen
prove practical.
also include
time
Chapters
greenhouse
vehicles
captured
that
it
US.
of
reducing
greenhouse
could Yetone
government
century
if
major
critical
that
(see be
it
of
energy, such as
storage
hydrogen hydrogen
a
that
in
could
me the
8). Still,
planning
this
of
accelerate global so
It
but
hydrogen
and
term
of
research - is
or
19
into
the peak
hydrogen
could
describes a
emissions
should
Hydrogen
transportation
warming.
2
others
demonstration
especially
half
again, we have never faced such a
potentially
be critical in
past
launched
cO
Chapter
surprised
longer
thereby
to a
capmre
matter),
in
current
Further,
process
thinking
then
is delivered by formations
(see
that
the carbon.
Why Hydrogen? Why Now?
could
second
economy" and
fossil fuels
the
to
in the
production,
plant
But
carbon
advances in one
officials and
this century,
sooner.
or if we are renewable sources
department
energy
have no net emissions
used
of
plants
storing
reductions
geologic
changed
Transition
steps.
starting
DOE
production
our
then not
from nuclear power,
that
much half
warming
"hydrogen
converting
as global warming.
hydrogen
atmosphere
of
ongoing
include
power
time
the
book-the
of
first Long
term
needed
We are
this
With
permanently
hydrogen
and biomass (e.g.,
nario
would
of energy
fraction
problem
The
The be
decade
the very deep
tial vehicle fuel in the
emissions tionary
significantly
in the
view before
areunlikely to make a significant dent in US. of
be the perfect answer to global tion-free
ing global
globe and is widely seen as a
siderable research as well as
briefings to possibility. Today, reason why the
into the
underground
during
tor has
has
the
later
from
it will
green
way to
"If
released
detailed
country
produce
That
Labora
Haldane
of
2
releasing
Princeton
who
from fossil
key role in
it is simply
"Among its
sources
the
cO
economy
although
for
would
the
is, I believe, the
then
no smoke or ash
playa
produced
if
without
a cost-effective and
years hence." Even
competitive
Haldane,
...
mid-rooos,
Automotive
hydrogen
hydrogen.
power
could
derive its energy
hydrogen
both
in price sharply.
from renewable energy
that
geneticists, gave a lecture
others)
John
possible source
electricity
gas emissions.
hydrogen,
warming,
be
than
hundred
Technology, argues,
hydrogen
Gases
generated
pure
economically'?"
HYDROGEN
a
of
of
1923,
the Sloan
or
be
efforts in research and develop
greenhouse-gas-free
producing
global
famous
18
could
of
declining
"tour
of
ultimately
produced
and fuel cells
generating
expensive
unexpected
greenhouse
ABOUT source
most could
most
in renewable
wind,
fossil fuels. In the
Institute
future
two decades, renewable energy, especially
net
when
would
a and solar electric
expanded
director
Greenhouse
more
decades before this is a
the vision
more
HYPE
fossil fuels
particularly
'Bob Williams (and
benign
a new one. In
for than
hydrogen
come from renewable sources,
interest
recently,
windmills"
environmentally
hydrogen
that
with wind,
THE
not
Britain
is far
more
hydrogen:
not
create no
that
the century's
advantages will be the fact
is more
hydrogen,
another,
imagining
without
that
of
Heywood, until
professor
that
Massachusetts
that
have been far too expensive to be practical.
pollution,
there was excess
for
doing,
is
renewed
does
hydrogen.
argument
metallic
arguing
a
was
would
problem
produced.?"
of
But
John
that,
and solar energy, has been
obvious
when
pollution
environmentally
worth
There
The
The idea
reports
an
house-gas-free
University
generate
still be two or
created
hydrogen wind
fuels.
today, nuclear,
hydrogen himself
been
more
and,
will be
"rows predicting
became one
any
not
hydrogen
ment. tory at the
strongest
combating
The possibility Hydrogen
sources, engines, and THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Why Hydrogen? Why Now?
We are unlikely to know whether a hydrogen economy is practi environmentally, and politically plausible scenario for bridging this cal and economically feasible for at least one decade and possibly classiccarch-zz chasm; it does not yet exist. two or even more. A hydrogen economy would require dramatic So, despite much hype to the contrary, a hydrogen economy is a changes in our transportation system because, at room temperature long way off. Widespread use of fuel cells, particularly for station and pressure, hydrogen takes up three thousand times more space ary applications, may be just around the corner, however, so they than gasoline containing an equivalent amount of energy. We will are the subject of the next two chapters. need tens of thousands of hydrogen fueling stations, and, unless hydrogen is generated on-site at those stations, we will also need a massive infrastructure for delivering that hydrogen from wherever it is generated. Substantial technological and cost breakthroughs will be needed in many areas, not the least of which is fuel cells for vehicles. In 2003, fuel cell vehicles cost $I million each or more. Were we to build a hydrogen infrastructure for fueling vehicles, the total deliv ered cost of hydrogen generated from fossil fuel sources would likely be at least triple the cost of gasoline for the foreseeable future. IS Hydrogen generated from renewable energy sources would be considerably more expensive. Hydrogen storage is cur rently expensive, inefficient, and subject to onerous codes and stan dards. The DOE does not foresee making a decision about com mercializing fuel cell vehicles unti120I5. I6 One detailed 2003 analy sis of a hydrogen economy by two leading European fuel cell experts concluded, "The 'pure-hydrogen-only-solution' may never become realitv?" And if the imposing technical and cost problems can be substan tially solved, we will still have an imposing chicken-and-egg prob lem: \'\7110will spend hundreds of billions of dollars on a wholly new nationwide infrastructure to provide ready access to hydrogen for consumers with fuel cell vehicles until millions of hydrogen vehicles are on the road? Yetwho will manufacture and market such vehicles-and who will buv them-e-until the infrastructure is in place to fuel those vehicles? A 2002 analysis by Argonne National ", Laboratory found that "with current technologies, the hydrogen delivery infrastructure to serve 40% of the light duty f1eet is likely to cost over $500 billion ?" I fervently hope to see an economically,
20 21
.~
in
in
the
and,
wind
of
engine
energy which
carbon
gas, 'so it
fuels. record
Although
of
Hydrogen
contribute
one
element
Transporta
of
it.
and insecure
no emissions
not
domestic,
safety
highly efficient
natural
wind.'
worst
will
with
combustion
and
limited
abundant
good
represents
and
and storage
power
that
is the
transporting
diversified,
a readily accessible
water
most
can
fuel
today, and we have decades
internal
of
as
4
and
capture
not
sunlight,
reliance on
is the
Hydrogen
to extract and purify.
is
fuel, it has a
67
by renewable sources, such as the
Production
Hydrogen
our
gas,
the use
industry
can be made from many things,
exceeded
Hydrogen
electricity and heat
storing,
in
molecules
with
fuels.
CHAPTER
transportation
should
hydrogen
hydrogen natural
of
2003
used
both
dangerous
generated
to replace
in such
as a
Hydrogen
side,
a massive scale prove practical and affordable.
energy-intensive
generating,
Hydrogen
for oil as a
on
in
generate
is widely
)
tightly
and
potential
2
the plus side,
minus
settings.
up
that
warming-if
(co
reputation
On
the
than pure, drinkable water.
fuel cell costs in
substitutes
ydrogen is the best
On
Hydrogen
experience
bound
tion
is is expensive
source, as are coal, oil,
industrial
it has a
dioxide of
power, or even by coal,
to global
few
other
ultimately, limitless sources.
fuel cells
energy sources, such as oil, H
offers us the the universe by far.
'.
.
of
is
his
to
He
and have
or
died Jules
In
out
John
water
into its
better
to pro
explains
be if the
is a sep
Antoine
then
Essential
from the
1783
powerful,
who
singly
runs
the oxygen
writer
to America's
credited in
The
writers.
used to elec
(1731-1810)
goes on to say:
would
chemist
its qualities.
the planet.
molecules,"
it
world
scientist
Harding,
hydrogen
of
work
alchemist. Paracel
decomposed
hydrogene)
(14-93-154-1),
first
happen generate
only generates
fiction
the
is often
that
will, insteadof coal,be
and
Harding
power
Hydrogen:
water. As physicist
not
Some day the coalrooms
ultimately
French
Cavendish
to
metals, a flammable gas is
"water
when
fuel, limitless and
number
source of heat and light, of
would
helped
1766
was the
element
remarkable
a
Earth
book
in
all atoms and
the ever-prescient
were
fuel,
Cavendish's
with
also
and
the
of
capable.
Henry
by electricity,which will
what
69
Hohenheim
Production
composes
locomotives
of
hydrogen
2002
ultimate
doubly
but hydrogen
hydrogen.
air"
his experiments. Lavoisier,
Island)
power
movement"
that water will one day be employed as
von
that
another
inexhaustible named
nineteenth-century
mother
and "generate."
as the
How
to
discovering
acids react
of
upon
doubtless
Hydrogen
learned
characterizing
nobleman
years. The engineer, Cyrus
generate
hydrogen,
delightful
"discovery" on believe
1794-,
is the
...
tum
I
place.
of
in
when
with oxygen
"water"
Mysterious
"inflammable
with
first and for
will
Bombastus
hydrogen
and the tenders of
first
English
expanded for
that
water to
The
of
from oxygen and
and commercial
friends,
imagination
that,
(174-3-1794-)
and
But
remarkable, then,
world
"hydrogen
hundreds
my
that
puts it in his
guillotine
as Paracelsus, Renaissance physician
words
hydrogen-generated
combined
steamers
hydrogen
book
water
substance
the
of
an intensityof which coalis not
together, will furnish an
fuel,that hydrogen and oxygenwhich constitute it, used
Yes,
observed
The idea
How
Hydrogen's
become a powerful and manageable force:'
primitive elements
that
coal in
"industrial
Verne has his characters discuss
trolyze
in stars in the '1874- sun's
when
,stoked the
Greek
repeated
on the
Lavoisier
duce
arate called
typically given credit for
emitted.
sus
known
Rigden
Theophrastus
Element)
the oxygen
of
90
the
our
cen
have
more
most all the
ClUD
chapter
directly
and has
liquefy;
including
future origin about
atoms. In
the
interstellar
one-third
sequestra
to
element.
would
particles ere
one-quarter
of the
providing
and one pro
of
contains
natural gas or
going
twentieth
of
of
are helium."
strict and
planet,
generated
from renewable
of
while virtually all
store, and trans
has major safety way.This
One
word
carbon
of
the
about
any fuel,
and in the
hydrogen
has
possible. The hydro
our
of
helium,
of that
electron
of the
the sea
theory
concentrations
other
percent
of atoms,
centimeter
atoms. Every second,
9
indispensable
today
into
of
a few hazard.
