Attempt to impede progress of alternative to oil?: Department of Energy plans to eliminate critical hydrogen infrastructure research programs in favor of more research for storage technologies that will lead to their goal of a hydrogen car with a 300-mile driving range (even though Toyota already has a mid-size SUV powered by a hydrogen fuel cell that has a driving range of 480 miles!)

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and their potential to solve the oil crisis, please read the series of articles titled “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

Last week, oil prices reached record levels above $105 a barrel.  Gasoline prices are very close to record levels and are expected to be even higher this spring.  Two weeks ago, it was announced that wholesale prices were up 7.5 percent over the past year which is the biggest increase in 26 years.  This was due in large part to higher oil prices and production of ethanol leading to higher food prices.

To make matters worse, the Labor Department reported last Friday that 63,000 jobs were lost in February.  This has sparked fears that the U.S. is currently in a recession.

The combination of gasoline and ethanol that powers our cars is having a major negative impact on the economy.

At a time like this, you would think the U.S. federal government would be doing everything possible to solve this problem.  However, that is not the case.

Hydrogen fuel cell cars are rapidly approaching commercialization.  Companies such as Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, GM, etc. are aggressively pursuing this technology.  The following quotes from high-level executives from the top two global automakers illustrate this:

“The development of Toyota’s hydrogen fuel-cell powertrains continue to move forward and mature at an impressive pace, far in advance of an infrastructure that will be necessary to support them.”

Bob Carter, Toyota Division group vice president and general manager, January 2008

“I think the [hydrogen] car is real.  What we have to have next is infrastructure.”

Larry Burns, GM Vice President of R&D and Strategic Planning, February 2008

Basically, hydrogen cars are just about ready, but the transition to a hydrogen fueling infrastructure needs to begin soon.  Larry Burns from GM recently said that his company is currently looking for a large city (e.g. Los Angeles) where 50 to 80 hydrogen fueling stations can be installed.  This would be the next step up from the current demonstration programs.

Furthermore, during an announcement of a partnership with GM to use three Chevrolet Equinox hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for their complimentary airport shuttle service for their passengers at Los Angeles International Airport, Virgin Chairman Richard Branson spoke out last week about the need for governments to help build hydrogen fueling stations:

“We are calling upon governments world wide, not just the UK and the US, to assist our businesses by building hydrogen filling stations in key cities so that drivers can fill up their cars more easily.”

A key point to mention is that the hydrogen infrastructure does not just mean fueling stations.  It also involves producing the hydrogen from renewable sources and then using pipelines to transport the hydrogen close to fueling stations.  Hydrogen can be made economically from natural gas (Note: This is true for demonstration programs, but the price of natural gas would soon increase to levels that would not be economical if it were to be the source of the hydrogen to power even a small percentage of the cars on the road today), but it makes no sense to replace gasoline with another fossil fuel.

Hydrogen cars are almost here.  With the need to produce the hydrogen for these cars from renewable sources and then transport that hydrogen safely and economically through pipelines, one would think that Department of Energy funding levels in both of these areas of research would be greatly increased.  But what is actually happening?

The Department of Energy is planning on completely eliminating research funding for both hydrogen production from renewable sources and hydrogen pipelines.

This can be seen by looking on page 27 of the following link which provides details of the Fiscal Year 2009 Department of Energy hydrogen budget.  If you look at the budget chart, you can see that the FY 2009 Request for Hydrogen Production and Delivery R&D is zero (down from $39,636,000 in FY 2008).

It gets even better.  In the first paragraph on page 27, it says:

“Substantial increases are included for hydrogen storage R&D, to enable vehicles to have a greater than 300 mile driving range…”

Based on this, one would think that there were no hydrogen vehicles with a range of 300 miles.  But this is not the case.

Toyota has a mid-size SUV powered by a hydrogen fuel cell that has a driving range of 480 miles.  The vehicle is the newest version of the Toyota FCHV (Fuel Cell Hybrid Vehicle) which is basically a Highlander Hybrid with a hydrogen fuel cell that can hold six kilograms of hydrogen stored at 10,000 psi (pounds per square inch).  Here is a YouTube video that shows that Toyota FCHV.

Toyota is not getting 480 miles of range (actually, Toyota says in the following article that the FCHV will “achieve a single-fueling cruising distance of approximately 780 km” which equals 484.67 miles) by playing the game of using a really small car that does not weigh very much.  Out of all of the cars, light trucks, and SUVs on the road, the Toyota FCHV is likely as big as at least half of them.  And it weighs 1880 kg or 4136 pounds.

