Hydrogen Discoveries company blog

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

I recently wrote about the speech given by Larry Burns of GM at the 2008 National Hydrogen Association annual meeting.  In the speech, Larry Burns urged the government and energy companies to work together to build the initial hydrogen fueling stations that are desperately needed.  Here is a quote from the speech:

“We feel it is past time for the necessary infrastructure to accelerate.  What is urgently needed is sufficient investment by energy providers and the cooperation of government to assure auto companies that the required hydrogen infrastructure will be in place when we deploy our next generation of fuel cell electric vehicles.”

Apparently, his speech is making an impact.  Sebastian Blanco from AutoblogGreen noted in a post yesterday that although there is nothing to announce:

“Burns told me that in the six or so weeks since that speech, he’s heard a bit of discussion and seen some movement on this issue.”

This is a very good step in the right direction.

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

A couple of weeks ago Hydro Kevin from the outstanding Hydrogen Cars & Vehicles blog let me know about a blog entry that he had posted about the song “Hydrogen Highway” by Elmers Youngest.  I was pleasantly surprised to hear about this.

Kevin writes in the blog entry that:

“Hydrogen Highway is an engaging country rock song aimed at rallying people around the cause of energy independence and cleaner air.

Hydrogen Highway is the ninth track on the album, ‘Elmers Youngest: A Kid With a Cause,’ a CD featuring other important social topics such as homelessness, AIDS and drug addiction plus love of God and country.

According to Elmers, ‘Due to the oil crisis in our country and the need for alternative fueling, I felt that hydrogen was the way to go.  Maybe if people’s hearts are touched by this song, it might motivate many, to a new approach regarding our oil dependence.’”

Hydrogen Highway is a catchy tune that has indeed touched my heart.  I have listened to it many times and get inspired every time I do.  I know one day Elmers is going to play it in front of thousands and thousands of hydrogen advocates.

I highly recommend listening to this very inspirational song.  Kevin has included a link to the song in his blog entry which you can get to by clicking here.

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

Many years ago, I heard Oprah Winfrey say “You should believe people when they show you who they are the first time.”  Since companies are made up of people, this also applies to them.

The oil companies have shown us exactly who they are time and time again.  They are truly amazing when it comes to finding, distributing, and refining oil.  But they are absolutely terrible when it comes to developing alternatives to oil.

Furthermore, all of the talk about what oil companies should be doing has not changed them one bit.  And don’t believe the commercials you see on TV from some of them which makes it look like they are making a serious commitment to alternatives to oil.  Hydrogen will be the next transportation fuel and the oil companies are barely involved in the industry outside of the facade of putting up large exhibits at conventions.

For example, GM has been working with Shell in order to get the fueling stations built to provide hydrogen for the Chevy Equinox hydrogen fuel cell vehicles that are part of the Project Driveway demonstration program.  GM delivered the fuel cell vehicles, but Shell did not keep their promise to build the hydrogen fueling stations.  Therefore, GM had to pay for temporary hydrogen fueling stations, so the customers driving the Chevy Equinox hydrogen fuel cell vehicles would have a place to refuel.

Clearly, Shell and the oil companies have no interest in funding the replacement for oil.

The beauty of capitalism is that others can take advantage of the situation and become leaders within the hydrogen industry.  But who will step up and seize the opportunity?

When I think about this, the company that keeps popping up in my head is GE.

GE is one of the top companies in the world.  They hire people who are very talented and manage them extremely well.  Nearly every time I have come across a GE employee, I have been impressed.  GE employees are very professional and come across as winners.  The performance of the company validates this.

Furthermore, unlike the oil companies, GE does not have a psychological addiction to fossil fuels.  Hydrogen would fit very well into the company’s ecomagination program.  GE has already done really well in the area of clean energy with GE Wind which was bought from Enron back in 2002.  The company also has a very promising electrolyzer technology.  These two technologies will provide a good foundation for getting involved a lot more with hydrogen.

However, at this point, GE definitely does not “get it” when it comes to understanding that the revolution with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is on the verge of beginning (see Hydrogen Fact #1 - Hydrogen cars are just about ready to be commercialized, but the hydrogen fueling infrastructure needs to be built).

Once the people at GE learn the facts, I believe they will seize the opportunity and become a force within the hydrogen industry.  This will be done by acquiring companies and technologies in the area of hydrogen infrastructure.

The global market for hydrogen fueling stations and hydrogen pipelines will be in the trillions of dollars over the next 10-15 years during the transition from oil to hydrogen as the dominant transportation fuel.  GE loves large growth opportunities where they can be the leader and this certainly applies with hydrogen.  I believe the company will get involved in most aspects of hydrogen.  However, a couple of areas where GE might not get involved are in the ultra-competitive business of operating the fueling stations and delivering the hydrogen to fueling stations in trucks.

GE currently has no expertise in building hydrogen fueling stations or laying and operating hydrogen pipelines.  Therefore, they must obtain this expertise.  This could be done by acquiring the companies Air Products and Smart Pipe.

Air Products is one of the top hydrogen infrastructure companies and has a tremendous amount of experience in producing, storing, and delivering hydrogen.  They also have a lot of experience in building hydrogen fueling stations.  Air Products has many other business units and GE could sell these after the company is purchased (or GE could just buy the hydrogen division from Air Products if that would be easier).

Smart Pipe is a start-up company based in Houston, Texas that has a portable factory technology (see pictures of this fascinating technology in pages 6-20 in the following link) for restoring damaged pipelines.  The portable factory technology can be used for laying polymer hydrogen pipelines.

Furthermore, GE will need to hire people with expertise in operating long-distance pipelines.  And the best polymer hydrogen pipeline technology will need to be licensed.

Once this is done, GE would be involved in producing the hydrogen with their wind turbines and electrolyzers, laying and operating the hydrogen pipelines, and building the hydrogen fueling stations.

This is a multi-trillion dollar opportunity that is perfect for GE.  And that is why I predict it won’t be long before GE Wind will be joined by GE Hydrogen.

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

I was recently watching a discussion about oil prices on CNBC and I thought I heard well-respected energy analyst John Kilduff say that global demand for oil was 87 million barrels per day and global supply of oil was 85 million barrels per day.

I thought to myself, “That can’t be right.”

I knew that global supply of oil was 85 million barrels per day.  But I didn’t think that demand was already 2 million barrels above supply.  I thought supply and demand were almost exactly the same right now even though the demand for oil would soon exceed the supply.  If this were already the case, oil prices would have to go much higher.

It turns out that it was indeed true.

The following article from Forbes which was published on April 15th notes that:

“The oil cartel [OPEC] predicts global oil demand in 2008 will average 87 million barrels per day…”

The following Bloomberg article from April 17th notes that T. Boone Pickens says that there are:

“Only 85 million barrels of oil globally in the market coming a day and I don’t think you can increase that 85 million.”

The reason given by Pickens for the inability to increase global oil supply is “high depletion rates of existing wells.”

Therefore, oil is headed towards $150 per barrel.  Pickens said that:

“When you have 85 million to cover 87 million, the price has to go up.”