Earth death
billion years later,
Hydrogen
has only
energy-intensive
compress,
the
out
word,
Hydrogen
15
on
and
HYDROGEN
fire
a
current
and
densities
of
most
bodies and
68
thirty.
our
directly the
this
hydrogen
contains Shapley, one our
hydrogen
with
is subject to a set
hydrogen formed
birth
of
In
energy
hydrogen
hydrogen-one
ABOUT
on
of
gasoline.
percent
make life
hydrogen
first
going
significant
92
of
world
stellar
factor
that
Harlow
Hydrogen
make up
a
liquid
HYPE
is expensive and
of
hydrogen
producing
centimeter
standards. atoms
of
It
of
some
that
the lowest said
billion billion
than
for
THE
background
planet Jupiter, evety cubic
of
million tons is everywhere. In the near-vacuum
astronomers.
a gallon
gas.
warmth
gases,
when
we were all
is difficult and costly to
leaks are a
of
process
unproven.
of
energy twenty times smaller than
all particles are
more
of
600
a gallon
is flammable over a wide range
History
did create the
codes and
million
a little
of
options
has one
natural
greatest
constituted
and the
IO
hydrogen;'
fuses
It
interior
of
is as yet
first
God
Hydrogen
the rest was helium. Today, some
ignition
hydrogen,
To paraphrase Charles Dickens again: We were all
Hydrogen
heavier elements
light
gen-driven
Still
than
the
space, every cubic
percent
of
ton-
ared in the big bang, basic
the universe,
been rurv's
"If
A Brief
but
looks at
to
bersome
leak-prone
an
gasoline-so
issues-it
moreover, the energy
that
port.
tion
sources is especiallyexpensive. The practicality costs by far THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Hydrogen Production
stored with thesetwo condensedgases, whichwill burn in the fur the awesome power of the sun's hydrogen fusion. Strikingly, we naceswith enormous calorific power.There is, therefore, nothing have been all too successful in tapping fusion energy in uncon to fear. As long asthe earth is inhabitedit will supplythe wants of trolled reactions-unleashing the horrific power of the hydrogen its inhabitants,and there will be no want of either light or heat as bomb- but unsuccessful in efforts to create practical energy long as the productions of the vegetable, mineralor animal king sources from a controlled fusion reaction to generate electricity. doms do not fail us. I believe, then, that when the depositsof coal Controlled, earthbound fusion is still many decades away. For this are exhaustedwe shallheat and warm ourselves with water. Water century, the fusion energy we will most likely be tapping will be will bethecoalofthefuture. 4 from the sun, in the form of its renewable radiating energy. Efforts to harness hydrogen on a smallerscale, through direct com Verne neglected to tell us where the primary energy to elec bustion or fuel cells, gathered momentum throughout the twentieth trolyze the hydrogen would come from, but his prediction stands century. An excellent history of those efforts can be found in Peter as one of uncanny foresight. Hoffmann's 2001 book Tomorrow's Enewy. The large investments A few years later, in 1893, British novelist Max Pemberton pub made by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to lished a prophetic best seller, The Iron Pirate. In the book, a speedy develop compaet, lightweight engines and energy storage devicesfor and powerful pirate ship terrorizes the Atlantic Ocean. The source spacetravelwere especially important. As discussedin earlierchapters, of its power baffles the narrator: "Neither steam nor smoke came making practical and affordable fuel cells has proven more difficult from her, no evidence, even the most trifling, of that terrible power than expected. And even if we can develop transportation fuel cells which was then driving her through the seas at such a fearful speed:' that canpotentially replaceautomobile engines, a true hydrogen econ Ultimately, we learn that the ship is based in Greenland and hydro omy will require the generation of enormous amounts of hydrogen gen from coal fuels "the most powerful engines that have yet been from co 2 -free sources, which is not currently practicalor affordable. placed in a battle-ship:' Interestingly, Pemberton writes, "the gas itself was made by passing the steam from a comparatively small boiler through a coke and anthracite furnace, the coke combining Hydrogen Generation: Today and Tomorrow with the oxygen and leaving pure hydrogen?" As we will see, gen Hydrogen production is a large, modem industry with commercial erating hydrogen from coal is one of the principal areas of focus for roots reaching back more than a hundred years." Globally, hydro public and private sector research and development (R&D). gen is produced primarily for two purposes. The first is to synthe As the twentieth century dawned, hydrogen became an intense size ammonia (NH especially for fertilizer production, by com 3), focus of scientists, both theorists and experimentalists. "To under bining hydrogen with nitrogen. The second is hydro-formulation, stand hydrogen is to understand all of physics;' one physicist said. or high-pressure hydro-treating, of petroleum in refineries, a The study ofhydrogen was criticalto our understanding ofthe atom process that, for instance, converts heavy crude oils into usable and the evolution of the universe, to the development of quantum transportation fuels or that produces cleaner reformulated gasoline. mechanics and quantum electrodynamics, and to such practical Global annual production is about 45 billion kilograms (kg) or devices as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) medical equipment. 500 billion Normal cubic meters (Nm3). A Normal cubic meter is a Rigden's book is the best recent recounting of all this work. cubic meter at one atmosphere of pressure and oOe. Hydrogen is In the middle of the twentieth century, scientists and govern produced through a variety of processes discussed below using ments expended tremendous effort in trying to replicate on Earth traditional fuels (see Table 4.1).7
70 71 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Hydrogen Production
TABLE 4-.I. half of global hydrogen and more than 90 percent of US. hydro gen (representing some 5 percent gas consumption)." Con ___ ~ __ C}~balHlt!!-openProduetj
Hydrogen production in the United States is currently about 8 shifted with steam to produce cO 2 and extra hydrogen: billion kg (roughly 90 billion Nm3), or the energy equivalent of 8 co + H20 > cO 2 + H2 billion gallons of gasoline. Hydrogen demand grew by more than 20 percent per year for much of the 1990S and has been growing at This reaction can be accomplished in one or two stages at tem more than 10 percent per year since then, with the biggest demand perature levels ranging from 200°C to 475°C. growth coming from oil refineries." The flue gas that leaves the shift reactor is some 70 to 80 percent In 2000, Americans consumed nearly 180billion gallons ofgaso hydrogen, together with co 2, CH4, water vapor, and co. The line, diesel fuel, and other transportation fuels for on-road travel. hydrogen is then separated from the mixed gas stream for final use, This represented about 20 percent of US. total energy consump typically using pressure swing adsorption (PSA), achieving high tion. More energy is consumed to power travel by air, water, and purity. (For proton exchange membrane, or PEM, fuel cells, a co rail (and to power US. pipelines), bringing total transportation removal system is needed, since PEMS tolerate only a few parts per
energy use alone to nearly 30 percent of all US. energy consump million of co.) The cO 2 is usually vented to the atmosphere, but as tion." The scale of hydrogen production in the United States and concerns over global warming continue to grow, it might well be the world will have to be vastly greater than it now is just to replace captured and sequestered. Both SMR and PSA are mature commer transportation energy. cial processes. For SMR, the overall energy efficiency (the ratio of The rest of this chapter examines the current sources of hydro the energy in the hydrogen output to that in the fuel input) is about gen and possible future alternatives. Each option raises different 70 percent. questions involving its effects on hydrogen infrastructure options Although SMR is by far the most widely used means of produc and on the energy and environmental problems we face. Many, if ing hydrogen on an industrial scale, small-scale SMR might also be not most, of these questions cannot be answered today, but I will used at local hydrogen filling stations. Currently, however, it is try to answer a number of them in subsequent chapters. far too costly a process for providing a major source of hydrogen for transportation. Today, SMR plants have significant economies of ", scale-not only are large plants relatively cheaper to build (per Natural Gas unit output), but they also would very likely command a far Natural gas (methane, or CH4-) is by far the most common source lower price for natural gas than would smaller SMR plants at local
of hydrogen. 10 Steam methane reforming (SMR) generates about urban filling stations. Partly offsetting that extra cost, local produc-
72 73 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Hydrogen Production tion would avoid the need to transport hydrogen from a central Water generation facility to the filling station (see Chapter 5)· The cost of producing and delivering hydrogen from an SMR is currently Water is another C011ID10nsource of hydrogen. Electrolysis, the projected to be $4 to $5 per kilogram, comparable to a gasoline process of decomposing water into hydrogen and oxygen using price of $4-$5 per gallon." Not surprisingly, a considerable amount electricity, is a mature technology widely used around the world to of R&D is being focused on efforts to reduce the cost of SMR as well generate very pure hydrogen. It is, however, an extremely energy as its alternatives, such as partial oxidation and autothermal intensive process, and the faster you want to generate hydrogen, reforming. the more power you need per kilogram produced. Typical com While natural gas is both the least expensive source of hydrogen mercial electrolysis units require about 50 kWh per kilogram, which today and the most straightforward to scale up quickly tor fueling represents an energy efficiency of 70 percent-that is, more than 1.4 PEM vehicles, we must answer these questions before pursuing this units of energy must be provided to generate I energy unit in the path: hydrogen. And since most electricity comes from fossil fuels, and the average fossil fuel plant is about 30 percent efficient, the overall o Is there enough natural gas to both meet the growing demand system efficiency is close to 20 percent (70 percent times 30 per for gas-fired power plants and supply a significant fraction of a cent) - four units of energy are thrown away for every one unit of hydrogen-based transportation system? hydrogen energy produced. That is a lot of energy to waste. o What would happen to the prices of natural gas, hydrogen, and As with SMR plants, larger electrolysis plants are relatively electricitywith a dramatic increase in the demand for natural cheaper to build (per unit output)-and they would very likely gas to make hydrogen? command a far lower price for electricity-than smaller ones at o Can the delivered cost of hydrogen from natural gas become local urban filling stations (sometimes called "forecourt plants" competitive with the delivered cost of gasoline? because they are based right where the hydrogen is needed). o Can the infrastructure costs be reduced to manageable levels? Hydrogen could be generated at low nighttime off-peak rates, but Current estimates are as much as a trillion dollars or more. that is easier to do at a centralized production facility than at a local o WInch will be cheaper and/or more practical, reforming filling station, which must be responsive to customers who typi methane at small local filling stations or at large centralized callydo most of their fueling during the day and early evening, peak plants? Could teclmological advances change the answer to power demand times. "To circumvent peak power rates;' Dale Sim that question? beck and Elaine Chang noted in their July 2002 analysis for the • Are the global warming benefits from methane-based hydrogen National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), "forecourt plants sufficient to justify building an infrastmcture around SMRS, or have to be built with oversized units operated at low utilization should we wait until we can build the infrastmcture around a rates with large amounts of storage. This option would require co 2-free source of hydrogen? considerable additional capital investment'?" These basic questions are in addition to the fundamental Simbeck and Chang estimate the cost today of producing and question that applies to all means of generating hydrogen: Can delivering hydrogen from a central electrolysis plant at $7-$9/kg. automakers build an affordable and practical PEM vehicle that will They put the cost of production at a forecourt plant at $I2/kg.High use the hydrogen? cost is probably the main reason why only a small percentage of the
