An electron based economy makes sense, but let’s not leave out hydrogen

Hydrogen versus electron economy

Why a hydrogen economy doesn’t make sense

In a recent study, fuel cell expert Ulf Bossel explains that a hydrogen economy is a wasteful economy. The large amount of energy required to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds (water, natural gas, biomass), package the light gas by compression or liquefaction, transfer the energy carrier to the user, plus the energy lost when it is converted to useful electricity with fuel cells, leaves around 25% for practical use — an unacceptable value to run an economy in a sustainable future. Only niche applications like submarines and spacecraft might use hydrogen.

snip

To Bossel, this means focusing on the establishment of an efficient “electron economy.” In an electron economy, most energy would be distributed with highest efficiency by electricity and the shortest route in an existing infrastructure could be taken. The efficiency of an electron economy is not affected by any wasteful conversions from physical to chemical and from chemical to physical energy. In contrast, a hydrogen economy is based on two such conversions (electrolysis and fuel cells or hydrogen engines).

“An electron economy can offer the shortest, most efficient and most economical way of transporting the sustainable ‘green’ energy to the consumer,” he says. “With the exception of biomass and some solar or geothermal heat, wind, water, solar, geothermal, heat from waste incineration, etc. become available as electricity. Electricity could provide power for cars, comfortable temperature in buildings, heat, light, communication, etc.

With current technology it is difficult to argue with Bossel’s main thesis. There is one fissure in his with view of hydrogen and even it acknowledges this in his reference to submarines and spacecraft, that hydrogen has great potential as a niche fuel. The idea of a hydrogen based economy is a little misleading. While a hydrogen based economy does have its cheerleaders most of us have a more realistic view of its future as a fuel. As a portable fuel to replace gasoline in cars hydrogen’s future is limited, but as a stationary source of fuel for small factories the obstacles of portable storage and the extra safety measures don’t come into play. That would still leave us with the currently inefficient energy intensive methods used to produce hydrogen fuel. Well what if we could produce that fuel from sunlight, Unprecedented efficiency in producing hydrogen from water

Previously, the best water photooxidation technology had an external quantum efficiency of about 37 percent. The new technology’s efficiency is 42 percent, which the researchers term “unprecedented.” The efficiency is due to an improved positive electrode and other innovations in the water-splitting device, researchers said.

This is not to say that Ulf Bossel isn’t correct in saying that we should approach transforming the economy with an emphasis on an electron economy, only that we shouldn’t write off hydrogen as a dead end in all situations. As we make the inevitable transformation to a solar/wind – electron based economy we should be careful about putting all our eggs in one basket as Bossel warns, but we should also be careful in condemning hydrogen. One obvious drawback to hydrogen fueled cars is the infrastructure needed for people to fuel up their hydrogen powered cars, but that is just one scenario as to how to best utilize hydrogen fuel. If we need put our emphasis on an electron economy we could use hydrogen plants which would be part of the nation’s electrical grind along with solar and wind to produce electrical energy to power electric cars. What would you rather live down the street from a htdrogen plant that produces steam as a by-product or a coal fired plant and the pollution they produce. Iceland is already on its way to a mixed resources fuel economy, The hydrogen economy blasts off and while this sounds overly negative this artcle from PopSci actually points to the same positive aspects of hydrogen that I’ve alluded to to, Warning: The Hydrogen Economy May Be More Distant Than It Appears

“An economically sane, cost-effective attack on the climate problem wouldn’t start with cars,” David Keith says. Cars and light trucks contribute roughly 20 percent of the carbon dioxide emitted in the U.S., while power plants burning fossil fuels are responsible for more than 40 percent of C02 emissions. Fuel cells designed for vehicles must cope with harsh conditions and severe limitations on size and weight.

A better solution to global warming might be to hold off building hydrogen cars, and instead harness fuel cells to generate electricity for homes and businesses.

Where economically feasible hydrogen could be one of the sources for the energy that charges your fuel cell.

Iceland’s first hydrogen fueling station is already operating on the outskirts of Reykjavík. The hydrogen, which powers a small fleet of fuel cell buses, is produced onsite from electrolyzed tap water. Meanwhile the recently formed Icelandic New Energy—a consortium that includes automakers, Royal Dutch/Shell and the Icelandic power company Norsk Hydro—is planning to convert the rest of the island nation to a hydrogen system.

Impressive, yes. But 72 percent of Iceland’s electricity comes from geothermal and hydroelectric power. With so much readily available clean energy, Iceland can electrolyze water with electricity directly from the national power grid.

Finally at least for today let’s consider the figures that are touted for the conversion. One, the shift away from fossil fuels isn’t optional we and the world will have to do so sooner or later. Two, yes we’re talking billions of dollars; for those not keeping up the U.S. is spending almost 3 billion dollars a month on Iraq alone. That’s an awful lot of research and infrastructure money. Then imagine the return on investment. Fossil fuels cause a tremendous degradation of the environment and cause or aggravate a variety of medical conditions, all of which cost taxpayers and business billions of dollars a year.