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

How much will it cost to build the entire U.S. hydrogen infrastructure?  This question gets asked a lot.  Is it $10 billion?  $100 billion?  Or could it be as high as $1 trillion as I used to think?  This post will try to answer this question.

The two parts that will make up the hydrogen infrastructure are the retail hydrogen fueling stations and the hydrogen pipelines.  The assumption is going to be that the hydrogen will come from clean sources of energy (e.g. wind power from the Great Plains region or solar power from the Mojave Desert), so the number of miles of hydrogen pipelines will reflect this.

Currently, there are around 170,000 gasoline fueling stations in the U.S.  Right now, hydrogen fueling stations cost about $2 million to build.  However, this will obviously go down a lot over time.  I’m going to assume that the hydrogen fueling stations will eventually cost $1 million to build.  Therefore, the average cost of all of the 170,000 hydrogen fueling stations will be $1.5 million.

This will equal a cost of $255 billion for all of the hydrogen fueling stations in the U.S.

Polymer hydrogen pipelines are estimated to cost $500,000 per mile.  Regarding the number of miles of hydrogen pipelines that will be needed, the closest comparison that can be made is with the current natural gas pipeline infrastructure.  Although there are about 2.2 million miles of natural gas pipelines, only 300,000 miles are long-distance transmission pipelines.

Trucks will be the most practical way to distribute hydrogen locally to fueling stations.  Therefore, I’m going to estimate that 300,000 miles of hydrogen pipelines will be needed.  This will equal a cost of $150 billion.

Therefore, the total cost of both the hydrogen fueling stations and the hydrogen pipelines will equal $405 billion.

Some people could obviously argue that the cost will be higher and others could argue that it will be lower.  However, this figure provides a really good general idea of what the total cost would be.

Although $405 billion is obviously a lot of money, it is about $100 billion less than has been spent so far on the Iraq War.

Furthermore, as discussed in Hydrogen Fact #7 and Hydrogen Fact #8, the entire hydrogen infrastructure could be built without any subsidies (although, for all practical purposes, the federal government will almost certainly need to get involved in building the initial hydrogen fueling stations).

Consumers would simply pay for the hydrogen infrastructure through their purchases of hydrogen fuel.  The loans on the hydrogen fueling stations and hydrogen pipelines would be paid back over 20 years by including the infrastructure cost as part of the cost of each kilogram of hydrogen sold.

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

The following article from CNNMoney.com that was published today opens by noting that:

“Toyota said the strong yen and weaker U.S. sales took a bite out of January-March earnings and projected worse was to come - a 27% plunge in its full-year profit.

It would be the first drop in full-year profit in seven years for the automaker.

The results and outlook released Thursday highlight how the tough North American auto market is hammering profits.”

Toyota is arguably the top car company in the world in terms of sales and quality.  They have had an incredible amount of success for many, many years.  However, high oil prices can even take a toll on the best car company in the world.  Today’s announcement of falling profits is an ominous sign of things to come.

The title of Hydrogen Fact #12 is “Many consumers will stop buying cars powered by gasoline as fuel prices continue to rise even further, so car companies will be very motivated to start selling hydrogen cars soon.”  The first paragraph states that:

“The days of powering our cars with gasoline in an internal combustion engine will be over much sooner than most people think.  High oil prices that will go much higher are taking away the economic viability of our current transportation model.  Hydrogen fuel cell cars are the only option for meeting all customer requirements.  Therefore, the transition away from oil to hydrogen will begin in the near future.”

Let me say that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in large numbers will not suddenly show up tomorrow, next month, or next year.  People will still continue to buy cars with gasoline-powered internal combustion engines.

However, we may look back years from now at Toyota’s announcement today of falling profits as the beginning of the end of the gasoline-powered internal combustion engine.  Toyota is the gold standard when it comes to making money in the auto industry.  When their profits begin to go down, you know that the entire industry is in a lot of trouble.

If oil prices were to go back down, this would only be a temporary problem.  However, oil prices are going to continue to rise.  Global demand is simply outpacing global supply.  As I wrote about on Tuesday, a Goldman Sachs analyst (who has an excellent track record of forecasting oil prices) predicts oil could hit $200 a barrel as soon as this year.

How many people are going to be lining up to buy a new car when gas prices are heading towards $5 or $6 per gallon?

Furthermore, Toyota has made tremendous progress with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.  The Toyota FCHV is a mid-size SUV (Highlander Hybrid) powered by a hydrogen fuel cell that gets 80 miles per kilogram of hydrogen and has a driving range of 480 miles.

Although Toyota will never admit it for fear of losing current new car sales to people who might instead wait for hydrogen fuel cell cars, I guarantee you that they are making plans to bring hydrogen fuel cell cars to showrooms.  My guess is that the earliest the first hydrogen fuel cell vehicles could be brought to market would be 2011.  Although this seems like it is right around the corner, a lot can happen in three years.  Just look at how much higher oil prices are now than back in 2005.

Therefore, Toyota would be wise to start being a lot more aggressive (like Larry Burns from GM) about calling on the government and energy companies to build the initial hydrogen fueling stations.

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

BusinessWeek is reporting that Goldman Sachs analyst Arjun Murti said in a client note released today that:

“We believe the current energy crisis may be coming to a head, as the lack of adequate supply growth is becoming apparent.”

The BusinessWeek article says that Murti “predicted that oil prices could reach $150 to $200 a barrel over the next 6 months to two years.”

Oil is poised to set another record today as it is currently trading at over $122 a barrel.

The speed at which oil prices have advanced is incredible.  It was just two months ago on March 2nd that I wrote a blog post about T. Boone Pickens predicting that oil could reach $150 a barrel in two years.  Oil was right around $100 a barrel at the time.

What is the reason behind the high oil prices that are going higher?  It is very simple.  Global demand is steadily increasing due to the rapid growth of China and India, but global supply is not able to keep up with it.

I don’t think oil companies are angels, but they are not the reason for the high oil prices.  It is simple supply and demand.

People are now beginning to realize that this problem is not going away.  It will only get much worse as oil prices head a lot higher.  As I wrote about in Hydrogen Fact #12, many consumers will stop buying cars powered by gasoline as fuel prices continue to rise even further, so car companies will be very motivated to start selling hydrogen cars soon.

The only solution to the oil crisis is hydrogen fuel cell vehicles where the hydrogen is produced from clean sources of energy such as wind and solar power.  It is time to start the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

Plug-in battery technology has numerous problems which include driving range, fueling time, cost, space they take up in a car, durability, safety, weight, cold weather performance, and a negative impact on the environment.

Regarding the cost issue with plug-in battery technology, here is an excerpt from a May 3rd AutoblogGreen post where GM CEO Rick Wagoner criticizes the cost of the Tesla Roadster and Fisker Karma:

“Speaking to the Commonwealth Club of California this week, GM CEO Rick Wagoner told the gathering that in order for electric cars to make a difference in global warming it will require large numbers of them to be deployed at prices that mainstream buyers can afford.  While a few hundred Tesla Roadsters or Fisker Karmas may make the owners feel better about themselves, in the U.S. vehicle fleet of 200 million vehicles they won’t make any real measurable difference in the grand scheme of things.  To make a significant impact on fuel consumption and emissions, millions of cars and trucks every year need to be more efficient.  However, that can only happen if those vehicles are affordable to average car buyers.