74 75 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Hydrogen Production world's current hydrogen production comes from electrolysis. Gasoline Moreover, to replaceall thegasolinesoldin the United Statestodaywith hydrogen from electrolysiswould require moreelectricity than is sold in Gasoline can be used as a source of hydrogen. Hydrogen can be the United Statestoday.14 produced from hydrocarbons such as gasoline (and methane) with From the perspective of global warming, electrolysis makes little partial oxidation and autothermal reformers. 17 The toughest practi sense for the foreseeable future because both electrolysis and cen cal problem for onboard gasoline reformers-other than high tral-station power generation are relatively inefficient processes, cost-is that the high temperamre at which they operate does not and most US. electricity is generated by the burning of fossil fuels. allow a rapid start for the automobile, a design feature we have all Burning a gallon of gasoline releases about 20 pounds of co 2' Pro come to expect. ducing I kg of hydrogen by electrolysis would generate, on average, In May 2003, Nuvera Fuel Cells armounced that in conjunction 70 pounds of co 2.15 A gallon of gasoline and a kilogram of hydro with the US. Department of Energy (DOE) and a European gen have about the same energy, and even allowing for the poten automaker, the company had demonstrated a 75 kW gasoline tial doubled efficiency of fuel cell vehicles, producing hydrogen reformer with more than 80 percent efficiency.18 This device cannot from electrolysis will make global warming worse. Because of these start up in less than a minute, but the company is working on a economic and environmental problems, it seems unlikely that the next-generation device aimed at beating a thirty-second start time. nation will pursue generation of significant quantities of hydrogen Since the 75 k\V reformer is not a commercial product, the com from the US. electric grid anytime soon. pany did not announce its price. Prashant Chintawar, Nuvera's Hydrogen could be generated from renewable electricity, but the executive director for business development and strategic R&D, has renewable system most suitable for local generation-solar photo told me that it would be at least ten vears before the device would voltaics-currently makes hydrogen that is far too expensive. The achieve a cost of $25-$30jk\V,the range needed for an affordable car. least expensive form of renewable energy-wind power-still con When I was at the DOE in the mid-I990S, we thought this area stitutes only a few tenths of I percent of all U.S. generation, of R&D was valuable because it was far from clear that we could although that figure is rising rapidly." These basic questions need solve all the technological problems related to building a pure to be answered before we pursue this enticing path: hydrogen infrastructure, including practical and affordable onboard storage of hydrogen, or that we could solve the chicken • . Is generating hydrogen from electrolysis powered by renew and-egg problem between the hydrogen fueling infrastructure and ables a good use of thar power from economic and environ the hydrogen-powered vehicles. Gasoline fuel cell vehicles (FCVS) mental perspectives? seemed like a worthwhile interim step. As a comprehensive 2001 • How long will it be before the United States has enough excess study on commercializing fuel cell vehicles concluded, "a major low-cost renewable generation that it can divert a substantial potential advantage of gasoline FCVS is the prospect of a conven fraction to production of hydrogen? tional fuel ... that requires essentially no infrastructure changes or • What are the prospects that forecourt hydrogen generation investment for FCV use." The study, undertaken for the California .~ from solar photovoltaics will be wise or practical in the first Fuel Cell Partnership (cascr-), notes, "It would also eliminate the half of the century? new health and safety concerns of other fuels.?" • If hydrogen is generated from the vast wind resources in the Nonetheless, many people questioned this strategy when it was Midwest, what would be the infrastructure costs for delivering it? first developed, and mar1Ycontinue to do so. For instance, follow-
76 77 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Hydrogen Production ing the 2003 Nuvera announcement, David Redstone, editor and rily because it is considered much safer. It is less flammable than publisher of the Hydrogen & Fuel CellInvestorsNewsletter;wrote: gasoline and, when it does ignite, causes less severe fires; one 1990 study for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) con What is the point of a gasoline reformer? Isn't the point of "the cluded, "Pure methanol is projected to result in as much as a 90 per hydrogen economy' to eliminate carbon from the fuel chain cent reduction in the number of automotive fuel related fires rela (thereby eliminating co 2 emissions) and to end our dependence tive to gasoline:' Methanol appears to biodegrade quickly when on foreign energy sources (Saudi-Kuwaiti-Iraqi oil)? How is spilled. It dissolves and dilutes rapidly in water. It has been actively switching from burning gasoline in ICES [internal combustion promoted as an alternative fuel by the EPA and the DOE, in part engines] to reforming it for use as H2 in fuel cellsgoing to get us because it has reduced urban air pollutant emissions more effec where we need to go, especially when the fuel cells currently tively than gasoline. Most methanol-fueled vehicles use a blend of being contemplated for car engines are barely more efficient than 8s percent methanol and IS percent gasoline called M8s. ICES and the reforming process involves a loss of 20 percent of Methanol has a number of advantages for powering fuel cell the energy contained in the gasoline?20 vehicles. As the 2001 study tor the caFCP noted, these include methanol's "immediate availability without new upstream infra These are reasonable questions. Several additional questions need structure, high hydrogen-carrying capacity, and ability to be readily to be answered before we pursue a path of generating large volumes stored, delivered, and carried on-board without pressurizarion.?" of hydrogen from gasoline reformers on board fuel cell vehicles: In short, our transportation system and its infrastructure favor liq • Can we build an affordable and practical gasoline reformer? uid fuels. Fuel cell vehicles with onboard methanol reformers • Is the chicken-and-egg problem solvable, or will we need this would have very low emissions of urban air pollutants. Daimler technology to achieve significant market penetration of fuel cell Chrysler has introduced demonstration fuel cell vehicles that con vehicles before we build the hydrogen infrastrucrure? vert methanol to hydrogen on board. • Are the net energy and environmental benefits of gasoline A key advantage of methanol is versatility. Methanol reformers powered fuel cellvehicles worth the extra cost of the system? operate at much lower temperatures (2s00C-3S00C), so they are more practical than onboard gasoline reformers. Also, methanol reformers could be used at fueling stations to generate torecourt hydrogen. Methanol Most intriguingly, considerable research is aimed at developing a direct Methanol, also known as wood alcohol, is another widely discussed methanol fuel cell (DMFC), which could run on methanol without a potential source (or carrier) of hydrogen." Chemically, methanol, reformer-although practical, affordable DMFCS for cars and trucks CH is a clear liquid, the simplest of the alcohols, with one appear a long way off. And while methanol is primarily synthesized 30H, carbon atom per molecule. Methanol is extensively used today from narural gas, it can also be produced from a number of cO 2 -free U.S. demand in 2002 exceeded 2 billion gallons. The largest U.S. sources, including municipal solid waste and plant matter. 2, methanol markets are for producing the gasoline additive MTBE On the other hand, many features of methanol would make its (methyl tertiary butyl ether) as well as formaldehyde and acetic acid. widespread use as a transportation fuel problematic. It is very toxic. Methanol is already used as a transportation fuel. It has been the Asthe EPAhas noted, "a few teaspoons of methanol consumed orally fuel of choice at the Indianapolis soo for more than three decades, can cause blindness, and a few tablespoons can be fatal, if not in part because it improves the performance of the cars but prima- treated." Methanol is also very corrosive, so it requires a special fuel-
78 79 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Hydrogen Production handling system. Most major oil companies currently responsible • Can methanol achievethe necessarysupport from businesses for delivering our transportation fuels are at best unenthusiastic and consumers to be viable as the nation's primary transporta about creating a methanol economy, and some have expressed out tion fuel? right opposition. Some environmentalists and former environmental regulators I Coal have spoken to are reluctant to embrace a dramatic increase in methanol use, in part because it is used to make MTBE, a gasoline Coal is a major source of hydrogen. To produce hydrogen, typically additive now being phased out in California because of environ coal is gasified, impurities are removed, and then its hydrogen is , mental concerns such as groundwater contamination (although in recovered. This process results in significant emissions of co 2 and fairness to methanol, which exists in nature and degrades quickly, so, from a global warming perspective, current coal gasification MTBE,in contrast, is a complex, man-made compound that exhibits technology could not serve as a basis for a hydrogen economy. In little degradation once released into the environment). addition, Simbeck and Chang estimate that producing and deliver For any dramatic increase in U.S. methanol consumption, most ing coal-generated hydrogen would cost $4-.50-$5.60/kg, several of the supply would have to be imported. While biomass-generated times the cost of U.S. gasoline on an equivalent energy basis. methanol might be economical in the long term, there is a consid Coal is the most abundant fossil fuel in the United States and a erable amount of so-called stranded natural gas in distant locations great many other countries. For instance, coal constitutes some 95 around the globe that could be converted to methanol and shipped percent of the nation's fossil energy reserves, and it is estimated by tanker at relatively low cost, should increased demand warrant that, with the use of existing technology, known recoverable coal such investment." Methanol from natural gas would have little or reserves could sustain the nation's current level of coal consump no net greenhouse gas benefits in a future fuel cell vehicle, as com tion for more than 300 years." Major developing countries such as pared with future hybrid electric vehicles (see Chapter 8). China and India also have vast coal reserves. However, burning any These questions need answering before we pursue a path of significant fraction of global coal reserves using current power building a transportation system around a methanol economy: plant technology would almost certainly cause devastating and irreparable harm to the global climate (see Chapter 7). Hence, • Is there enough natural gas both to meet the growing demand many countries and companies are pursuing R&D into generating
for gas-fired power plants and to supply a significantfraction of hydrogen, electricity, or both from coal without releasing cO 2 ' a transportation system built around methanol? Here is one strategy being pursued by the DOE: Use a gasifica • Can the price of methanol remain competitive with that of tion and cleaning process that combines coal, oxygen (or air), and gasoline if methanol demand increases sharply in the coming steam under high temperature and pressure to generate a synthesis decades? gas (syngas) made up primarily .of hydrogen and co, without • What would be the overallhealth and safetyeffectof large-scale impurities such as sulfur or mercury." The water-gas shift reaction use of methanol as a consumer product? described earlier is then applied to increase hydrogen production••
• What are the prospects for generating a substantial fraction of and create a stream of cO 2 that can be removed and piped toa
methanol cost-effectively from renewable or cO2 -free sources? sequestration site (see Chapter 8). The rest of the hydrogen-rich gas • Will direct methanol fuel cells be affordable and practicalany is sent to a PSA system for purification and transport. The remain time soon? ing gas that comes out of the PSA system can be compressed and
80 8r
is
is
soc
so
and
path
prac
'Which
warm
grasses
poten
cou
seques
sources
percent
infra
includes
the ethanol,
cycle,
8.
a
biofuel make the
sequester
25
It
Biomass
energy, by as
and
accelerating
research
30
from
global
and
and
a
pursue
major
energy carriers?
into
such
consumption
cycle.
about
Chapter
8).
growing
previously
switchgrass,
corn coal
active
the
represents
from
both without
fuel, as
the
ethanol
of
only
was
the
hydrogen.
we can
energy
in
of
from
thus
growing
detail in
of
such
Chapter
Today,
liquid
that
energy
interest
yields
grow
transformed
the
2
a focus
before
(see
and electricity from coal,
of
generating
to
crops
to a
in
minimal
cO
because it seems likely to be the
source Production
is
promise
greater
blend.
83
it is
hydrogen
waste as well as trees
Biomass
which
zero
in
of
the
with
(temporarily)
on a massive scalebe practical, economi
remains
energy
providing
major
near
hydrogen
when
answering
interest
corn,
wood
a
Hydrogen
Biomass
zero."
of gasoline
converted
consumed
of
holds
are
participated
is
discussed
and need volumes
extraction, be made into an affordable and
as a
from
was
way
harvested
is
2
has
is generated from large coal plants outside cities,
special
crops.
dedicated
because
become
atmosphere
future
cO
costs for delivering the hydrogen to consumers?
sequestration of
and
large
used
and
than
food,
that
Sequestration
2
produced:
emitted
can also be
emissions
the
corn,
2
2
The
cogeneration cO
energy
for instance, it releases
questions
could
then
produced
32
co
CO
as
grown
is
warming.
sustainable
energy
than
from
tical system for cost-effectively
Ifhydrogen
structure
pled with perhaps close to existing coal mines, what would be the
cal, and permanent?
overall
perspective
material
the
net
• Can
•
• Can
generating
These
Biomass Biomass is
of
perspective.
development other ing
agricultural, ing more
ethanol
ethanol.
Biomass
the
tially which
any grown
Biomass
that global can be
'tered
,burning,
28
in of
for
the
of
his
and
too,
and
cost
and
per
cycle
clean
tech
much
chem
com
atmos
part
be
hydro
power
achieve
so,
10
goal
config
SOFCS.
electric
gasoline
environ
poor
challenge.
Research
or scientific
not
the
build,
instance,
Laboratory
announced
pathways
The taken
only
sequestration
,
and
and
could
Moreover,
simpler
Earth's
hydrogen
2
with
is
electricity
generate
emission
can also
combined
of
(for
common
far
expected,
co
would
2
many
to
design,
high.
that
cogenerate
enter
Energy
of
Hydrogen
the
cO
capture
was
delivering
to
with
are a
turbines
2
(SOFC).27
engineering
of technological
Technology
used
in price
of
economic,
of
up
and
near-zero
of
Hydrogen
cO
"embarrassingly
than had
Estimates
an
fuel cells has
would
be
cannot
cogenerating gasification
cost
electricity
HYDROGEN
the
project
coal-generated
capture
in
use).
technologies
with
that
exceedingly
have
percent
Energy
from
another
coal
so it
locking
82
the
difficult
are
and less electricity or vice versa.
consequences
90
and
would
of
plant (similar to the natural gas
more
plant
coal-based,
competitive
engineering,
Department
ABOUT
produce
current
systems
existing
Sequestration
proven
or
described
will be
is
more
combinations
the sequestration.
