Hydrogen Power Questions ** found info on another forum

Ballard, one of the biggest Hydrogen companies in the world just announced that they were getting out of the development of Stacks for automotive applications. That I think says a lot if not all. One of the people in the interview said 20+ years still before it's economical for the automotive side of their business. MTBF is still in the 1-2,000 hour range and the price is still out of reach for all but the richest people in the world. Then there is the range problem and the refueling infrastructure. I for one don't believe all the hype surrounding hydrogen. Never have and never will. I'll be long dead and forgotten before it arrives. I don't think Ballard has ever had a business quarter without red ink and they have been working on Hydrogen Stacks for many years. Their stock is down about 67 cents in the last 2 trading days. Google Ballard and read.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Frank Hudon\";p=\"113613)</div>

I just did and found this...

http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouvers...7b-b656e2540286

Most recent article I could find on them, and it has their CEO driving around in a Ford hydrogen car (Ford is really pushing forward in hydrogen and hybrids it seems). And nothing about pulling out of fuel stack production.

Best quotes...

As I made my way back to Ballard's headquarters, keeping an eye on the "hydrogen" gauge, it became very apparent to me that a commercially viable hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is much closer than most consumers realize.

Make no mistake, however, that the technology is here, and that it works. Getting costs down to the point where commercialization is possible is, I suspect, a matter of years, not decades.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26\";p=\"114012)</div>

Wow, the CEO of a hydrogen company is quoted as essentially saying that Hydrogen is just around the corner. :roll:

I'm sure that's enough for me. :lol:

Bob, keep looking. A lot of us have trouble understanding the economics of hydrogen. Personally, I think hydrogen is being forced down our throats because the profit stream is better for the companies involved, NOT because the science is better.

Many in Priuschat have noted that electric car science looks better than hydrogen car science in this regard. But with electric, IMHO, the profit stream for the corporations is not as good.

So we are being hoodwinked into the hydrogen economy not because of the superior science, but because of the superior business model. Just my 2 cents.

 

yes I read that article and a week later he announced that they were getting out of the automotive side of the hydrogen stack business and letting others develope it. Their stock is down about $1 since the announcement. Ballard is the biggest money sink in the hydrogen scene. They have burned thru millions possibly billions and all they have are a few fuel cell buses to show for it. Still no refueling infrastructure to power a nation let alone a city.

 

I think there is more to that story. Ballard had partnerships with Ford and DCX to develop automotive fuel cells. With the investment going nowhere fast, Ballard sold out the automotive segment to get some much needed cash to stay in business. It remains to be seen whether the rest of the company is able to remain afloat or is a takeover target.

 

Still, Ford, DCX, and GMC all seem to be heavily invested in fuel-cells and Honda actually has a small car for lease in the LA basin. The largest barrier may be distribution (after the initial runup in infrastructure and fuel creation). I am old enough to recall 'gas-crisis' I and II of 1967 and 1973; HAD WE ACTED THEN TO WEAN OURSELVES OF MID-EAST OIL, we would now be enjoying more energy for less! So, let us start acting now, even if initially the 'special-fuel' costs more. True, I will long be dead before it attains fruition, but at least it will have started!

Subject for a survey:

Many on PriusChat are willing to pay for other extras, such as stereos and navigation systems.

How many would willingly pay $5/gallon of corn-based ethanol if it was all 'home-grown'? (It is clean and not controlled by a foreign interest. Many vehicles are currently FFV anyway, what additional mods are necessary?)

 

Well, actually, hydrogen will be initially made by steam reformation of Natural Gas. Not the most optimum solution, but if that's what it takes to begin the conversion from gasoline to hydrogen, so be it. Non-fossil fuel will take over eventually, it has to.

However, as far as production of hydrogen goes, there is a variety of research being done. Everything from biological production to solar cells that directly use sunlight to convert water into hydrogen (without first producing electricity and then using electrolysis).

However, in my opinion, the best solution is to use wind energy in the open ocean. Wind energy is plentiful and free in the open ocean and you can't make practical use of it without an energy storage and transportation mechanism, which is exactly what hydrogen is.

A German company has refitted a coastal tanker with a windmill to experiment with wind powered hydrogen producing ships. Imaging fleets of these ships off the east and west coast of the US. They sail out 100 miles into the open ocean where the winds are strong and then sit around making hydrogen out of sea water. When the tanks are full, they sail back into port, drop off their load of hydrogen, and return back to sea.

With such a hydrogen producing industry, the production efficiency complaints that people have with hydrogen go out the window. It doesn't really matter how much wind energy is wasted producing the hydrogen because wind energy in the open ocean can't be used for anything else anyway.