When Wagoner was asked why it’s taking as long as it is to bring the Volt to market he explained that it’s a lot harder to create a viable $20,000 electric car than one that costs $100,000.”

The Tesla Roadster contains a whopping 6831 lithium-ion batteries.  This is the same type of battery that is used in laptop computers.  And they are not inexpensive.  Therefore, it is easy to see why the car costs so much.

Moreover, the following excerpt from an August 2006 article about Tesla reveals a major cost issue:

“The central concept of Tesla Motors, founded in July 2003, is that there is no need to reinvent the battery, particularly for a product with a small initial market.  Eberhard simply adopted the lithium-ion technology used in laptops and harnessed the momentum of the computer industry.  Let Dell, HP, and the rest of the sprawling PC business, with their billions of R&D dollars, do the hard work of extending battery life and driving down prices.  He’d piggyback on their innovations.”

The problem is that lithium-ion batteries are already mass produced.  They were first commercialized back in 1991 by Sony.  Therefore, the cost benefits of mass production have already been realized.  They will obviously continue to go down in price in the future, but the point is that the potential for reducing the cost of lithium-ion batteries is far less than it was 10 or 15 years ago.  And if the batteries are far too expensive now, how will they ever be economical?

Furthermore, I think Rick Wagoner is wrong to say that plug-in battery technology will make a difference with global warming and emissions.  In the U.S., 50% of the electricity comes from coal and around 20% comes from natural gas.  Therefore, plug-in battery technology would result in far greater use of fossil fuels.

Plug-in battery technology is a half-measure just like ethanol.  The only complete solution to the oil crisis is hydrogen fuel cell vehicles where the hydrogen is produced from clean sources of energy such as wind and solar power.

The car companies are very aware of all of the problems with plug-in battery technology.  Honda is one of the top car companies in the world and they have completely rejected plug-in battery technology!

This is why Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, GM, Daimler, and others are aggressively pursuing hydrogen fuel cell cars.

(Note: To learn more about hydrogen fuel cell cars 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.)

Larry Burns, vice president of R&D and strategic planning for General Motors, has been very vocal about the need for energy companies and the government to get involved in building the hydrogen infrastructure.  Although I have written about this several times, the speech he recently gave on April 2nd at the National Hydrogen Association annual meeting in Sacramento, California, will give you a much better sense of the urgency and passion that he has when discussing the issue.

I would strongly recommend listening to this speech.  It is the closest thing you will find to a “State of the Union” address for the hydrogen industry.

An audio clip can be found at the following link (Note: It may take a minute or so for the web page to come up).  The speech lasts just over 24 minutes.

Here are three quotes from the speech that I found particularly intriguing:

“The potential societal and customer benefits of fuel cell electric vehicles are clear and compelling.  Fuel cell technology promises to deliver family-sized automobiles that are fun to drive, safe, look great, refuel fast, go far between fill-ups, and are emissions-free and petroleum-free.  And very importantly it holds the promise to do all of this while keeping automobiles affordable to own and operate.  Quite honestly, no other technology offers this exciting potential.”

“It’s great to have small numbers of these vehicles running around.  But be very, very clear, the mission is to heavily penetrate the 70 million cars and trucks that are built worldwide each year with this technology.”

“We feel it is past time for the necessary infrastructure to accelerate.  What is urgently needed is sufficient investment by energy providers and the cooperation of government to assure auto companies that the required hydrogen infrastructure will be in place when we deploy our next generation of fuel cell electric vehicles.”

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #11 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

Although nearly all of the hydrogen produced in the U.S. today comes from natural gas, the grand vision for a hydrogen economy is for the hydrogen to be produced from clean sources of energy such as wind or solar power.

In order for this to happen, hydrogen pipelines will be needed to transport the hydrogen from where it is produced (e.g. large wind farms in the Great Plains region or large solar facilities in the Mojave Desert) to storage facilities close to where the hydrogen will be purchased at fueling stations.

There are currently around 700 miles of hydrogen pipelines in the U.S.  They are located close to where the hydrogen is used which is typically in refineries or chemical plants.

Just like most of the existing natural gas pipelines, these hydrogen pipelines are made of carbon steel.  However, the problem with carbon steel hydrogen pipelines is that they are expensive and have leakage and embrittlement issues.

Dr. Tim Armstrong, research scientist at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, says that:

“Laying pipelines of different iron-based alloys costs $1 million per mile.  One significant cost is welding.  Every weld point changes the microstructure, making hydrogen leakage more likely.”

Due to the leakage and embrittlement problems, carbon steel hydrogen pipelines can only work at distributing hydrogen up to around 500 psi (pounds per square inch).

However, polymer hydrogen pipelines are much less expensive and far more effective at distributing hydrogen.

Dr. Armstrong notes that:

“Current polymer technology allows the manufacture of mile-long polymer pipelines for the oil industry, reducing the number of connections and potential leaks.  Using mobile factories we estimate the cost of laying pipeline would be cut 50%, to half a million dollars a mile.”

Furthermore, polymer hydrogen pipelines can distribute hydrogen at up to 1500 to 2000 psi, which means much more hydrogen can be sent through them.  Another advantage of polymer hydrogen pipelines is that they do not have embrittlement problems.

Smart Pipe is a company based in Houston, Texas that restores damaged pipelines.  The company uses a portable factory to allow for installation lengths up to ten miles.

This portable factory technology could be used for laying the polymer hydrogen pipelines.  Pictures of this fascinating technology can be found on pages 6-20 in the following link.

The future hydrogen pipeline national infrastructure will be much like the existing long-distance natural gas pipeline network.  Although there are about 2.2 million miles of natural gas pipelines, only 300,000 miles are long-distance transmission pipelines.  The distribution pipelines that bring the natural gas all the way to the consumer make up 1.9 million miles of the total 2.2 million miles.

The future hydrogen pipeline national infrastructure will likely be much closer to 300,000 miles of polymer hydrogen pipelines, because trucks are the most practical way to distribute the hydrogen locally to fueling stations.

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #1 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

When will hydrogen fuel cell cars be ready?  This question gets asked a lot.  The short answer is that hydrogen cars are just about ready to be commercialized, but the hydrogen fueling infrastructure needs to be built.

The following quote from Bob Carter, Toyota Division group vice president and general manager, in a recent press release about the Toyota FCHV (a mid-size SUV powered by a hydrogen fuel cell) sums up the situation with hydrogen cars:

“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.”

Here are just a few examples that show how far along hydrogen fuel cell cars are:

Last fall, Toyota released the newest version of the FCHV which is a mid-size SUV powered by a hydrogen fuel cell that gets 80 miles per kilogram of hydrogen and has a driving range of 480 miles.