National
include
2
generators
widespread
the
will
power
yet
far
billion-dollar
than
commercializing
a solid oxide fuel cell
HYPE
hydrogen in
sequester
co
commercial
formations) that
not
hydrogen
technology
separation
advanced
prototype
not
percent
cycle
2
analysis
various
and
for the
power
the
processes,
now
2020"
2003,
environmental
THE
of
more
Integrated using
the ''validate
gasification
is the process
proven
are
large
cO
60
MW
just as
by
and
current
2003
of
has
expensive
cycle plant (as can syngas), so this system can be
(the
275
coal
a ten-year,
study
using
this does
hydrogen
a
that
While
combined
perhaps
viability
and
generate
hydrogen
One
industrial
that
underground
using
traditional
February
building
cycle plants
2002
more
to
processes."
to a
Sequestering
A
In
combined sequestration
practicality
costs
effective for large-scale
phere. many
large
Sequestration
ical
tory"
units.
may
longer
Nonetheless,
electricity
efficiencies
found
power,
(although
gen). Initially,
produce
nologies mental
cent
the system is to
ity and
FutureGen
construct
Initiative),
a
ured
bined sent
a
of
this,
effi
into
is
could
that
be eco
amount
Straight
tempera
fact
the goal
plants, like
generation
water
plant is one
efficient for
opportunity
percent
renewably:
production
temperatures whether
would
The
with
electricity
higher
thermochemical
power
power
to 52
at
of
2015.
gasoline-and
hydrogen."
considerable States (and the
hydrogen
4-0 by
of
mean it
hydrogen
power,
of
percent.
knowing
of
decomposing
nuclear
economically
not
pursuing
processes at
United hydrogen?
chemical reactions.
hydrogen
as 60
achieve
nuclear
perspective?
does
of
of
hand,
emerging
Cogeneration
away.This creates an
production
Production
85
biomass-to-hydrogen
high
way from
a set
using
other
currently
generate
other
large volumes
plants, generate a
is
however,
the
long
consumers?
electricity from a nuclear
throwing
Hydrogen
theoretically
with
thermochemically
On
through to
systems
water-splitting
arable land in the
up
power
DOE
seems unlikely to be
production."
with
of
Plants
efficient to
could
generating
displace a significant fraction
end
plants can also be a source
commercial-scale
that
The
compete
to
be efficient,
water
more
they
but
of
750°C
production
can
and oxygen and we are a
Power
hydrogen
power
could
that
hydrogen is generated from large biomass plants far away
source for
central-station
ronmental or an energy security ing the hydrogen
If from cities, what would be the infrastructure costs for deliver
that a practical or politicallyfeasible approach?
gasoline and with other Sources
sufficient
world) would be needed for
• Is hydrogen generation the best use for biomass from an envi
Thermochemical • Can hydrogen from biomass be made cost-competitive with •
• What fraction
heat
These questions need answering before we can consider biomass as
likely
approach
process raise the overall efficiency to as
nomical, hydrogen technologies.
demonstrating
ciency in exceeding
hydrogen
tures, for instance by
of
possibility, the foreseeable future.
most
dectrolysis
Nuclear
Nuclear
a
'because it is
at
is
the
are
and
and
into
would small
where
gasifi
but
would
In one
idea
pyroly
serve as
system
heat to
delivery.
estimate
of
injecting
it
to
infrastruc
processes
term
on a large
for
land
of
-
of
2
commercially
then
as much arable
gasification
coproducts
refinery,
biomass
were
converted
cO
Chang
reforming."
is possible, one
ultimate
products.
has
and
improvements
of
the gasification and
with
that
commercial
hydrogen and
hydrogen
The
if gasification
heated,
agricultural
in the near
of
useful
biomass
and
from the
Group
of
via steam
for coal gasifIcation. This
petroleum
cost, especially
and
reducer
on the means
growing
cost-effective source,
country
through
Simbeck
HYDROGEN
shells or bagasse (the residue
to a
sequestration
source
biomass from
fuel.
net
a practical
gasifier.
stream
lower
technological
2
dried
is pyrolysis, the use
different
hydrogen most
of
biomass
84
production
a
2
cO
produced
constituents.
of
of
cO
primarily
Dutch/Shell
if
peanut
is
ABOUT
potent
Even in a reservoirs
its
many
contemplated
a
analogous
the although
renewable
hydrogen
number
suggest
challenging. Biomass can also be gasified
production.
approach
significant
source
Biomass can be gasified and seems unlikely to serve as a source
into
into
HYPE
into
biomass/coal
from the air while
to biomass
transportation
such as
being
limited.
2
States, a large fraction
hydrogen
of
tends to be the
NREL
depending
is
intriguing,
THE
cO
term.
25175
earlier. A
electricity) in a process very similar to coal gasifIca
extracting
by
a
delivered
process. underground
coal; the Royal
biomass hydrogen
biomass
biomass
promising
devoted
we achieve
United
renewable
converted
most
long
source
commercialization
"bio-refinery"
this process, biomass is
of
biomass,
and the
demonstrated,
(and
supply
into
is
with
technologically
of
2
studies turn
process, as is
to be
sugarcane), imagine
extracting
on-site
technologies."
described
major
cO
should
Waste
Like coal,
Another
Perhaps
need the
ultimate
land as the
from
ture
successful
Other sis,
S5.00-$6.30/kg,
the cost
scale
removed,
biomass version
to create a
decompose
sequestration
mean that
would
could cation
remains together
demonstrated
are being
hydrogen tion,
scale in the
because it may be a viable lowest-cost THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Hydrogen Production
No plausible strategy for generating hydrogen that is potentially devices to split water directly. Considerable research is also taking co 2 -free can be dismissed out of hand, but I am skeptical that place into producing hydrogen through active biological processes, nuclear-generated hydrogen could be a practical solution, at least in such as adapting photosynthesis processes for hydrogen produc the United States, especially since roo or more nuclear water-split tion and using existing or bioengineered bacteria to decompose ting plants would be needed to replace a significant fraction of If.S. organic compounds into hydrogen. As noted in an editorial in the transportation fuel with hydrogen. A major 2003 interdisciplinary special 2002 issue of the InternationalJournal of Hydrogen Enewy study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The Future of devoted to biohydrogen, this is still a relatively small and long-term Nuclear Power, highlighted many of the "unresolved problems" that area of research because "so far efficiencies obtained are low, pro have created "limited prospects for nuclear power today:' The study ductivity is low and costs are high compared to alternative tech found that "in deregulated markets, nuclear power is not now cost nologies.?" competitive with coal and natural gas:' The public has significant Finally, fuel cells themselves, especially high-temperature ones, concerns about safety, environmental, health, and terrorism risks could trigenerate electricity, heat, and hydrogen. FuelCell Energy associated with nuclear power. The study also found that "nuclear Inc. is pursuing this strategy for its molten carbonate fuel cell, as are power has unresolved challenges in long-term management of solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) companies. Fuel cells running on natural radioactive wastes." The study described possible technological and gas typically use about three of the four hydrogen atoms in methane other strategies for addressing these issues, but noted, for instance (CH 4) for power generation. The remaining hydrogen goes into , that "the cost improvements we project are plausible but the flue gas or stack effluent with various amounts of co 2 co, and unprovcn.f'" water vapor, depending on the type of fuel cell. That flue gas is These questions need answering before we pursue a path of gen sometimes vented to the atmosphere, sometimes combusted for erating large volumes of hydrogen from nuclear power: heat, and sometimes used to facilitate the reforming process. Hydrogen could, however, be separated and purified from the • Can nuclear power be a safe and economical source of hydrogen flue gas at a relatively low cost ifhigh-temperamre fuel cells can be capable of attracting enough investment capital to build so made into successful commercial products. That is, when an SOFC many new plants? or molten carbonate fuel cell can cost-effectively generate electricity • Ifhydrogen is generated from nuclear povverplants outside and heat, the fuel (natural gas) and the fuel cell are already paid for. cities, what would be the infrastructure costs for delivering the The cost of the hydrogen generation would then be just the incre hydrogen to consumers? mental cost of the purification and separation system. A future • How much additional nuclear power capacitywould need to be SOFC system might cogenerate hydrogen for about $2.00 per kg." added to meet the needs of the hydrogen economy? How This is still somewhat more expensive than gasoline, but it is poten would the nuclear waste be disposed of? tially a very attractive price, since these fuel cells could be sited at an urban fueling station, thus avoiding the need for a costly hydrogen delivery infrastructure. ,. Other Sources of Hydrogen This promising strategy will, however, require fuel cells to have Novel strategies for generating hydrogen abound. For instance, achieved significant technological and cost improvements while research is being conducted into using solar energy to directly facil overcoming the numerous barriers to commercialization discussed itate the production of hydrogen, such as by using photovoltaic in Chapter 3.
86 87 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN
Conclusion There are many different promising technologies and strategies for producing hydrogen, each with its own great advantages and severe disadvantages. It is possible that one will come to dominate. It is possible that multiple means will be used. These are still very early days in the transition to a hydrogen economy, and no one can know. The most cost-effective existing technologies are, unfortunately, the ones that generate the most greenhouse gas pollution and thus face the greatest risk of stranded investment-of needing to be replaced when government policies change, as I believe they inevitably will (see Chapters 7 and 8). For instance, if by 2020 we were to build a hydrogen infrastructure around small steam methane reformers in local fueling stations, and then decide that greenhouse gas emissions must be dramatically reduced, we would have to replace that infrastructure almost entirely. At this time, no set of commercial technologies appears able to deliver hydrogen to vehicles at a price much below about four times the current cost of gasoline (untaxed) on an equivalent energy basis. Nor does onboard reforming of gasoline appear likely to be a cost-effective and practical interim strategy without significant technological advances. Centralized hydrogen production far away from cities is the least expensive way of generating hydrogen for the foreseeable future, but that would entail a considerable investment in a delivery infrastructure, which is the subject of the next chapter.
0:"
88 CHAPTER 8 Coping with the Global Warming Century
uring my five years at the u.s. Department of Energy (DOE), Dthe two questions I was asked most often were "How expensive will it be to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions?" and "What role can clean energy technologies play in reducing that cost?" These questions became increasinglyimportant in the months leading up to the 1997 international negotiations in Kyoto, Japan, as President Bill Clinton's administration tried to determine what level of emissions reductions it could agree to without jeopardizing the U.S. economy. Many traditional economic analyses concluded that the cost of reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2010 ) would harm the economy and cost jobs, with carbon dioxide (co 2 permits costing $60 per metric ton or more, which would raise energy prices by as much as 40 percent. These results made use of "top-down" economic models that rely on macroeconomic assumptions about how fast technology changes and are thus espe cially weak in their ability to characterize the effects of technology, Years earlier,most ofthese same models had wildly overestimated the " price of industrial permits to emit sulfur dioxide that would result, from the Clean Air Act restrictions, some by a factor offive or more. After I was put in charge of technology analysis at the DOE'S Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), it
14-3 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century seemed more practical to have a "bottom-up" analysis that consid the myriad alternative strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emis ered in detail the specific technologies that could reduce U.S. cO 2 sions. Why1 Four reasons: emissions and their likely cost and benefit to the nation. • The competition-more fuel-efficient internal combustion Expert technologists at the national laboratories were the ideal engine vehicles-is getting tougher, so the incremental benefits authors for such a study. The laboratories, together with EERE staff, of using fuel cell vehicleswill be smaller than if thev were are responsible for the vast majority of federal research and devel replacing existing vehicles. opment into hydrogen and fuel cells; energy-efficient building and • In the near term, hydrogen is likelyto be made from fossil fuel industrial technologies; cogeneration and distributed energy; and sources, which entails significant greenhouse gas emissions. aUforms of renewable energy, including solar, wind, and biomass. • The annual operating costs of a fuel cell vehicle are likelyto be These are a large fraction of the core technologies that will be vital much higher than those of the competition for the foreseeable to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. future. For a full year, I supervised an effort by some of the best analysts • The fuels used to make hydrogen for transportation could at five U.S. national laboratories. The result was the September achieve larger greenhouse gas savings at lower cost if used 1997 report Scenariosof Carbon Reductions: PotentialImpactsof us. instead to displace the dirtiest stationary electric power plants. Ene7lJy-Efficient and Low-Carbon Technologiesby 2010 and Beyond. It concluded that significant emissions reductions were possible for In this chapter, I examine each of these points as well as other the COW1trywith no net increase in the nation's energy bill, plus a potential drivers of a transition to a hydrogen economy. I end with much lower price for cO 2 emissions reductions, $7 or $14- per my own scenario for the transition. ton - a long way from the $60 per ton predicted by others.' Achieving this would take a significant effort by the government to accelerate the deployment of a variety of clean energy technolo The Competition gies, but the conclusion was based on existing commercial or near Underestimating the competition may be the single biggest reason commercial products- energy-efficient lighting, cogeneration, why new clean energy technologies achieve success in the market hybrid electric vehicles, wind power. It would require no major much more slowly than expected. Consider renewable energy, technology breakthroughs. which has been the focus of considerable public and private In.November 2000, the DOE released an even more comprehen research and development (R&D) in the past few decades. In a 1999 sive analysis by our national laboratories extending out to 2020, study of five major renewable technologies as well as conventional which showed that U.S. cO emissions could, with serious govern 2 power generation, Resources for the Future concluded: ment effort, be reduced dramatically below 2000 levels, again with In general, renewable technologies have failed to meet expecta a price for cO 2 of less than $15 per ton and with reductions in energy bills to consumers and businesses that exceeded the eco tions with respect to market penetration. One exception to this nomic costs.' Other benefits included reductions in urban air pol trend is wind, which has met projections from the 1980s, ~.:" lution and oil imports. although earlier projections were overly optimistic. The other, One conclusion I draw from all this analysis is that, in the near exception is biomass applications, for which market penetration term, hydrogen almost certainly will not be able to compete with has exceeded previous projections."
