I think there was a point in time when hydrogen looked like it might be a realistic option for personal cars. I think that time has now passed. Electricity is just so much more ubiquitous, which makes battery electric cars much much more attractive.
However, I think hydrogen makes a lot of sense for fleets of vehicles that need to go long distances between fixed depots where infrastructure can be built. I think hydrogen buses and trucks are a natural choice, because you can build fuelling stations at their depots, and then you don't have to lug a battery around. Whether that ends up being more cost effective than battery electric, I don't know.
Looking at hydrogen after considering a CNG car, it has all the problems of CNG, plus it's an even more exotic fuel that reacts with the container and it's an exotic chemistry project to turn the fuel into motive power. Yes, the vehicles exist, but it seems like a big waste of everyone's time and money.
Shared problems:
high pressure vehicle fuel tanks that expire 15-20 years after manufacture and are uneconomical to replace (if parts are even available)
high pressure fuel storage which will require a large energy cost to compress
High pressure on board fuel storage is hard to expand and heavy compared to liquid fuels.
CNG/LNG/Propane powered vehicles can work for high mileage fleets that work locally, they typically put on enough miles that the vehicles would be retired before the tanks expire anyway, and they can put fueling stations in their service and parking depots. And the vehicles tend to be heavy already, so a large metal tank is no big deal.
I had LPG installed on my car last year. For the fuel prices in my part of Europe, I calculated it would pay for itself in less than 10,000km.
LPG is lot simpler than CNG or Hydrogen as the fuel can be stored at room temperature in liquid form at relatively low pressures. The tank pressure is around 10 bar / 150 psi, which is not much more than your home water supply. CNG is around 200 bar and hydrogen around 500 bar.
Note though that there is a world of difference between a room temperature pressurized water system (which won't BLEVE if it ruptures) and propane (which will).
Exactly! I could also see hydrogen for things like freight trains and cargo ships which will be tough to electrify in America (so much track and rail companies hate spending on upgrades.)
Hydrogen seems not only more dangerous, but more complex to store and deal with than typical gas. Whereas every gas station and nearly every home already has an electric connection that will have to be maintained and upgraded forever, regardless of what happens to cars. Electricity as the prime energy source for cars and devices also allows any potential future fuel type or energy source to be used for generators. That’s not possible with hydrogen, and it’s a massive downside.
We have an opportunity to (in software terms) generalize our infrastructure and separate concerns. We can make energy generation separate from energy use. That’s going to be a lot more flexible for the long-run than committing to distributing more gas around.
No one is seriously pursuing hydrogen for large cargo ships. Storing enough compressed or liquified hydrogen to make an ocean crossing is just ridiculous. The current trend is toward ammonia fuel which, although it has some safety and environmental problems, is far more practical and cost effective.
>When the cost of drilling oil and converting to gasoline outweighs the cost of manufacturing hydrogen, the current oil giants will pivot.
It is actually cheaper and greener to burn fossil fuels to make electricity for EVs, and just capture the CO2 emissions released than to produce hydrogen.
Virtually 100% of H2 sold today is 'blue hydrogen,' meaning it is derived from steam methane reforming of natural gas, a process that actually generates more Greenhouse Gas than simply burning natural gas [1].
'Green Hydrogen' produced from the electrolysis of water is incredibly expensive (about 3-4x more than Blue). Both are mature technologies that are unlikely to get cheaper at larger scale.
Perhaps, but the playbook has always been lobbying and deception to prop up oil. Manufacturing hydrogen isn't enough; they'll have to build out the infrastructure (I have no idea how easily gas pumps/stations can be retrofitted)
However, I think hydrogen makes a lot of sense for fleets of vehicles that need to go long distances between fixed depots where infrastructure can be built. I think hydrogen buses and trucks are a natural choice, because you can build fuelling stations at their depots, and then you don't have to lug a battery around. Whether that ends up being more cost effective than battery electric, I don't know.