GM has recently launched a program called Project Driveway where 100 hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are driven by members of the general public in Los Angeles, New York, and Washington, D.C.

GM announced in June 2007 that “it is moving more than 500 fuel cell engineers and experts from advanced development laboratories to engineering functions aimed at preparing the fuel cell for commercial sale.”

Honda will begin leasing the FCX Clarity hydrogen fuel cell vehicle to anywhere from a few dozen to 100 customers in Southern California beginning this summer.

Honda and GM have even produced hydrogen fuel cell commercials that have been playing on TV over the last five or six months.

Although the car companies have made tremendous progress with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, the hydrogen fueling infrastructure desperately needs to be built.

To illustrate how important this is, just look at all of the people that have called for hydrogen fueling stations to be built in the last couple of months:

Larry Burns, General Motors (April 2008):

“General Motors today called on the energy industry and governments to step up and help automakers make volume production of fuel cell-electric vehicles a reality by opening more hydrogen fueling stations.

“That message was delivered by Larry Burns, General Motors vice president, research & development and strategic planning.  Burns delivered a keynote address at the National Hydrogen Association’s annual conference in Sacramento, CA.

“‘The automobile industry has reached a critical juncture in our journey to realize the full potential of hydrogen fuel cell-electric vehicles,’ said Burns.  ‘While we have made impressive progress, we have now reached a point where the energy industry and governments must pick up their pace so we can continue to advance in a timely manner’…

“Burns said addressing the infrastructure challenge is essential because the potential benefits of hydrogen fuel cell technology are clear and compelling.  ‘This technology promises to deliver family-sized vehicles that are fun to drive, safe, look great, refuel fast, go far between fill-ups, and are emissions-free and petroleum-free.  It also holds promise to do all of this while keeping automobiles affordable to own and operate.  And just like electricity, it can be made from a broad range of renewable and sustainable energy pathways.  No other technology offers this exciting potential,’ he said…

“‘Clearly, the automotive industry has stepped forward with fuel cell-electric vehicles, and we are doing everything possible to aggressively develop this critically important technology,’ Burns said.  ‘However, we have reached a stage where we cannot continue to make significant progress on our own.  Our customers must have safe and convenient access to affordable hydrogen.  This means the energy industry and governments must join the auto industry in our journey to produce and sell fuel cell-electric vehicles in volume numbers.’”

Currently on the Honda website:

“Honda has brought the fuel cell vehicle from the lab to the fleet and finally to the public.  The major barrier now is building up the hydrogen supply infrastructure.”

Katsuhiko Hirose, Toyota (April 2008):

“Citing ‘Who Killed the Electric Car?,’ a documentary film that explores reasons why electric vehicles never became popular, Hirose explained five miracles needed to diffuse fuel cell cars.

Specifically, the five miracles needed for diffusion of fuel cell cars are (1) cost reduction, (2) comfortable interior space, (3) reasonable fuel prices, (4) efficient diffusion of hydrogen stations and (5) no evolution of rival technologies.  He caused a stir in the audience, stating the industry can overcome all these challenges except for the efficient diffusion of hydrogen stations.

Automobile manufacturers can solve problems by working hard if only the challenges are related to fuel cell cars, whereas the diffusion of hydrogen stations cannot be realized only by automobile manufacturers, he stressed.  To make the miracle come true, he called for cooperation of energy companies and the government toward the diffusion of hydrogen stations.

He also said that it is important to establish more infrastructure before commercializing fuel cell cars and that increasing fuel cell cars as quickly as possible will lower costs for cars and infrastructure maintenance while meeting consumer benefits.”

Richard Branson, Virgin (March 2008):

During an announcement last month 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 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.”

Jeff Dorchen, The Huffington Post (January 2008):

“Lazy, that’s what it is.  Bush and what’s left of his advisory posse of the ideologically deformed just don’t feel like bothering to think of anything effective to do.  Did they consider, Hey, let’s spark some industry development, encourage investment in something American ingenuity and work ethic and entrepreneurship can really sink their teeth into.  Like maybe get in on the ground floor of this whole hydrogen economy thing.  Whoever positions themselves to profit from that will be riding the crest as the economic powerhouse of the future.  Think of all the money that would change hands as researchers came up with better ways of generating and storing hydrogen, think of all of the contractors and laborers and tradesman and engineers busy as beavers converting gas stations to hydrogen stations, and the auto industry and the advertising — good lord, a few billion judiciously channeled and matching-funded and dangled like carrots in front of the right noses, and the economy would be blazing on all cylinders — to use a one-day-to-be-outmoded mechanical metaphor.  How about we redirect our resources and young men and women out of destroying the Middle East and channel them toward poising the U.S. economy to be the dominant force behind the hydrogen revolution that will end petroleum’s reign of terror forever?”

Paul Brubaker, Department of Transportation (March 2008):

“The reality is, we cannot wait.  We have to figure out what to do to reach critical mass and create the infrastructure to get these cars on the road sooner than later.”

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #5 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

When the cost of hydrogen fuel cell cars is discussed, a lot of people will say “They cost $1 million.”  This happens to be true.  Prototypes that are made by hand do indeed cost around $1 million.  But what really matters is what hydrogen fuel cell cars will cost when they are mass produced.

In the following excerpts from a Korea Herald article from November 2006, Larry Burns from GM addresses this issue:

“Hydrogen fuel cell cars will cost the same as their gasoline counterparts once they reach a production volume of 1 million units, General Motors Corp.’s head of research said yesterday.

‘This would be just a ninth of the vehicles GM produces each year and one sixty-sixth of the total autos built worldwide,’ Larry Burns, General Motors Corp. vice president of R&D and strategic planning, told reporters attending the carmaker’s Tech Tour 2006 in the Chinese city (Shanghai).  ‘Lack of scale is the primary reason for the high costs of fuel cell vehicles,’ he said.

GM aims to design and validate a fuel cell system that is competitive in terms of performance, durability and cost at volume of $50 per kilowatt (of power generated) by 2010…

(Note: Internal combustion engines cost about $30 per kilowatt.)

GM is striving to minimize the requirement of the costly platinum used in its hydrogen fuel cell vehicle to cut production costs for commercialization.

‘The key is to spread platinum on the fuel cell membrane as evenly as possible via a catalyst-thrift technology to meet cost and durability targets,’ Burns said.  ‘We are also investing in other materials that can replace platinum.’”

Here is another example that shows the cost of fuel cells if they were mass produced.

Ballard, a pioneering fuel cell company which was recently bought by Daimler and Ford, created a “Road Map” that tracked the company’s progress in developing a commercially viable automotive fuel cell stack by 2010.  At the end of 2005, Ballard achieved a cost of $73 per kilowatt (based on a production volume of 500,000 units per year).

The very reputable TIAX LLC conducted an external audit to confirm that the 2005 cost estimate was valid.

When the cost of fuel cells is discussed, the issue of the amount of platinum needed for them is often brought up.  Since platinum is expensive, the amount used must be minimized in order for fuel cells to be economical.

Car companies are not about to publicize their research and development secrets, so it is not easy to find information about this.  But the excerpt below from a Resource Investor article covers this issue quite well.