14-4- 14-5 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
The study noted that these failures came in spite of the fact that Europe, providing 20 to 4-0 percent of electric power in parts of R&D efforts did reduce the cost of renewables: Germany, Denmark, and Spain. Although renewables have been slow to achieve market share in the United States, they will very Renewable technologies have succeeded in meeting expectations likely become essential components of the nation's and the world's with respect to cost. For every technology analyzed, successive efforts to avoid catastrophic global warming. As such, they repre generations of projections of cost have either agreed with previ sent a significant long-term success for government R&D. ous projections or have declined relative to them. The internal combustion engine, running on gasoline, has dom Government R&D for renewables has been exceedingly success inated the transportation market for nearly a century. Significant ful, bringing down the cost of many renewables by a factor of ten advances in both the engines and their fuels (such as reformulated in only two decades-in spite of the fact that the R&D budget for gasoline) have dramatically reduced the urban air pollution of renewables was cut by 50 percent in the 1980s and didn't return to internal combustion engine cars, helping them fight efforts by comparable funding levels until the mid-1990S. For example, a sep competitors such as electric battery cars and natural gas vehicles. In arate, earlier analysis in The TechnologyPork Barrel, which examined the area of reduced greenhouse gas emissions, the direct competi more than a dozen major government R&D efforts, including the tion to fuel cell vehicles includes hybrid electric vehicles and diesels, space shuttle and the nuclear breeder reactor, concluded, "Unlike which themselves are the subject of considerable R&D today. the orher technologies discussed in this book, PV [photovoltaics] Hybrid gasoline-electric cars can be twice as efficient as regular had very good outcomes.'" cars. The onboard energy storage device, usually a battery, Why, then, have most renewables not achieved the level of mar increases efficiency in several ways. It allows "regenerative brak ketplace success that was projected? The authors conclude, "To a ing"-recapture of energy that is normally lost when the car is significant degree, the difference in performance in meeting pro braking, It also allows the engine to be shut down when the car is jections of penetration and cost stem from the declining price of idling or decelerating. Finally, because gasoline engines have lower conventional generation, which constitutes a moving baseline efficiencies at lower power, the battery allows the main engine to against which renewable technologies have had to compete." The be run at higher power and thus more efficiently more of the time, competition got tougher. especially in city driving. In fact, not only did traditional electricity generation reduce The first-generation Toyota Prius has a city mileage of 52 miles costs in the 1980s and 1990S (rather than increasing costs, as had per gallon (mpg) and a highway mileage of 4-5mpg. The second been projected in the 1970S), but it did so while reducing emissions generation Prius, debuted in 2003, has even better mileage. Toyota of urban air pollutants. Also, as noted in the discussion in Chapter plans to introduce a great many more hybrid models in the com 3 of on-site power generation, which involves many forms of ing years, and most automakers will be coming out with their own renewables, utilities place many barriers in the path of new projects, hybrid vehicles. Imagine how good hybrid vehicles will be by and these technologies typically receive little or no monetary value 2020, when they might first have to face fuel cell vehicles in the for "the contributions they make to meeting power demand, reduc marketplace. ", ing transmission losses, or improving environmental quality." The high efficiency that hybrids have in urban settings poses par The competition from renewables does drive the entire power ticularly tough competition for fuel cell vehicles because, at least generation industry to improve its performance. And renewables, initially, fuel cell vehicles are likely to be used mainly for urban driv especially wind power, have become a major marketplace success in ing, for several reasons:
146 147 Coping with the Global Warming Century THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN brane (rEM) fuel cells. would be unwise to assume that such a • Early models probably will not have the driving range of regu It hybrid car cannot be built by 2020. Trucks have less stringent emis lar vehicles. • Early models probably will be used by fleets, which operate sions requirements than cars. FedEx Express and Environmental Defense teamed up in 2000 to develop a new generation of pickup mainly in cities. and delivery trucks running on hybrid diesel-electric engines. These • The limited number of fueling stations early in their deploy- trucks are expected to improve fuel efficiency by 50 percent, reduce ment will restrict long-distance travel.' emissions of particulates by 90 percent, and reduce emissions of Fuel cells typically have higher efficiencies at lower power, so nitrogen oxides by 75 percent. By September 2002, two suppliers hybridizing a fuel cellvehicle (by adding a battery) does not improve had delivered prototypes." its efficiency as much as does hybridizing a gasoline engine." The other major competition to fuel cell vehicles is diesels. Diesel engines are the workhorses for big trucks and construction If Hydrogen Comes from Natural Gas equipment because of their high efficiency and durability. Modem In a near-term deployment scenario, hydrogen would almost cer diesel engines are quite different from the smoky, noisy engines of tainly be produced from natural gas and probably at local fueling the 1970S and 1980s, with advances such as "electronic controls, stations (see Chapter 5). This has three effects on greenhouse gas high-pressure fuel injection, variable injection timing, improved emissions. First, the extraction and delivery of natural gas to a fuel combustion chamber design, and nirbo-charging." Although they ing station entails very small leaks of natural gas, important because represent less than 1 percent of car and light truck sales in the methane- the primary component of natural gas- has twenty-one United States, diesels are becoming the car of choice in Europe, times the global warming effect of co 2, Second, reforming natural where gasoline prices are much higher, fuel taxes favor diesel use, gas into hydrogen not only produces cO 2 but also is an inefficient and tailpipe emissions standards are less stringent. Diesels have process, particularly for the kind of small reformers that would be some 40 percent of the market for cars in Europe, and by 2001 they seen at filling stations. You might expect to lose as much as one
represented the majority of new cars sold in a great many European third of the energy in the natural gas.12. Third, compression of countries. They are 30 to 40 percent more fuel efficient than gaso hydrogen, the likely near-term approach for onboard storage, line vehicles. Also, producing and delivering diesel fuel releases 30 ,requires lots of electricity, the production of which also releases sig percent lower greenhouse gas emissions than producing and deliv nificant greenhouse gases. The life-cyclewell-to-wheel efficiency of ering'gasoline with the same energy content." While diesels cur such a fuel cell vehicle, in terms of energy delivered to the wheels rently have higher emissions of particulates and oxides of nitrogen, divided by total energy input, might be only 25 percent, according they are steadily reducing their emissions. Many believe that with to one 2002 analysis, though future advances might increase that a
the large amount of R&D funding currently aimed at diesels, they little. 13 will be able to meet the same standards as gasoline engines. In 2003, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology did a
Building a clean hybrid diesel-eleetticvehiclewill require advances comprehensive "assessment of new propulsion technologies as 0. in technology, but ones that seem less daunting than the major potential power sources for light-duty vehicles that could be coI11 breakthroughs that will be required for a practical and affordable mercialized by 2020;' focusing on life-cycle energy consumption
hydrogen fuel cell vehicle, such as advances in hydrogen produc and greenhouse gas emissions. 14 The assessment analyzed hydrogen tion and storage technology as well as in proton exchange mern- generated from natural gas and concluded that a diesel hybrid
14-9 14-8 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century would have greenhouse gas emissions more than TO percent below Unfornmately, for the foreseeable future, hydrogen cars will those of a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle and would have roughly the almost certainly be unable to compete with alternative strategies for same emissions as a hybridized fuel cell vehicle. Equally notewor reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As we saw in Chapter 6, we do thy, theprojeetedgasolinehybridfor 2020 has roughly the samelift-cycle not even know today whether a practical and affordable fuel cell greenhousegas emissionsas the hydrogenfuel cell vehicle.This is one of vehicle can be built. A 2002 analysis for the DOE concluded that many reasons arguing against significant investment in natural gas even with optimistic assumptions about technology improve reforming and local fueling stations. ments, future fuel cell vehicles will probably cost 40 to 60 percent ". more than conventional vehicles.15 Also, hydrogen will be much more expensive than gasoline. As Annual Operating Costs previously discussed, hydrogen provided at fueling stations would Cost savings-economic payback-appears to be the single biggest probably cost $4 or more per kilogram (kg). The equivalent-energy determinant of success for a new energy technology. Renewable price of gasoline hovers around $1.50-$2.00, including taxes, in the energy has many superior attributes similar to those of fuel cells, United States today (since a kilogram of hydrogen has about the including zero emission of urban air pollution, but renewables have same energy content as a gallon of gasoline). Ultimately, if hydro been slow to catch on in the United States because of their high gen were to be the main transportation fuel, it would itselfhave to cost. On the other hand, the other major area of R&Dconducted by be taxed unless we found a new source for funding road projects. DOE'S office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy-devel So, even with a more efficient engine, the annual fuel costs are likely oping energy-efficient technologies that reduce energy bills- has to be considerably higher, perhaps by a factor of two. been wildly successful. Moreover, compared with the competition, hybrids and diesels, The national laboratories, funded by EERE, developed a host of the cost differential is even more. While hybrid and clean diesel more efficient devices, including a more efficient refrigerator, vehicles may cost more than current internal combustion engine improvements to the compact fluorescent light bulb, solid-state vehicles, at least when they are first introduced, their greater fuel lighting controls for office fluorescent lights, and super-efficient efficiency means that, unlike hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, they may windows. Many of these products have achieved very significant pay for that extra up-front cost over the lifetime of the vehicle. This market penetration. The National Academy of Sciences examined means that hybrids and diesels will very likely have roughly the dozens of case studies ofEERE-funded technologies and found that same annual operating costs as current internal combustion engine they had cumulatively saved American businesses and consumers vehicles, a significant marketplace advantage over fuel cell vehicles. $30 billion in reduced energy bills. Hence, from a policy perspective, hybrids and diesels would
The products that were most successful not only reduced pollu reduce transportation CO 2 emissions at a far lower cost perton. The tion from electricity generation but also had a good economic average new car today generates about four to five metric tons of payback combined with equivalent or superior attributes to the cO 2 per year. Perhaps the key reason for replacing gasoline engines products they replaced. For instance, solid-state lighting helps busi is.to lower that number. A fuel cell vehicle in 2020 might reduce cO 2 nesses cut lighting energy use in half or more while delivering emissionsat a priceof morethan $200 per metric ton (regardlessofwhat higher-quality light without the annoying flicker of earlier fluores fuel thehydrogenwasproducedfrom).16An advancedgasoline enginecould cents. Likewise, greenhouse gas emissions from lighting are cut in reduce cO 2 forfar lessandpossiblyfor a netsavings becauseofthereduced half, often with paybacks ofless than two years. gasoline costs.Energy efficiencystrategies in other sectors are similarly
150 151 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century low in cost. A June 2003 analysisin the journal Scienceby David Keith turbine releases about 8IO pounds (370 kg) of co 2, whereas the of Carnegie Mellon University and Alexander Farrell of the Univer same megawatt-hour of even relatively new coal plants can release , sity of California, Berkeley, put the cost of co 2 avoided by fuel cells more than 2,200 pounds (1,000 kg) of co 2 And the savings would running on zero-carbon hydrogen at more than $250 per ton, even be even larger if the natural gas were used in a future stationary fuel with optimistic reductions in fuel cell costs.17 cell and gas turbine system that might have 70 percent efficiency. If Moreover, we still have the question of who will pay for the the nation had an unlimited supply of cheap natural gas, we could hydrogen infrastructure, which in the early going could easily come use it for all purposes, but we do not. to $5,000 per car.IS Those who believe, as I do, that global warming The United States has recently been sprinting to build new nat is the most intractable and potentially catastrophic environmental ural gas power plants because they are so efficient and clean. As of problem facing the nation and the planet this century-and there 2003, the country had more than 800 gigawatts (ow) of central sta fore the problem that requires the most urgent action on the part of tion electric power generation. A gigawatt is equal to 1,000 government and the private sector-may conclude that spending megawatts (MW) and is the size of one very large existing power this kind of money on building a hydrogen infrastructure could take plant or three typically sized new power plants. "Of the 144 away a massive amount of resources from far more cost-effective gigawatts added between 1999 and 2002, 138 gigawatts is natural measures. Ultimately, a hydrogen infrastructure may be critical to gas-fired, including 72 gigawatts of efficient combined-cycle capac helping us achieve the kind of deep co 2 reduction that we will need ity and 66 gigawatts of combustion turbine capacity, which is used in the second half of this century, but probably not before then. mainly when demand for electricity is high;' as noted by the US. Department ofEnergy's Energy Information Administration (EIA) in its Annual EnellJJ Outlook 2003. As rising demand leads to rising Better Uses for the Fuels prices for natural gas, however, the EIA forecasts an increase in coal In the first half of the twenty-first century, the fuels used to make powered production. The EIA projects that between 2001 and 2025, hydrogen for transportation could achieve far larger greenhouse 74 GWof new coal-fired capacity will come online. Significantly, "as gas savings at lower cost, displacing emissions in electricity genera natural gas prices rise later in the forecast, new coal-fired capacity is tion, as several analyses have shown." This is true not only for nat projected to become more competitive, and 91 percent of the pro ural gas but also for renewable power in the foreseeable future. jected additions of new coal-fired capacity are expected to be Let's start with natural gas. Aswe've already seen, a fuel cellvehi brought on line from 20IO to 2025:'20 cle running on hydrogen produced from natural gas will have little From a global warming perspective, the right approach would or no net greenhouse benefits compared with the likely competi be to defer that increased coal-fired capacity and to Sput the retire tion in 2020, hybrid vehicles. Natural gas, however, has a huge ben ment of existing coal plants. Yet not only is coal-fired capacity pro efit when used to avoid the need to build new coal plants-or to jected to grow, but also the EIA projects that existing coal plants displace existing ones. Coal plants do not merely have much lower will be used far more. From 2001 to 2025,the EIA projects a remark efficiencies than natural gas plants-30 percent versus 55 percent. able 40 percent increase in coal consumption for electricity genera Compared with natural gas containing the same amount of energy, tion, which by itselfwould increase US. greenhouse gas emissions coal has nearly double the cO2 emissions, whereas gasoline has by IO percent. Dale E. Heydlauff, senior vice president for govern only about one-third' more cO2 emissions than natural gas. A mental and environmental affairs at American Electric Power megawatt-hout (Mwh) of electricity from a combined cycle gas (AEP), a leading US. producer of coal-fired power, said in August