Furthermore, the Toyota FCHV recently went 436 miles from Las Vegas to San Diego on 5.6 kilograms which is slightly less than the six kilogram tank capacity.  This is a whopping 77.86 miles per kilogram.  The trip included going from 110 feet below sea level in Brawley, California to 3353 feet above sea level in Boulevard, California.  And at one point they encountered headwinds “with gusts up to 50 mph.”

These were definitely real-world driving conditions.

Furthermore, the Honda FCX Clarity is a hydrogen fuel cell car that can hold four kilograms of hydrogen stored at 5000 psi and has a travel range of 270 miles.  If the more efficient Toyota fuel cell at 80 miles per kilogram were used in the Honda FCX Clarity, the travel range would be 320 miles with hydrogen stored at 5000 psi which would also exceed the Department of Energy goal of a hydrogen car that can go 300 miles.

In the past, two concerns with hydrogen stored at 5000 and 10,000 psi were: 

1) The tanks taking up passenger or trunk space; and

2) Safety

Regarding having enough passenger and trunk space, James Healey from USA Today notes the following about the Honda FCX Clarity:

“Trunk appears big enough to hold three sets of golf clubs.”

Furthermore, I have gotten an up-close view of the newest version of the Toyota FCHV.  There is no passenger space and only about five inches of trunk space lost due to the hydrogen tanks.  And the FCHV was not built from the ground up specifically to be a hydrogen vehicle.

Regarding the safety issue, these hydrogen vehicles would not be on the road if they were not safe.  GM and Honda are putting members of the general public in these vehicles as part of their demonstration programs.  Last fall, Toyota brought along an editor from Road & Track magazine to be one of the drivers on a 2300-mile trip from Fairbanks, Alaska to Vancouver, British Columbia and on the 436-mile trip from Las Vegas to San Diego in the Toyota FCHV.

Furthermore, the following SearchChicago article from January 22, 2008 notes the following about GM’s effort to make their high-pressure hydrogen tanks safe:

“The idea is to make the tanks virtually indestructible.  During testing, the tanks have been shot and dropped out of airplanes among other things to ensure overall safety.”

Toyota notes the following on page 6 of the Toyota FCHV book:

“Crash testing of the TOYOTA FCHV was particularly rigorous, with the addition of new safety confirmation tests for high voltage components and for protection against hydrogen leakage.  If a collision occurs, sensors in the TOYOTA FCHV’s front, rear and sides detect impact and instantly shut the valves on the high-pressure hydrogen tanks.  For additional safety, the valves are also closed if leakage is detected by any of the hydrogen sensors placed at multiple locations within the vehicle, namely, on the Toyota FC (fuel cell) Stack, the upper end of the hood, the high-pressure hydrogen tanks and the cabin ceiling.  The high-pressure hydrogen tanks are designed for maximum safety to avoid rupture even if the vehicle suffers a rear-end collision.”

Steve Ellis, Honda manager of alternative fuel vehicles, had the following comment about the safety of hydrogen cars in a HybridCars interview in January 2007:

“People need to understand that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are safe.  We wouldn’t have handed the keys to the hydrogen car to an ordinary family if we didn’t think it was safe.”

And here is some information on Honda’s website about the safety features of the Honda FCX Clarity hydrogen fuel cell car which includes the following:

“The FCX Clarity passed all the same rigorous tests required by U.S. safety standards that other Honda models have endured.  So you can drive the FCX Clarity with confidence.”

Once all of the information presented above is taken into account, two things are very clear:

1.  The car companies are moving forward with hydrogen vehicles that have high-pressure hydrogen tanks, because they meet customer requirements.

2.  A hydrogen infrastructure to provide fuel for these vehicles is desperately needed.

Therefore, why is the Department of Energy attempting to completely eliminate critical hydrogen infrastructure research on hydrogen production from renewable sources and hydrogen pipelines?

If this is allowed to happen, two things are certain:

1.  Oil will extend its dominance in the U.S. transportation sector for several more years than it should have.

2.  The hydrogen to power the fuel cell vehicles that come to market first will have to come from natural gas and not from renewable sources.

I have one question to ask: Who does this benefit?

I will let you draw your own conclusions, but I am sure you know the answer is not the American people who are paying more and more for fuel and food these days (and who will be paying a lot more for both of them in the future).