Please note that this article was published in July 2005.  Since car companies are aggressively moving forward with hydrogen fuel cell cars today, it would be safe to assume that the amount of platinum used in fuel cells is not going to be a problem.  The car companies will either use a lot less platinum or they have found a viable alternative to platinum.

Here is the excerpt:

“Today’s experimental hydrogen fuel cells use so much platinum that there is not enough of the precious metal to replace all of the world’s petrol engines.

As Kazuo Okamoto, the new head of research and development at Toyota, Japan’s biggest car maker, says: ‘With the current type of technology, we know already that (platinum supplies) will not be sufficient’…

‘There is no other alternative to hydrogen,’ Okamoto says.  ‘So one day (precious metals) will be a big problem.  That will be the barrier to hydrogen.’

The possibility of a platinum shortage is already a critical issue for manufacturers spending vast sums on hydrogen research.  More pressingly, it is also a major cost issue as 60g of platinum adds almost $2000 to the cost of a fuel cell.  The only way to make the new technology competitive is to cut precious metal use.

Dan O’Connell, a GM fuel cell engineer, says he is confident that the company can cut platinum usage by two to three times.

But others are less concerned about platinum supplies.  A study by consultants TIAX, for the U.S. Energy Department, has claimed platinum will not run out.  It believes platinum use will drop 75% to 15g a fuel cell once hydrogen cars become viable.

Katsuhiko Hirose, head of Toyota’s fuel cell project, points to the developments made in catalytic converters, which use platinum to clean up car exhaust fumes.  He says when California adopted laws requiring catalytic converters, manufacturers sounded similar warnings as the devices needed more than 100g of platinum each.  Thirty years on, platinum use has fallen 99%.

Car makers the world over are searching for alternatives, although palladium, a cheaper metal used in exhaust catalysts, does not work.

David Hart, head of fuel cell and hydrogen research at Imperial College, London, recognizes the problems.  But, he says, ‘There is a possibility of enzymatic catalysts which wouldn’t need platinum at all.’”

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #12 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

The days of powering our cars with gasoline in an internal combustion engine will be over much sooner than most people think.  High oil prices that will go much higher are taking away the economic viability of our current transportation business model.  Hydrogen fuel cell cars are the only option for meeting all customer requirements.  Therefore, the transition away from oil to hydrogen will begin in the near future.

High oil prices have a startling negative impact on the economy.  The cost of fueling your car is just the beginning.  Practically every single product that is sold in a Wal-Mart Supercenter from food to televisions to tires had to be shipped to the store in a truck with higher fuel costs.  This raises the price of each item shipped.  The cost to fly or ship a package is more expensive.  It costs more to mow your lawn.  Higher oil prices hit consumers from all different angles.

The result is that people simply have less money to spend.  And the problem is going to get much worse as oil prices go even higher.  The reason that oil prices have increased and will increase much more is very simple.  Oil production is peaking, but global demand has continued to steadily increase.  This means that prices can only go up.

Now let’s consider how consumers will act in this environment.  How will this situation influence sales of new cars?  Here are four factors that will impact how many consumers will purchase new cars:

1)  The average American has less disposable income now due to high oil prices.  And they will have less in the future as oil prices continue to rise.  This means fewer and fewer Americans can afford to buy a new car.

2)  More people are realizing that the price of oil will only go higher in the future.  The reason is that oil production is peaking, but global demand continues to steadily increase due to the rapid growth of countries such as China and India.

3)  Hydrogen cars are just about ready.

4)  The cost of hydrogen produced today from wind power (without any subsidies) would be less than the equivalent of gasoline at $3 per gallon and the cost will be even lower in the future.  (For the complete analysis, please go to Hydrogen Fact #7.)

Under this scenario, what motivation is there for consumers to buy new cars that are powered by gasoline?

Fewer people today can afford to buy a new car.  Even fewer will be able to afford one in the future as oil prices continue to rise.

However, even the people who can afford to purchase a new car will soon realize that buying a new car that is powered by gasoline is a terrible investment.  When you purchase a new car right now, you are making a very expensive 10-12 year commitment to oil.

Some might counter this by saying, “I am not very concerned about this, because I will just sell the car once hydrogen cars become available.”  The problem is that cars powered by gasoline will have almost no resale value when gasoline is $7-8 per gallon.  People will be stuck with cars that they can’t afford to drive and won’t be able to sell.  This will be an even more difficult situation if you are still making payments on the car.  At some point, banks will likely stop making loans on cars that are powered by gasoline, because the collateral will be almost worthless.

As you would expect given high oil prices and the state of the economy, new car sales have been on the decline lately.  Total vehicle sales in the U.S. are down 12% from this time last year.  This decline will obviously continue as oil prices rise even further.

However, new car sales will sharply fall as more and more people realize that oil prices are going to stay really high and hydrogen cars are just about ready.

Consumers will have a choice between:

1)  Buying a new car and making a 10-12 year commitment to oil; or

2)  Keeping the car they have right now or buying a used car to get them by for a couple of years until hydrogen cars are available and hydrogen fueling stations are in place where they live.

Most consumers will undoubtedly choose the second option.  The cars that will be most in demand will be inexpensive used cars over five years old that will last at least a couple of years and get really good gas mileage.

The sharp decline in new car sales will leave the car companies scrambling to bring the hydrogen cars to market as soon as possible.  They will also be much more vocal in demanding that the government help to get hydrogen fueling stations built as soon as possible.

Up until now, Larry Burns from GM has been the most vocal about the need to get hydrogen fueling stations built.  Other car companies with very advanced fuel cell programs have not been vocal at all about the need for hydrogen fueling stations.  The reason is the dirty little secret that car companies desperately don’t want you to know about.

Here is the problem: If car companies are vocal about the need for hydrogen fueling stations, it means that the hydrogen cars are just about ready.  And if the hydrogen cars are just about ready, then people will stop buying cars powered by gasoline.  This is a huge problem for car companies.  How do they get the hydrogen fueling stations built without dramatically decreasing the number of cars that they currently sell (and which finance their research and development programs)?

However, this problem is basically taking care of itself as new car sales decline.

When car companies are making money by selling cars that are powered by gasoline, there is no economic incentive to promote hydrogen cars.  However, high oil prices are causing new car sales to decline.  As this trend continues, you will see many more executives from other car companies join Larry Burns from GM in the effort to get hydrogen fueling stations built.

We are entering into an unprecedented period of change within the transportation sector.  The car companies with the most innovative hydrogen research and development programs who bring the best hydrogen cars to market will be extremely successful.  The others will be in serious trouble.

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #10 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

The ability to store enough hydrogen on-board to achieve the 300-mile driving range that customers demand has been an issue with hydrogen cars in the past.  However, although few people are currently aware of this (even in the hydrogen community), the hydrogen storage problem is no longer an issue.

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).

Toyota is 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) without 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.

In the past, two concerns with high-pressure hydrogen tanks were:

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

2)  Safety

Regarding having enough passenger and trunk space, I have gotten an up-close view of the newest version of the Toyota FCHV.  There is no passenger space lost 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.