152 153 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
2003, "The amount of AEP'S coal plant retirements will be driven EnergyAgency, of which 400 GW will represent replacement of old primarily by the price of natural gas:>2l plants (see Figure 8.1). Unfortunately, by 2003, rising demand for natural gas had These plants would commit the planet to total CO 2 emissions of already hit North American supply constraints, driving up prices. some 500 billion metric tons over their lifetime, unless "they are In June 2003, Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve backfit with carbon capture equipment at some time during their Board, took the unusual step of testifying before the House Energy life;' as David Hawkins, director of the Natural Resources Defense and Commerce Committee about natural gas, warning, "We are Council's Climate Center, told the U.S. House Committee on not apt to return to earlier periods of relative abundance and low Energy and Commerce in June 2003.25 Hawkins continued: prices anytime soon:'22 While robust government efforts to push To put this number in context, it amounts to half the estimated more efficient use of natural gas and to accelerate renewable power total cumulative carbon emissions from allfossilfuel use globally are the policies that I would recommend (see the Conclusion), such over the past 250 years!Ifwe build any significant fraction ofthis approaches lack political support, and Greenspan himself did not new capacityin a manner that does not enable capture of its cO propose them. Noting that "Canada, our major source of imported 2 emissions we will be creating a "carbon shadow" that will darken natural gas, has little capacity to significantly expand its ... 26 the livesof those who follow US. exports;' he endorsed an expansion of the capacity to import lique fied natural gas (LNG). The carbon shadow is not merely the long lifetime of coal plants
While not as energy-intensive a process as liquefying hydrogen, (many decades) but also the long lifetime of heat-trapping cO 2 in cooling natural gas to a temperature of about -260°F and trans the atmosphere (more than a century). porting the resulting liquid has "an energy penalty of up to 15%;' according to the Australian Greenhouse Office." So if LN G repre 2,500 sents a significant fraction of incremental U.S. natural gas con sumption in the future, the energy lost in the process of making and ... Ql shipping LNG provides one more reason why we should not make 3= 2,000 0 hydrogen from natural gas, which already offers little or no energy Q. or greenhouse gas benefit over hybrid vehicles." And since we (ij o New Ca pacity 8 1,500 1,442 Built after should start thinking of the energy resource base as a global one, it ... 1999 0 would be far better to use foreign natural gas to offset foreign coal III IiIIPre-1 999 1,000 ;:: Capacity combustion than to import it into the United States in order to ~ turn it into hydrogen to offset domestic gasoline consumption. ~ Cl That's especially true because projected grmvth in global coal con (; 500 sumption is an even bigger greenhouse gas problem than projected growth in U.S. coal consumption. 0 By 1999, the world had just more than 1,000 GW of coal-fired 1999 2030 electricity generating capacity, of which about one-third was in the United States. Between 2000 and 2030, more than 1,400 GW of FIGURE 8.1.Two-thirds of world coal capacity in 2030 is not yet built. new coal capacity will be built, according to the International Source: lEA, NRDC.
15+ ISS THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
Carbon capture and storage (ccs) is an important focus of research, but on a massive scale it is unlikely to be practical and eco 2,500 nomical for more than two decades (as discussed later in this chap ter). To defer as many of these plants as possible until ccs is ready, 2,000 "C "C
The British study concluded, "Until there is a surplus of renew elimination of cO 2 emissions from electricity generation? The able electricity, it is not beneficial in terms of carbon reduction to British authors conclude that, in the United Kingdom, it is likely to use renewable electricity to produce hydrogen- for use in vehicles, be "at least 30 years:' Significantly, the United Kingdom's electric or elsewhere. Higher carbon savings will be achieved through dis grid already has a cO 2 intensity (co 2 emitted per megawatt-hour of placing electricity from fossil fuel power stations?" The July 2003 electricity produced) that is lower than that of the United States by 7 Keith and Farrell analysis in Science comes to a similar conclusion: more than one-third. Moreover, the United Kingdom has.moved' "Until cO emissions from electricity generation are virtually elim sharply away from coal generation in the past two decades and IS 2 inated, it will be far more cost-effective to use new co 2 -neutral aggressively pursuing renewable energy and cogeneration. The electricity (e.g., wind or nuclear) to reduce emissions by substitut U.S. government, in contrast, has been unable as of 2003 to pass a ing for fossil-generated electricity?" law requiring that 20 percent of electricity corne from renewable
156 157 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
power in 2020, even though the environmental benefits are very especially those less than ten microns in size, which do so much large and the economic costs small. In fact, a key reason why the damage to our hearts and lungs. costs are so small is that such a law would reduce the pressure on In the United States, vehicle emissions (other than greenhouse the natural gas supply, which would reduce prices by just about the gas emissions), however, have been declining steadily. Toxic emis amount of the extra electricity costs. 31 A May 2003 analysis in Wind sions are being reduced through the combination of ever stricter powerMonthly argues that having excess U.S. wind power genera federal and state regulations coupled with the steady turnover of tion to use for hydrogen production is "a situation not likely before the vehicle fleet. The oldest and dirtiest vehicles ultimately go out 2050 at the earliest'?" of service and are replaced by the newest and cleanest vehicles. The As but one example of how far the United States and the world federal Clean Air Act Amendments of I990 set in motion a two have to go on clean energy, consider the results of a March 2003 pronged process. In the I990S, Tier I standards dramatically analysis by scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, reduced tailpipe emissions of new light-duty vehicles (such as cars the University of Illinois, and New York University." They con and most sport utility vehicles, or suvs). By 20IO, Tier 2 standards cluded that if the world is to stop global temperatures from rising will even further reduce vehicle emissions and will extend the regu by more than 2°C as a result of our greenhouse gas emissions, we lations to larger suvs and passenger vans while mandating the use should be building between 4-00 and I,300 MW of zero-carbon elec of gasoline with lower sulfur content (which not only directly tricity generation capacity perday for fifty years. Yet current projec reduces emissions but also makes it easier for automakers to design tions for the next thirty years are that we will build just 80 MW per cars that achieve further reductions). Due to its infamously day.34 And 2 °C would still very likely have a devastating effect on the smogged-in cities, California has even tougher standards for auto planet, as we have seen. Strikingly, "if climate sensitivity is in the mobiles than does the United States as a whole; these standards will middle of the IPCC range;' the analysis also concludes, "even stabi also be phased in during this decade. lization at 4-°C warming would require installation of 4-IO 'When all these standards are in place, new U.S. cars will be megawatts of carbon emissions-free energy capacity each day?" exceedingly dean, at least from the perspective ofemissions ofurban I think it is possible that the United States could have virtually car air pollutants (the current Clean Air Act standards do not address bon-free electricity before zoso-swith hydrogen playing a key role, as vehicle cO 2 emissions). Many new cars, so-called partial zero I will discuss in my scenario at the end of this chapter- but it will emissions-vehicles, will actually have tailpipe emissions cleaner require both major technological breakthroughs and a sea change in than Los Angeles air. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, though, have no U.S. government policy on global warming. First, let's examine some emissions besides water and thus are the ultimate in a clean car. On of the other potential drivers of the hydrogen transition. the other hand, they will be more costly in the beginning and will require a significant investment in infrastructure. Here is the ques tion for any such breakthrough clean technology: Are the benefits Hydrogen and Urban Air Pollution received proportional to the money spent? Put another way, can Another driver of a shift to hydrogen is concern about urban air emissions reductions beyond Tier 2 standards be achieved for less pollution. The transportation sector remains one of the largest money using other strategies? In the short run, the answer isyes. sources of such pollution-especially (I) the oxides of nitrogen For instance, remote sensing of vehicles at a major intersection (NOx) that are a precursor to ozone smog and (2) particulates- in Denver, Colorado, showed that "the worst polluting IO% of cars
158 159 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
and trucks emit 65% of the carbon monoxide pollution, while the The two most effective strategies for permanently reducing 50% of clean, new cars emit less than 6%:'36 Those dirty vehicles are dependence on imports-raising gasoline taxes and raising fuel primarily "older, poorly maintained automobiles:' This evidence efficiency standards-simply lack political support, even though strongly suggests that until we make a serious effort to either repair they both have the added benefit that they would help address or scrap these gross polluters, we won't affect urban air pollution global warming and other environmental problems. The gasoline much by focusing on further emissions reductions in new vehicles. tax strategy is the one Europe has used to help constrain fuel con Trying to lower that already low 6 percent just won't have much sumption. The United Kingdom and countries such as France effect. The 2003 analysis by Keith and Farrell estimates that fuel cell and Germany have gasoline taxes of more than $2.00 per gallon, vehicles would reduce oxides of nitrogen at a cost 100 to 500 times more than five times the gasoline tax in the United States." Such greater than that of current strategies." Also, in terms of overall tax hikes are essentially inconceivable in this country for the fore emissions of urban air pollutants, for the next two decades at least, seeable future. For instance, by the end of the Clinton adminis we can achieve pollution reductions far more cost-effectively by tration, it was not possible to suggest increasing gasoline taxes by cleaning up power plants and large off-road vehicles, such as con even a few cents-tax increases of all kinds were considered polit struction equipment, than by investing in fuel cell vehicles. The ical suicide. George W Bush administration has proposed new, tougher emis The fuel efficiency approach is the one this country used so suc sions regulations for off-road vehicles. cessfully in the late 1970S and early 1980s, when we doubled the fuel The long-term answer to the cost-effectiveness question will efficiency of our fleet while making our cars safer, mandating that require a far better understanding of what is now unknown-the new cars have a fuel efficiency of 27.5 mpg. In a 2002 report to Pres cost of super-clean vehicles, their hydrogen fuel, and the necessary ident Bush, the NationalAcademy of Sciences concluded that auto infrastructure. Research, development, and demonstration of mobile fuel economy could be increased by 12percent for small cars hydrogen fuel cell vehicles remain the only ways to find the ulti and up to 4-2 percent for large suvs with technologies that would mate answers. pay for themselves in fuel savings." That study did not even con sider the greater use of diesels and hybrids. Studies undertaken by the national laboratories for the DOE, by the Massachusetts Insti Hydrogen and Energy Independence tute of Technology, and by the Pew Center on Global Climate In a February 2003 speech on hydrogen, President Bush said, "It Change have concluded that even greater savings could be cost jeopardizes our national security to be dependent on sources of effective while maintaining or improving passenger safety." The energy from countries that don't care for America .... It's also a Europeans have a voluntary agreement with automakers that will matter of economic security, to be dependent on energy from reduce cO 2 emitted per mile by 25 percent from 1996 to 2008 for volatile regions of the world.?" You might think that after fighting the average light-duty vehicle, which equates to a vehicle fuel effi two wars in the Persian Gulf since 1990, after enduring a major ter ciency of almost 4-0 mpg. Japan has a mandatory target with simi -, rorist attack funded in large part by Persian Gulf oil money, and lar goalS!2 Yet most observers consider such new fuel efficiency with imports accounting for more than halfof our oil consumption standards in this country politically infeasible for the foreseeable and our sending $100 billion per year offshore, that our first call to future: The auto companies have actively lobbied against any such action would be to significantly reduce those imports. And yet we standards, the White House is opposed to them, and there is little have done essentially nothing. evidence of broad political support in Congress or elsewhere.