Here is an article about the German company and their ship. Hydrogen-producing ship will use wind

And here's a picture of the ship:

 

WOW!! all this spin is making me dizzy. i concur that the CEO of a company would never say anything different when taking about his product. reasons?? thats easy. need the money to develop the product. cant get that when telling investors it will be 20 years instead of 3.

also, there is no secret about the technology so he was dead on with that. getting the hydrogen and shipping it to the masses is the problem and it will take MORE than 20 years to do it around here.

it takes FOREVER to get anything done around here and if a cent of public money is required, forget it, wont happen

 

Why would/should it call for public funds? I don't thinkt that Standard Oil got Uncle Sammy to directly foot the bill for refineries or service stations, did they?

Currently, it is hard more me to buy diesel fuel (if I wanted it). It is available where the market is, not by government edict.

 

guess you didnt hear about geo bush giving energy companies 14 billion today?

 

To build hydrogen refineries and service stations?

 

what difference does it make what he gave our money for??

what possible reason could he have to give money to an industry that made a collective profit of 150 billion last year??

 

Research?

As I recall, in years past, CONGRESS gave $40billion for hydrogen research.

And, CONGRESS is the entity that spends, the President only can bully-pulpit and then sign or veto.

In any case, the subject WAS hydrogen, wasn't it?

 

Hmmm, I bet you're against government funded medical research too. After all, doctors and drug companies are making huge profits and all that government money just ends up in their pockets anyway, right?

And what about all that money the government spent on hybrid research. Boy, what a waste. It all just ended up in the hands of corporations.

Incentives and other government funding allow the government to steer industry into desired directions. Assuming the government picks a good direction, everyone benifits from this.

It's kind of like a parent saying to a child: "Son, I know you can just coast through school and earn B's, but I'd like you to earn A's. I tell you what, if you get all A's this quarter, I'll buy you that bicycle you've always wanted."

 

http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid304.php

Suggest you look at Rocky Mountain Institute's discussion on Fuel Cells and Hydrogen. One problem is looking to centralized power plants. Distributed power generation (individual roof tops) are in the process of changing how we produce, store, use and transfer energy.

Electricity is an enormously important and versatile energy carrier. Unfortunately, traditional methods of producing it are messy and inefficient, and it can't be stored in large quantities.

Over the next few decades, hydrogen and fuel cells will change all that. Fuel cells—devices that produce electricity via chemical reactions rather than combustion—convert fuel into electricity two or three times more efficiently than power plants or internal combustion engines do, and produce far fewer toxic emissions or noise. They also permit the storage and distribution of energy in the form of a fuel, most commonly hydrogen. Moreover, this fuel can be renewably derived from water and clean energy, or (as a transitional step) from natural gas. The coming "hydrogen economy" will pair electricity with hydrogen to produce an energy system that is safer, cleaner, and even more versatile than the one we know today.

 

"Collective profit..."

Some thoughts here:

1. That portion of ' the industry ' that the USA has any say so over via taxes, restrictions, laws, etc is small compared to OPEC.

2. ' He' did not 'give' anything to anyone; Congress passed a bill that earmarks tax breaks and credits as well as research funds (along with a lot of non-energy related pork like the millions to California for highway beautification; I doubt 'Big-Oil, inc,' made much on that...)

3. Why do some people worry so much about profit? Did YOU make a profit last year? Was it in excess of some dollar amount? Did you ever receive an incentive or rebate? Did anyone else subsidize you in any endeavour? If you are guilty of any of the above, perhaps WE should scrutinize YOU!

 

Here's a unique idea that just made it in the news.

A solar tower uses concentrated sunlight to vaporize zinc oxide to produce oxygen and gaseous zinc. The gaseous zinc is then condensed into powered zinc, which is stable and easily transported.

The zinc powder can then be placed in water to produce hydrogen and zinc oxide. The zinc oxide is then returned to the solar tower and is converted back into powered zinc.

This process was developed by a Canadian company and a 300 kW prototype was built in Israel.

Current research is looking into using metal ores other than zinc oxide.

Canadian-Designed Solar Tower Helps Make 'Green' Hydrogen

 

So, can this be adapted to mobile use? I appreciate the application for stationary power, but the article is unclear on transport applications.

Can you enlighten?

 

I know nothing more than what the article says. Just read it today in fact.

However, I would think that this would be better suited for applications between large scale production facilities. For instance, you might have a solar tower in sunny New Mexico producing powdered zinc and then transport that zinc to a hydrogen production facility in cloudy Seattle where hydrogen and zinc oxide is produced from the zinc and sea water. You then ship the zinc oxide back to the solar tower in New Mexico to turn it back into Zinc powder.

To use it directly in a car would require filling the car up with water, and in most of the US, that would be fresh water. Since fresh water is a limited resource, and in some places very limited, it would be a poor use of it.

Also, I would think the zinc oxide produced by putting zinc powder into water would be a sludgy mess and too inconvienient for small scale collection from every car that pulls into a filling station.