The safety issue is covered in Hydrogen Fact #3.

Furthermore, Toyota engineers took an editor from Road & Track magazine along on a trip last September in the Toyota FCHV over seven days and 2319 miles from Fairbanks, Alaska to Vancouver, British Columbia.

The best news was no news: nothing went wrong.

The official Toyota press release for the trip noted that:

“Whether sharing the road with an unimpressed group of buffalo or sailing along a vast open stretch of tundra at 90 miles an hour, the Highlander FCHV performed without a glitch for seven days and 2300 miles.

Bob Carter, Toyota Division group vice president and general manager, said in the release that:

“Beyond the single-tank range capability, this new system was developed to deal with two major challenges to the refinement of fuel-cell powertrains.  That is, starting and operating in cold temperatures and standing up to the vibration and harshness of rough road conditions…over a long distance…over a long time.”

“Equally important was to show how 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.”

Here is a YouTube video of the trip with the Toyota FCHV:

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #9 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

The most vocal hydrogen critics are strong advocates of plug-in battery technology.  When hydrogen is brought up (especially in online discussions), they are there to criticize the technology as much as possible.  Apparently, this has been happening for a long time.

Here is an excerpt from a November 2006 AutoblogGreen post where Steve Ellis, Manager of Fuel Cell Marketing for Honda, addresses this issue:

“He says there is a group of ‘EV Zealots’ who are constantly criticizing all hydrogen related work based on flawed arguments and without examining all of the costs of a plug-in system.”

The typical argument plug-in battery advocates try to make is that batteries are much more efficient than hydrogen fuel cells at using electricity in cars.  Batteries are charged up with electricity.  On the other hand, electricity is used to produce hydrogen via electrolysis and then fuel cells convert the hydrogen back into electricity.

Plug-in battery advocates argue that it is an inefficient use of energy to use electricity to produce hydrogen and then convert that hydrogen back into electricity (where there will be conversion losses in both cases) when you could just charge up a battery with electricity in the first place.

As you might imagine, there is much more to the story.

The argument above makes the assumption that plug-in cars can meet customer requirements for driving range and fueling time.  Can plug-in cars provide a 300-mile driving range and a fueling time of a few minutes?  Absolutely not (see below).  Plug-in cars by themselves (i.e. without the car also being powered by gasoline, ethanol, or hydrogen) can only offer a very limited driving range along with a fueling time of HOURS.

Furthermore, let’s apply the efficiency argument described above to a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. that came from oil in Saudi Arabia.  Would gasoline pass the “efficiency” test?

In order to get oil out of the ground, drilling must be done in Saudi Arabia.  Once the oil has been brought to the surface, it must be transported from the oil field to an oil tanker.  The tanker travels halfway around the world to the U.S.  At that point, the oil is refined into gasoline.  Pipelines then take the gasoline to local distribution centers.  From there, gasoline tanker trucks distribute the gasoline to retail fueling stations.  And then the gasoline is used in a car with an internal combustion engine that is half as efficient as a hydrogen fuel cell.

With all of the energy that is used in the process of getting a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. from oil in Saudi Arabia, the efficiency argument described above could be used to show that this is not viable.  And yet, we still use gasoline in our cars today that comes from oil in Saudi Arabia.

Here are nine problems with plug-in batteries in cars:

1.  Driving range - Customers expect their cars to have a 300-mile driving range.  In order to achieve this, plug-in battery technology must be used in a car that is also powered by gasoline or ethanol in an internal combustion engine or hydrogen in a fuel cell.  Here is some information from Toyota that will give you an idea of the range of plug-in battery technology when it is used in a Prius with an internal combustion engine.

Right now, Toyota has a Prius with plug-in technology, but it will only go seven miles on the nickel-metal hydride batteries that are currently used.  However, lithium-ion batteries will be used in the future to extend the range from seven miles to between 10-20 miles.

This quote comes from the following article from PowerPulse.net which is titled “Honda & Toyota Express Doubts Regarding GM’s Plug-in Hybrid Campaign”:

“The company [Toyota] thinks that it is more realistic to expect plug-in hybrids to run in electric-only mode for between 10 and 20 miles, rather than the GM 40-mile target.”

Furthermore, here is an excerpt from a February 15th Chicago Tribune blog post that includes a quote from Jaycie Chitwood of Toyota that was given at the recent Chicago Auto Show:

“Toyota plans to have a test fleet of plug-ins by 2010 using lithium-ion batteries that are more expensive than nickel-metal-hydrides and carry more safety and reliability risks.

‘We know it needs to be more than seven miles, but it won’t be 40,’ Jaycie Chitwood, senior planner for advanced technologies, said of Toyota’s target range.”

And here is another quote from Jaycie Chitwood of Toyota during an AutoblogGreen interview on February 17th:

“If you are talking about [a] battery sufficient to give you a range of 40 miles that is probably better to do as a dedicated EV that is a small city commuter car.  If you are talking about [a] plug-in hybrid we think that there is a difference in the application [than] one [that] is all electric.  Again, maybe more suited for a particular urban environment.  If you are talking about a car that needs to both handle short distance electric driving and high speed conditions, then a plug-in with smaller batteries with some level of EV range that is not 40, maybe it is in the 10 to 20 range, that is more viable for that application.”

Furthermore, even if plug-in batteries could provide a 20 to 40 mile range, most of the miles would still be travelled on the primary fuel (gasoline, ethanol, hydrogen, etc.).  The following article from Nikkei Business Publications says that:

“According to Toyota, if PHEVs that can drive 20 to 40 miles (32 to 64 km) per charge as electric vehicles replaced all current automobiles in the US, it would only reduce energy consumption by 20 to 30%, given the driving patterns in the US.  In other words, Toyota indicated its view that the maximum contribution that PHEVs can make in an effort to break dependence on fossil fuels or to halve CO2 emissions is a 20 to 30% reduction in energy.”

2.  Fueling time - Plug-in batteries in cars take several hours to recharge.  Can you imagine having a pure plug-in car without another fuel on-board and having to wait HOURS to refuel?  How long would it take to complete the 500-mile road trip to visit grandma or to go to the beach?

3.  Cost - Plug-in batteries cost extra on top of what is paid for a car with an internal combustion engine or a fuel cell.  Plug-in advocates like to say that the fuel cost is equivalent to $0.75 or $1.00 per gallon of gasoline (untaxed).  The problem is that this does not include the extra cost of many, many thousands of dollars for the plug-in battery system.

In regard to the cost of plug-in battery systems, Jaycie Chitwood of Toyota recently said at the Chicago Auto show that:

“What people don’t realize is that those batteries don’t come free”

Furthermore, the following post from AutoblogGreen notes that:

“Speaking to the Commonwealth Club of California this week, GM CEO Rick Wagoner told the gathering that in order for electric cars to make a difference in global warming it will require large numbers of them to be deployed at prices that mainstream buyers can afford.  While a few hundred Tesla Roadsters or Fisker Karmas may make the owners feel better about themselves, in the U.S. vehicle fleet of 200 million vehicles they won’t make any real measurable difference in the grand scheme of things.  To make a significant impact on fuel consumption and emissions, millions of cars and trucks every year need to be more efficient.  However, that can only happen if those vehicles are affordable to average car buyers.