r60 r6r THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
Because of this inaction, as of 2002 the fuel economy of the aver suming even more oil. In spite of all this growth in the developing age vehicle on American roads was at its lowest level in two decades world, no COWltrywill overtake the United States in oil conswnp and likely to get worse." The fuel economy laws have a loophole tion anytime soon. The ErA projects that between 2000 and 2025, allowing suvs and light trucks to average 20.7 mpg, 25 percent we will increase our oil demand by nearly 50 percent." lower than the standard for new cars. This has allowed overall vehi This acceleration in global oil demand will eventually bump up cle efficiency to drop as the suv share of new vehicle sales has against the reality of oil as a finite, nonrenewable resource, causing grown. Ford, for instance, has backed off a voluntary commitment global production to peak and start declining, much as production to increase suv fuel efficiency, and, in fact, its 2003 model year in the continental United States did decades ago. Some believe this
suvs will be less fuel efficient than those of the previous year.44 will occur by 20IO-or sooner. In a 2003 speech, Matthew Sim Moreover, companies known for fuel efficiency, such as Honda and mons, energy investment banker and Bush administration advisor, Toyota, both of which have introduced hybrid vehicles into the said that his analysis was leading him more and more to "the worry U.S. market, have also introduced gas-guzzling strvs. that peaking is at hand; not years away. If it turns out I'm wrong, From my years of working to influence policy on this issue, both then I'm wrong. But if I'm right, the unforeseen consequences are in and out of government, the conclusion I draw from all this is that devastating. But unfortunately the world has no Plan B if I'm "energy independence" is a phrase to which politicians and policy right.?" In his 2001 book Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil makers give lip service but which is exceedingly unlikely to speed Shortage) Princeton University geophysicist Kenneth Deffeyes up the transition to a hydrogen economy. If the actions of Saddam states bluntly, "There is nothing plausible that could postpone the Hussein and Osama bin Laden and record levels of oil imports peak until 2009. Get used to it."47 couldn't induce lawmakers, automakers, and the general public to The Royal Dutch/Shell Group, probably the most successful pre embrace existing vehicle energy efficiency technologies that will dictor in the global oil business, adds a few years to those gloomy actually pay for themselves in fuel savings, I cannot imagine what forecasts. According to Shell, "a scarcity of oil supplies-including fearful events must happen before the nation will be motivated to unconventional sources and natural gas liquids-is very unlikely embrace hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, which will cost much more b~fore2025. This could be extended to 2040 by adopting known to buy, cost much more to fuel, and require massive government measures to increase vehicle efficiency and focusing oil demand. on subsidies to pay for the infrastructure. this sector'?" Whether we will adopt these known measures or not Ultimately, I believe, it is not fear about the growing level of oil remains to be seen. Moreover, producing conventional liquid fuels imports that will bring about change but the inevitable exhaustion from either natural gas or unconventional sources of oil (such as of the world's finite oil resources. Worldwide population growth, Canadian oil sands) is relatively energy-intensive, and relying on economic growth, and urbanization will dramatically increase these sources will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions. global oil consumption in the coming decades, especially in the I have found that this issue-the possibility that we are nearing developing world. As farmworkers move to urban centers, much a production peak-gets even less traction in Washington, D.C., as more oil will be needed. The key elements of urbanization are com a driver of energy policy than the call for energy independence. The ., muting, transport of raw materials, and construction of buildings argument is inevitably dismissed with a wave of the hand: "We've and other infrastructure. All consume huge amounts of oil. At the heard that for decades." In 1996, at my first congressional hearing same time, fewer farmers will have to feed more people, so the use representing the DOE, a researcher from the Massachusetts Insti of mechanization, fertilizer, and transportation will increase, con- tute ofTechnology testified that "you really can't see a peak, because
162 163 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century the peak keeps moving out further and further into the future. And, report of a February 2003 workshop on carbon management by the people who do this kind of work are always sort of explaining that National Academy of Sciences concluded, ''At the present time, the previous peak was wrong, but now they have a new peak and technology exists for the separation of cO 2 and hydrogen, but the it's the real peak. So, I wouldn't give too much credence to that?" capital and operating costs are very high, particularly when existing What would happen if we started running out of oil? Prices technology is considered for fossil fuel combustion or gasification would start spiking, possibly with destabilizing effects on the econ streams."! Significant R&D is being carried out to bring the Costs
~~ ~ omy. On the one hand, Deffeyes and others argue that after the Capturing CO from a gasification stream is potentially the most peak, production may well decline at a relatively rapid rate even as 2 demand increases, so delaying action until that moment may risk intriguing option for a hydrogen economy, especially for a world significant economic damage. On the other hand, most European awash in coal but needing to restrain greenhouse gas emissions. As countries have gasoline prices that are double ours already, with no discussed in Chapter 4, coal can be gasified and the resulting syn obvious harm to their standard of living. In either event, such a gas (synthesis gas) can then be chemically processed to generate a peak would eventually force us to switch to much more efficient hydrogen-rich gas for fuel and a stream of cO 2 that can be piped to vehicles and alternative fuels. So the possibility of a production a sequestration site. This hydrogen-rich gas can be combusted peak in the near future is an argument for being prepared with directly in a combined cycle power plant, or it can power a high alternatives to oil through an aggressive R&D effort. But again, if temperature fuel cell. we were seriously concerned about this issue, we would take up Some hydrogen can also be purified and shipped out for other Shell's suggestion and aggressively adopt "known measures" for uses, such as transportation. From a global warming perspective, vehicle efficiency, such as hybrids, diesels, and biofuels, discussed though, the same analysis that applied to renewable energy applies later in this chapter. here: Until the U.S. electric grid is virtually co 2 -free, this hydro gen-rich gas is far better used to displace electric power derived from fossil fuels than to be converted to very pure hydrogen, Hydrogen and Sequestration shipped hundreds of miles, and used as a transportation fuel. And, Carbon sequestration- permanent carbon storage- is a potentially in fact, the DOE'S FutureGen project for coal gasification and cO 2 crucial strategy for reducing net atmospheric co 2 emissions and one sequestration envisions using the hydrogen to generate clean that could dramatically accelerate introduction of hydrogen into the power, at least initially, perhaps using a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC).52 Coal gasification systems with cO 2 capture could achieve economy. cO 2 can be removed from the atmosphere and stored bio logicallyin trees and other biomass, a strategy I will return to shortly. efficiencies of 60 percent or more using various combinations of 53 turbines and SOFCS. Sequestration can also involve removing cO 2 from power plants and storing it within the planet's physical systems, which, as dis The key question is where to put the cO 2 ' The largest potential cussed earlier, is sometimes called carbon capture and storage (ccs). physical reservoir is the deep oceans. However, ocean sequestration poses serious environmentalrisks and is unlikely to be a viable cli The cO 2 can be captured either before or after combustion. mate mitigation strategy. Tens of millions of tons of cO 2 are already Geologic sequestration is the storage of cO 2 in vast, sealed underground places. Costs for geologic sequestration are currently injected into oil fields to enhance recovery. This strategy can be 5o expanded for early, low-cost sequestration efforts, but oil fields are quite high, more than $30 per ton of co 2 , according to the DOE. The technical challenges of reducing those costs are significant. The limited in size and location, and transporting CO 2 over long dis-
r64 r65 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
tances will be costly. To meet a potential demand to sequester sev Ultimately, this integrated gasification combined cycle (rccc) eral billion metric tons of cO 2 per year, especially in places that do technology will require leadership by the private sector. Yet, as the not have conventional storage formations, research is focusing on National Coal Council reported to the secretary of energy in its finding much larger reservoirs. May 2003 report titled Coal Related Greenhouse Gas Management Recent attention has focused on pumping highly compressed Issues, "vendors currently do not have an adequate economic incen liquid co 2, so-called supercritical co 2, into geologic formations tive to invest R&D dollars in rGCC advancement" because "rocc such as deep underground aquifers. As the report of the National may only become broadly competitive with" current coal and nat CO Academy workshop noted, "less dense than water, 2 will float ural gas power plants "under a co 2 -restricted scenario." Thus, under the top seal atop the water in an aquifer and could migrate "power companies are not likely to pay the premium to install upward if the top seal is not completely impermeable?" roday's IGCC designs in the absence of clear regulatory direction on The problem here is that even very tiny leakage rates can under the cO 2 issue?" Absent near-term restrictions on cO2 emissions, mine the environmental value of such sequestration. If we are try this option will be pushed much further out to the future. ing to stabilize CO 2 concentrations at twice preindustrial levels, a r As for storing CO 2 in underground aquifers, much testing will percent leakage rate could add $850 billion per year to overall costs have to be done before this approach can be considered for wide by 2095, according to an analysis by Pacific Northwest National spread use. Each potential major site will very likely need to be the Laboratory. That study concluded, "Leakage of cO2 from engi subject of intensive long-term monitoring to guarantee it can per neered 2 disposal practices on the order r% or less per year are . co of manently store co 2 Very sensitive and low-cost in situ assessment likely intolerable as they represent an unacceptably costly financial and monitoring techniques must be developed to provide confi burden that is moved from present generations to future genera dence that leakage rates are exceedingly low. tions." If we cannot be certain that leakage rates are below r percent, Analysis suggests that ccs could eventually eliminate a large "the private sector will find it increasingly difficult to convince reg fraction of emissions from the u.s. electricity sector for $20 to $4-0 ' ulators that cO 2 injected into geological formations should be per ton of cO 2 whereas using the carbon-free hydrogen as trans accorded the same accounting as cO 2 that is avoided"-avoided, portation fuel to cut emissions in cars could cost more than $200 that is, directly through technologies such as wind power. The per ton." Ultimately, leak-proof ccs may be an essential strategy study notes that, "there is no solid experimental evidence or theo for combating global warming, one that will accelerate the transi retical framework", for determining likely. leakage rates from differ- tion to hydrogen economy. But, at this point, it seems unlikely to ent geologic formations. 55 be widely used until after 2030-after the world has built an addi How long will it take before ccs emerges as a major solution to tional 1,000 GW of coal plant capacity and dramatically enhanced global warming? That remains uncertain. As Princeton's Bob the prospect of catastrophic global warming. Williams wrote in 2003, "one cannot yet say with high confidence In the near term, biological sequestration can, with appropriate that tl1eco 2 storage option is viable ."56 The technology itselfis very accounting rules and environmental criteria, playa role in reducing . challenging, and just as commercializing fuel cells has taken much atmospheric concentrations of co 2 Probably the best-knownform longer and has proven far more difficult than was expected, so, too, of sequestration is the planting of trees (or other plants) to remove may building large commercial coal gasification combined cycle cO 2 from the atmosphere and store it inside that biomass. This bio units." The DOE is aiming to "validate the engineering, economic, logical sequestration is temporary because when the plant or tree 58 and environmental viability" of a system by 2020. dies, it decays, returning the co 2 to the atmosphere. Even massive
