Are Fuel Cells a false economy?

Question

Everyone seems to be getting very hyped up about the supposed hydrogen revolution that is just around the corner. Fuel Cell powered cars, we are promised, will be 100% with only water as a waste product. We are told fuel cells are going to power everything from cars to laptops.

Does anyone else see problems with this proposal? Firstly, hydrogen is an incredibly volatile gas, so filling up cars etc. with it will be far more dangerous than filling them with petrol. Also, if a car full of hydrogen gas crashes and it ruptured the storage tank, the whole thing will explode at the first sign of a spark.

Second, hydrogen does not occur in vast quanities naturally, so we have to produce it. This requires energy, and surely this energy is just going to come from burning more fossil fuels in power stations. And if it doesnt, if we set up a renewable energy infrastructure, why do we even need hydrogen? everything (including vehicles etc.) could just be plugged into a mains outlet...

Answer 1

The efficiency of fuel cell-to-motor energy conversion is undeniably much greater than that of internal combustion engines or steam engines. The cost of the fuel cell system is also undeniably much greater than that of IC or steam engines.

from Vision Engineer:
"Many automobile companies launch fuel cell test vehicles to show people the latest fuel cell technology edge. A good example is the Daimler Chrysler NECAR. The latest NECAR is NECAR 5. On 4th June 2002, NECAR 5 completed a 16-day historical journey from San Francisco to Washington, D.C. It was the first ever attempt to drive a fuel cell vehicle across the US."

From New York City, New York to San Francisco, California is about 2930 miles. At an average speed of 50 mph and average driving day of 10 hr. (500 mi/da), this thip should take 6 days to drive in relative comfort.
The Fuel Cell car averaged 184 mi/da, so considerable time must have been spent on promotion, or the car was painfully slow given real driving conditions. You could achieve this average with a Model T.

The production of hydrogen as a large scale fuel is incredibly expensive and inefficient using today's technologies. The most popular proposal is reduction of hydrocarbon fuels, which continues the same pollution problems we have today, albeit easier to deal with. The oxides of carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, and other contaminants have to be scrubbed out and safely disposed of. To be effective, the hydrogen must be compressed and stored in high pressure cylinders, then distributed to "gas stations". That technology exists, and need be only expended. The danger posed by the H2 gas cylinders is no greater than that posed by existing LPG (propane or butane) or LNG (methane) tanks, and is actually much less than that afforded by a half-full petrol tank.

Eventually we will resort to electrolosys of water to produce hydrogen. Our choices of energy sources will be nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal and tides. Of these, only nuclear has any hope of providing the necessary energy without irreparable destruction to our ecosystems. Hopefully, by the time we reach this pass we will have mastered controlled fusion reactions.

Totally electric vehicles are unacceptable as they are limited in range, speed, and endurance. Hybrids are being produced, and test vehicles have recieved broad acceptance (One test subject refused to relinquish his vehicle after the test.).

Answer 2

Hydrogen is volatile but so is gasoline. "The whole thing will explode at the first sign of a spark" is a Hollywood thing. It's not hard to engineer a tank that won't explode.

Hydrogen is abundant in everything and this is an limitless resource. Energy is abundant if we can tap the power of the sun. Hydrogen is a FUEL. As a FUEL, the gas/oil companies can keep their employees, gas stations, tanker trucks, supertankers, refineries, and make money with what they got instead of letting the electrical power industry make the money. The car industry has been working with the oil companies building cars for nearly 100 years. The car industry has been working with the electrical companies building cars for less than 5 years. No surprise, car industry picks oil industry's vision of the future. If producing hydrogen requires burning of fossil fules, the oil companies don't see why that is a problem.

Yes, the fuel cell economy is touted by car companies with the backing of oil companies. Oil companies are afraid of the future so they do everything in their power to stop this from happening. The electrical car powered by the power industry will doom the car-oil alliance once and for all should it ever come to mass market.

Answer 3

Fuel cells do not make sense for automobiles as you concluded. The energy required to produce the hydrogen takes more oil than would be used if you drove a gasoline driven car.

If you have a byproduct hydrogen source that is not being used, then the economics for producing electricity from fuel cells might work. I say might, because you have to add the cost of the fuel cell, the pre-treatment necessary to make the hydrogen suitable for fuel cells, and the other capital equipment to convert the DC current from fuel cells into useable AC power

The capital mentioned is in competition with conventional steam boilers where you can burn the hydrogen for heat. In many applications the hydrogen can be used with conventional gas fed boilers.

And finally, hydrogen has a chemical value assocated with it. That is hydrogen is used as a chemical to make other higher value chemicals. If the market is available, the chemical value for hydrogen will always be better than burning it.

Answer 4

Fuel cells are to be seen as the beginning of a LONG TERM solution to environmental problems. Anyone who does not recognize this is self delusional.

Unfortunately, many consumers and polititians are deluding themselves and their constituencies.

However, any solutions to long standing problems have to take the form of long term processes. The economy of a hydrogen powered nation will be realized as the economy of numbers. The more hydrogen and fuel cells are purchased and used, the cheaper these products will become. The cheaper they become, the more consumers will want them, etc, etc.

It takes the first few consumers to get this process started, for whatever reasons they have to choose this and other "green" solutions.

Most of the problems you describe, particularly the risks are simply not true. For example, fuel celled vehicles do not carry a massive hydrogen tank with inherent explosive properties. A nearly empy gasoline tank has more volitility than a hydrogen tank. You also suggest the mere sign of a spark will set of the hydrogen tank. Not so, the hydrogen, itself needs to be exposed to this spark. Where is this hypothetical spark?

Many other issues have been engineered out, and yes, others need to be worked out. Fortunately, large numbers of fuel cell cars are not rolling off the assembly line, and, there are plenty of other cleaner solutions available for literally EVERYONE to choose from.

Natural gas vehicles

Public transportation

Ethanol and E85 burning vehicles

BioDeisel

Hybrids and electric cars

Smaller cars

More and more fuel efficient vehicles

Exercising individual control of our own energy usage, such as slowing down, fewer trips, turning off unneeded lights and appliances, conserving water (yes, it takes power to pump water from it's sources to our homes!) walking and biking to short destinations, etc

And many others. No one is forcing the Hydrogen economy down your throats. No one is "promising" a fuel cell car into your home.

Heck, I'm still waiting for my rocket powered floater car I was "promised" in the 50s.

Answer 5

Danger? Gasoline is dangerous and explosive too.

Production? Yes, that is a problem.

But plugging cars into the mains does not work because they have to move and the mains plug is in a fixed location. The fuel cell should be thought of as a battery, not as a power source. It can be recharged like a battery and it can hold more energy than other kinds of batteries. In fact, before they were called fuel cells, they were called gas batteries.

Answer 6

In addition to your question. Also the most efficient way to get hydrogen is still from hydrocarbons>>>>>>fossil fuels.

Answer 7

False the politicians have allot more power than you think. World War I< and WWII were both followed by a depression. The reason is because of instability in the oil markets cause prices to go up on everything. So when the government says they have no control they are lieing to give money to their friends and contributers to their campains. To lower tensions and bring down oil and everything else we need stability in the markets. Instabilities cause prices to go up.