When Wagoner was asked why it’s taking as long as it is to bring the Volt to market he explained that it’s a lot harder to create a viable $20,000 electric car than one that costs $100,000.”

4.  Space they take up in a car - Here is a quote from the same PowerPulse.net article above regarding this issue:

“Toyota Motor Corp. also expressed skepticism regarding the GM plug-in hybrid plan.  Among the concerns given by company executives were…the practical feasibility of the concept of a car that can run on battery power for up to 40 miles (according to Toyota, a battery that powerful would take up the entire area of a vehicle’s trunk)”

Furthermore, since hydrogen tanks also take up a lot of space, plug-in battery technology will have even less potential with hydrogen cars.

5.  Durability - The batteries will need to last 150,000 miles.

6.  Safety - Any batteries used in cars must be safe.  The more energy that is stored on-board in batteries, the more of a concern this becomes.

7.  Weight - Batteries are quite heavy and will result in lower mileage for the primary fuel.

8.  Cold weather performance - Batteries must not have greatly reduced performance in cold weather.  The more space that is taken up with batteries, the more difficult this problem will be.

9.  Environment - In the U.S., 50% of the electricity comes from coal and around 20% comes from natural gas.  Therefore, plug-in cars would still be responsible for releasing an extremely large amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and could even increase air pollution in some areas.

Here is a comment from Toyota on this issue from a recent USA Today article about the plug-in version of the Prius:

“Averaged across the USA, ‘There’s very little (emissions) benefit’ compared with a current Prius hybrid, says Jaycie Chitwood, senior planner at Toyota’s advanced technologies unit in the USA.”

This list of problems shows the limited potential of plug-in battery technology.

Plug-in battery advocates will often try to say that “major advancements” will be made with batteries.  But are you going to believe them?

Or are you going to believe Toyota who has sold the Prius (which is partly powered by batteries) for over ten years and, according to the following Bloomberg article, has “as many as 300 in-house engineers studying the chemistry of lithium batteries”?  (Note: The article also mentions that “GM has no in-house researchers for lithium chemistry, relying instead on suppliers, according to Joseph LoGrasso, GM’s engineering group manager for plug-ins.”)

Lots of venture capitalists, bloggers, global warming “experts”, and alternative energy “advocates” have all foolishly bought into the false promise of plug-in battery technology while ignoring the only solution to the energy crisis caused by our addiction to oil and ethanol which is hydrogen from clean sources of energy.  Much like the car companies that ignored the regenerative braking hybrid technology in the Toyota Prius and the advocates of biofuels over the past couple of years, history will judge them very harshly.

However, the car companies are very aware of all of the problems with plug-in battery technology.  As the excerpt from the following article shows, Honda knows the problems so well that they have completely rejected plug-in battery technology:

“Takeo Fukui, CEO of Honda Motor Co., recently told reporters that his company would not be pursuing the plug-in hybrid gasoline-electric vehicle market…”

And that is why Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, GM, BMW, Daimler, and others are aggressively pursuing hydrogen cars.

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #8 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

Hydrogen Fact #7 provides a detailed analysis which shows that hydrogen produced today from wind power (without any subsidies) would cost less than the equivalent of gasoline at $3 per gallon.  Furthermore, the cost will be much lower 10-15 years from now as fuel cells become even more efficient and the cost of clean sources of energy, electrolyzers, compressors, and fueling stations all go down.

One critical point to emphasize is that the hydrogen from wind power cost analysis includes paying for the entire cost of the hydrogen infrastructure without any subsidies.

The cost to build the entire hydrogen infrastructure (pipelines, fueling stations, etc.) will likely be hundreds of billions of dollars.  Many people have asked: how are we going to pay for this?

The answer is by including the loan payments that pay for the cost to build the hydrogen pipelines and fueling stations in the cost of each kilogram of hydrogen that is sold.  This is much like how most people make monthly mortgage payments over 15 or 30 years to pay for their houses.

However, as mentioned in the Hydrogen Manhattan Project, the U.S. federal government will need to provide the funding to build the initial hydrogen fueling stations.  In order to mass produce the hydrogen cars, the car companies must know for sure that a certain number of hydrogen fueling stations will be in place.  The free market could then take over from this point, because companies could profit from building and operating the hydrogen pipelines and fueling stations even without any subsidies.

(Note: This is Hydrogen Fact #7 from “Twelve Hydrogen Facts” which is part of the Hydrogen Manhattan Project.)

The following analysis will show that hydrogen could be produced today from wind power (without any subsidies) at a cost less than the equivalent of gasoline at $3 per gallon.  Wind energy has a lot of potential in the U.S. and around the world.

Here is a breakdown of the cost of a kilogram of hydrogen from wind power:

Producing a kilogram of hydrogen by electrolysis with wind power

A kilogram of hydrogen can be produced by electrolysis with 50 kilowatt hours of electricity.  GE Wind says on their website that the cost of wind energy is “approximately 3.5 to 4 cents per kilowatt hour and declining.”

However, this figure includes the Production Tax Credit (PTC) of 1.9 cents per kilowatt hour.  Therefore, the unsubsidized cost of wind power would be 5.4 to 5.9 cents per kilowatt hour.

The wind farms to make hydrogen will be extremely large which will lower the cost significantly.  Therefore, the unsubsidized cost of wind energy used for this analysis will be 5.25 cents per kilowatt hour.  When multiplied by 50 kilowatt hours, this will equal $2.63.

Electrolyzers and hydrogen production facilities

The cost listed above for producing a kilogram of hydrogen by electrolysis with wind power only covers the cost of the electricity.  The cost of the electrolyzers and the facilities where the hydrogen will be produced also needs to be taken into account.

GE and ITM Power (UK) are two leading companies with low-cost electrolyzer technology.  An electrolyzer (at a cost of $400/kW) that produces 1000 kilograms per day and lasts for ten years is estimated to cost $1,220,000.  The payment on a ten-year loan at a 7% interest rate on this amount would equal $14,165 per month or $169,980 over an entire year.

The electrolyzers could produce 365,000 kilograms if they were to run at full capacity over an entire year.  However, it will be assumed that they will operate at an average of 75% of the hours at the large wind facilities.  Therefore, the electrolyzers will produce 273,750 kilograms per year.  This will equal a cost of $0.62 per kilogram of hydrogen.

Regarding the cost of the hydrogen production facilities, the closest comparison that can be made is with oil refineries.  Currently, refinery margins are pretty low with gasoline.  In February 2008, refineries received $0.24 per gallon of gasoline.  However, they received $0.33 per gallon in 2004 and $0.43 in 2005.

Since the cost of the electrolyzers and the electricity needed to produce the hydrogen have already been taken into account, this figure should be much lower than what the refineries are receiving per gallon of gasoline.  Therefore, the cost of the hydrogen production facilities is estimated to be $0.18 per kilogram.