r66 r67 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
planet-wide reforestation would have a limited effect on cO2 con est competition for hydrogen in the race to develop a transporta centrations.?' tion fuel with low or no greenhouse gas emissions. The big advan A biological sequestration strategy with enormous potential is to tage ethanol has over hydrogen is that it is a liquid fuel and thus is plant trees and crops for the purpose of harvesting them as renew much more compatible with our existing fueling system. Existing able energy, either electric power or liquid fuel.62 Ifthe planting and oil pipelines, however, are not compatible with ethanol, so signif harvesting are done in a sustainable fashion, with relatively low icant infrastructure spending would still be required if ethanol
energy inputs, the net CO 2 released will be close to zero. Biomass were to become the major transportation fuel. 65 As with hydrogen, can be gasified and converted to hydrogen (and electricity) in a production of ethanol will require major technological advances process very similar to coal gasification. A number of biomass gasi before it can come close to the price of gasoline on an equivalent fication processes are in the process of being demonstrated, energy basis." although a practical commercial system remains technologically Probably the biggest drawback to biofuels, and to biomass challenging. If carbon capture and storage is practical, then one energy in general, is that biomass is not very efficient at storing
could also imagine extracting the CO 2 stream from the biomass solar energy. Therefore, large land areas are needed to provide gasification process. This would turn biomass into a potent net enough energy crops ifbiofuels are to provide a significant share of reducer of cO2-extracting cO2 from the air via photosynthesis transportation energy. One 2001 analysis by ethanol advocates con
while growing and then injecting that cO 2 into underground reser cluded that to provide enough ethanol to replace the gasoline used voirs through ccs. This may be a critical option for the United in the light-duty fleet, "itwould be necessary to process the biomass States and the world, given the increasing risk of rapid and cata growing on 300 million to 500 million acres, which is in the neigh
strophic climate change. 63 borhood of one-fourth of the 1.8 billion acre land area of the lower Biomass can also be used to make a zero-carbon transportation 48 states" and is roughly equal to the amount of all U.S. cropland fuel, such as ethanol, which is now used as a gasoline blend. Today, in production today." That amount of displaced gasoline repre
the major biofuel is ethanol made from corn, which yields only sents about 60 percent of all U.S. transportation-related CO 2 ernis about 25percent more energy than was consumed to grow the corn sions today, but less than 40 percent of what is projected for 2025 and make the ethanol, according to some estimates. Considerable under a business-as-usual scenario. Ifethanol is to representa major R&D is being focused on producing ethanol from sources other transportation fuel in the coming decades, then U.S. vehicles will than corn. This so-called cellulosic ethanol can be made from agri need to become much more fuel efficient. Moreover, given the cultural and forest waste as well as dedicated energy crops, such as acreage needed, using it for these purposes would obviously have switchgrass or fast-growing hybrid poplar trees, which can be dramatic environmental, political, and economic implications. As grown and harvested with minimal energy consumption so that of 2003, there were no commercial cellulosic biomass-to-ethanol overall emissions are near zero." All cars today can use a mixture of plants. to percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline, known as Era. Some 4 Hence, ethanol, like hydrogen, is no near-term panacea. In 'the " million flexible fuel vehicles, which can run on either gasoline or a long term, however, biomass-to-energy production could be blend with 85 percent ethanol, E85, are on the road today, but few exceedingly efficient with bio-refineries that produce multiple use E85 because of its high price. products. Lee Lynd, professor of engineering at Dartmouth Col If hybrids and diesels are the toughest competition for trans lege, described one such future bio-refinery where cellulosic portation fuel cells, then cellulosic ethanol is probably the tough- ethanol undergoes a chemical pretreatment and then fermentation
168 169 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
world driven byreaction to bad environmentalnewsandgoodtechnolog converts the carbohydrate content into ethanol as co 2 bubbles off." The residue is mostly lignin, a polymer found in the cell walls icalnews. Here are some of the highlights through 2050: of plants. Water is removed, and the biomass residue is then gasi 2000-2009: The hottest decade in 2,000 years. Many developed fied to generate electricity or to produce a stream of hydrogen and countties (other than the United States) begin making modest co 2 , The overall efficiency of converting the energy content of the greenhouse gas reductions, creating a robust market for co , original biomass into useful fuel and electricity would be 70 per 2 Lack ofleadership in the United States and the developing world cent, even after accounting for the energy needed to grow and har stalls broader action on emissions. Growing R&D efforts and the vest the biomass. The cO can be sequestered. Also, this process 2 prospect ofmajor salesin Europe and Japan for climate-mitigating could be used to generate biodiesel. This is admittedly a futuristic energy technologies bring about steady advances in fuel cells, scenario, but it is the subject of intensive research and could make renewables, energy efficiency, and hydrogen. cO emissions in ethanol competitive with gasoline and make electricity competitive 2 the United States rise by more than 10 percent, and in the world with other zero-carbon alternatives, especially when there is a price they rise by more than 15 percent. for avoiding cO 2 emissions. 20IO-20I9: The hottest decade in 2,000 years. The Intergovern mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) raises its warming esti The Global Warming Century mate in its fifth assessment, projecting that 2100 will be I take issue with the many scenarios that place us in the safe harbor 3.5°p-I2.5°p hotter than 1990. The IPCC acknowledges in 2016 a hydrogen economy in just a decade two. I do think such a 550 of or that stabilization of cO 2 concentrations below ppmv (twice transition may well be essential, for all the reasons I have described, preindustrial levels) by 2100 is "for all practical purposes, impos but I think it will happen very differently from the way most ana sible." The National Academy of Sciences declares that 60 per lysts have suggested. cent of the world's coral reefs will be lost by 2030 and that most Here is my own scenario tor the transition. Scenarios are not pre of the rest are "unsavable, given current knowledge." The success dictions; rather, they are credible and relevant narratives designed to Europe and Japan have in achieving small reductions at moder challenge our thinking, This scenario assumes major technological ate costs inspires the first global climate treaty. Major developing advances but recognizes that the energy system changes slowly. As nations refuse to accept absolute emissions reductions and insist Shell noted in its most recent scenarios, "typically it has taken 25 that a nation's climate targets reflect cumulative emissions since years after commercial introduction for a primary energy form to 1900. The U.S. government refuses to accept a cO 2 reduction obtain a 1% share of the global market."? As in Shell's, the environ target before 2030. Solid oxide fuel cells and hybrid cars emerge mental driver in this scenario is global warming. I draw on the most as major commercial successes, delaying entry of PEM fuel cells recent science and apply the lesson of the 1990S, when the hottest into both the stationary and transportation markets. cO 2 emis decade in 2,000 years drove most developed countries to a commit sions in the United States rise by another 10 percent, and world-' .~ ment to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. wide they again rise by more than IS percent. Global concentra Although our scientific understanding of the climate will con tions exceed 400 ppmv by the end of the decade. tinue to improve in the coming years, this scenario plays out what 2020-2029: The hottest decade in 2,000 years. The IPCC'S a growing number of scientists see as the current warming trajec seventh assessment projects that, by 2100, sea levels will be tory. This scenario is called "The Global Warming Century." It is a
170 17 1 THE HYPE ABOUT HYDROGEN Coping with the Global Warming Century
twelve to sixty inches higher than in 1990. After a piece ofAntarc duces the first 100 mpg fuel efficiency standard. Other countties tica the size of Connecticut breaks off in 2024-, the National quickly follow suit. CO2 emissions in the United States drop by Academy of Sciences warns that disintegration of the entire 20 percent, and global emissions are flat. Biofuels make up 25 Western Antarctic Ice Sheet now "appears likely within 200 percent of all vehicle fuels sold globally by decade's end. years" and that a complete melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet is 2040-2049: The hottest decade in 2,000 years, another full 1°F "virtually inevitable;' which would raise sea levels more than warmer than the 2030S. The IPCC'S eleventh assessment warns twenty feet. In the United States, a major push for the most cost that "after five decades of anomalous behavior by the North effective climate solutions-energy efficiency, cogeneration, Atlantic Oscillation, the thermohaline ocean current may be hybrid vehicles-leads to a peaking of US. primary energy showing signs of shutting down." The United States launches a demand in 2027. Fuel cell vehicles appear in a few fleets man twenty-year effort to bio-refine all available biomass for biofuels dated by states such as California. Significant advances occur in production and for gasification, ccs, and hydrogen production. hydrogen storage, coal and biomass gasification, and solar The last coal plant without ccs shuts down in 204-8. By the end power. An electricity standard is proposed requiring that 50 per of the decade, most of the cars and light trucks on the road are cent ofUS. electricity be from renewables by 204-0. The standard hybrids (or hybrid diesel-electrics) running on an ethanol or passes in 2025, after a "grand bargain" amendment allows cO 2 biodiesel blend, and more than 10 percent ofall new cars and light capture and storage to constitute as much as one-third of the trucks are fuel cell vehicles. The hydrogen economy has begun. requirement. A major effort is launched to characterize all signif icant potential geologic reservoirs for co 2, Emissions of cO 2 in the United States remain flat, but global emissions rise by another 10 percent.
2030-2039: The hottest decade in 2,000 years. The IPCC's ninth assessment projects that 2100 will be 4-.5oF-15°F warmer than 1990. The United States experiences its first r.ooo-tornado month. In mid-decade, Hurricane Elisa hits Miami with winds raging at 200 miles per hour, killing 800 people and causing $100 billion in damage. In 2037, the National Academy of Sciences' Panel on Abrupt Climate Change, noting that the three previous years were a full 1°Fwarmer than the past decade, urges cO 2 sta bilization at 650 ppmv within fifty years. Coal gasification together with carbon capture and storage (cos) becomes cost effective, with the resulting hydrogen-rich gas used to generate " electricity in SOFC and gas turbine plants with efficiencies exceeding 80 percent. Global oil production peaks and starts to decline significantly in mid-decade as cO 2 restrictions limit development of unconventional resources. In 2038, China intro-
172 173