The total for both the electrolyzers and the hydrogen production facilities is $0.80 per kilogram.

Pipelines and storage

The cost to transport gasoline through pipelines and for storage is 4 cents per gallon.  However, the hydrogen pipelines and storage facilities have yet to be built, so the amount must be high enough to pay back loans for them.  Therefore, the cost will be $0.28 per kilogram of hydrogen.

Compression

At the storage facilities, the hydrogen will need to be compressed to higher pressures.  The cost must include both the compressors and the energy required for compression.

The cost for a 1500 kilogram per day compressor that will last ten years is $600,000.  For a ten-year loan at a 7% interest rate, the payment will be $6967 per month or $83,604 over an entire year.  With 547,500 kilograms of hydrogen compressed per year, the cost per kilogram for the compressors is $0.15.

In order to compress hydrogen to 10,000 pounds per square inch (psi), between 10-13% of the energy in a kilogram of hydrogen (which is 39 kilowatt hours of electricity) is required.  A figure of 12% will be used which will equal approximately 5 kilowatt hours.

The average cost of electricity for industrial facilities was 6.16 cents per kilowatt hour in 2006.  Therefore, a figure of 7 cents per kilowatt hour will be used.  This will equal a compression cost of $0.35 per kilogram of hydrogen.

The total cost for both the compressors and the energy required to compress the hydrogen is $0.50 per kilogram.

Trucking

The trucking cost for gasoline is 3 cents per gallon.  This amount must be greatly increased for hydrogen, because the trucks will need to take many more trips to fueling stations.  The reason is that trucks of the same size will hold far fewer kilograms of hydrogen than gallons of gasoline.  Therefore, this amount will be $0.30 per kilogram of hydrogen.

Retail fueling stations

The cost to operate retail fueling stations was $0.17 per gallon of gasoline in 2005.  However, the cost to build the hydrogen fueling stations must be added to this figure.

Although this amount will be much lower in the future, hydrogen fueling stations currently cost about $2 million each to build.  A loan for this amount over 20 years with an interest rate of 7% will have a monthly payment of $15,506.

If each hydrogen fueling station sells an average of 1500 kilograms per day (388.6 million gallons of gasoline are currently sold in the U.S. each day at 170,000 fueling stations which equals an average of 2286 gallons sold per fueling station), the total loan payments would be $186,072 over one year.  This cost must be spread over the 547,500 kilograms of hydrogen sold during the entire year.  This equals $0.34 per kilogram.

Therefore, the cost for the retail hydrogen fueling stations will be $0.51 per kilogram of hydrogen.

Taxes

The average total of federal, state, and other gasoline taxes in January 2008 was $0.47 per gallon.  Since a kilogram of hydrogen in a fuel cell will get twice the mileage of a gallon of gasoline in an internal combustion engine, the taxes must be doubled to $0.94.

Total cost

The total cost of hydrogen produced from wind power (without any subsidies) would be $5.96 per kilogram.

Since a kilogram of hydrogen in a fuel cell will get twice the mileage of a gallon of gasoline in an internal combustion engine, this is equivalent to gasoline at $2.98 per gallon.

A key point to mention is that this cost will be even lower in the future.  Fuel cells will be even more efficient and the cost of clean sources of energy, electrolyzers, compressors, and fueling stations will all go down over the coming years.  It is very likely that hydrogen from clean sources of energy will cost the equivalent of gasoline at levels close to $2 per gallon in 10-15 years.

(Note: Although wind power is used in this analysis, other clean sources of energy could economically produce hydrogen either by electrolysis or other methods now or in the near future.  In particular, hydrogen from solar power by methods other than electrolysis will likely become economical in the next couple of years.  Due to the availability of high-quality solar power at various locations around the world such as the Mojave Desert in the southwestern U.S., hydrogen from solar power has a tremendous amount of potential.)

(Note: If you would like to be added to the e-mail distribution list for the Hydrogen Manhattan Project grassroots campaign, please e-mail me at gblencoe@hydrogendiscoveries.com.)

HYDROGEN MANHATTAN PROJECT - A movement led by individual Americans to support corporations and elected officials that work towards the goal of having every car on the road in the U.S. powered by hydrogen produced from clean sources of energy by the end of 2020.

The United States is currently in the process of slowly committing suicide.  Energy is the blood of the economy and that blood is filled with poison.  The same fuel (gasoline blended with ethanol) that gives us the freedom of mobility is a direct and imminent threat to our overall freedom and way of life.

Escalating oil prices, rising food prices, military conflicts, and damage to the environment represent four walls that are closing in from all angles on each and every one of us.  All of these problems will steadily worsen in the future if we don’t start to make a dramatic change beginning soon.  For example, T. Boone Pickens recently said that the price of oil could rise to $150 per barrel in two years.

The first and most important step in solving a problem is to acknowledge that the problem exists and fully appreciate its magnitude.  Without this, the necessary will power to decide to act and follow through until the problem is solved will be lacking.  Fortunately, more and more Americans are realizing the depth and scope of the energy crisis to the point where they are ready to take action.

So what needs to be done?  The United States needs to be powered by a transportation fuel that is:

1)  Totally produced in this country;

2)  Used in cars that will meet or exceed the performance of the ones on the road today;

3)  Less expensive than gasoline;

4)  Without any negative economic side effects; and

5)  Friendly to the environment.

There is only one option that can meet all of these requirements: hydrogen produced from clean sources of energy.  (To learn more about hydrogen, please read “Ten Hydrogen Facts” which is below.)

The HYDROGEN MANHATTAN PROJECT was created because the movement to solve this energy crisis must be led by individual Americans.  Up until now, corporations and politicians have not stood up and provided bold leadership and vision.  Therefore, individual Americans must take responsibility by using their purchasing power with corporations and votes for politicians to help lead the way to energy freedom and security.

It makes perfect sense for you as an American citizen to take this responsibility.  After all, you have to live with the consequences of the country’s energy policy.

Your gasoline prices are much higher.  Your grocery bill keeps going up.  Your brother, sister, son, daughter, or friend is putting their life at risk in a war over energy.  Your health is affected by air pollution.  Your children and grandchildren will suffer the effects of climate change.  Your job could be lost due to high energy prices having a negative impact on the economy.  Your country and way of life are at risk.

And that is why you as an individual American should be a catalyst for positive change.

The most important area of focus right now should be on building the hydrogen fueling infrastructure.  Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have advanced to a point where the initial stages of mass production can begin in the next three or four years.  Although hydrogen cars are rapidly approaching commercialization, the fueling infrastructure needed to support them lags far behind.

Larry Burns from GM has made a heroic effort to both promote the need for hydrogen fueling stations and persuade the energy companies to build them.  But the actions of the energy companies clearly communicate that they have no interest in doing this.  The two likely reasons are that hydrogen is a competitor to oil and the ultra-competitive fueling station business is not one they even want to be involved in.

Even though the energy companies could build the hydrogen fueling stations, they should not be forced to do this.  However, they are not entitled to permanently receive $1.8