Future Energy Pathways

[Sandhi Yudha]

Today Turkiye starts up its first nuclear power plant. It is built by Rosatom and the program started in 2010. The Akkuyu-powerplant in the southern city of Mersin will deliver 10% of Turkish requirements in 2025, and Turkiye hopes with this nuclear powerplant they will be less dependent from other countries.

Turkije opent eerste kerncentrale, gebouwd door Rusland

De Turkse president Erdogan woonde de opening bij via een videoverbinding, samen met de Russische president Poetin.

nos.nl

 

[tonnyc]

Still at very early stage (design of the facility), but four Danish companies have signed a MoU with Pupuk Kaltim and Pertamina New & Renewable Energy (a subsidiary of Pertamina) for building a fertilizer factory.

SMRs considered for Indonesian fertiliser plant : New Nuclear - World Nuclear News

A collaboration between Danish and Indonesian companies will study the operational and regulatory conditions for constructing an ammonia production facility in Indonesia powered by Copenhagen Atomics' small and modular thorium molten salt reactors.

www.world-nuclear-news.org

It's relevant here because the energy source proposed for this factory is a thorium-fueled molten salt reactor.

Now, all the Indonesian members here is familiar with our reputation of signing lots of memorandums but few of them actually becomes reality, but damn if this doesn't look interesting. High heat nuclear reactor, a supercritical boiler to convert that heat into electricity, a desalination facility to get near pure water from seawater, and an electrolizer fuel cell to split that water into hydrogen, and then react that hydrogen with the nitrogen in the air to get ammonia (the Haber Bosch process is old tech, and I believe Pupuk Kaltim will handle the actual ammonia production).

 

[Ananda]

Japan to invest $107 billion in hydrogen supply over 15 years

Japan plans to invest 15 trillion yen ($107.5 billion) over the next 15 years to supply the country with hydrogen, the government said on Tuesday, as it accelerates efforts to use the gas to shift to a low carbon economy.

www.reuters.com

https://www.mining.com/web/chinas-ev-battery-sector-is-preparing-a-new-breakthrough/

Put it this two articles together as shown how Japanese and Chinese now more betting on different path for green energy solution. This especially going to affect Japanese and Chinese automakers solutions.

Toyota already shown their Hydrogen Internal Combustion engine, and seems others Japanese automakers going to folloe that.

Honda joins Toyota's hydrogen engine push

Honda and Suzuki are joining hands with Kawasaki and Yamaha to develop hydrogen combustion engines for minicars, motorcycles, boats, drones and more.

www.autonews.com

However doesn't means they are leaving EV, but shown EV is not their primary focus. They still need to play on EV for certain market, but seems focus by Japanese betting more on Hydrogen. Their move on Hydrogen generating industry, not only going to provide Hydrogen refueling infrastructures within their country, but for a country with very small minerals resources, this is more promising for them to invest and develop.

 

[Vivendi]

Hydrogen for cars is not a good idea. Much more expensive than battery cars. Battery cars will keep dropping in price, it's difficult to imagine that hydrogen car (which has much higher complexity) can manage similar drop in price. Hydrogen as a fuel will always be much more expensive than electricity. Also, there is a risk of explosion. H2 mixed with air is very explosive.

There perhaps are still some benefits for large trucks, ships, etc. But not for small cars. The modern batteries available today are already good enough, and huge investments in R&D to make them better and cheaper. Hydrogen has lost the global market for cars, it will be interesting to see if Japan and China can "buck the trend" and artificially create demand for hydrogen cars.

 

[tonnyc]

The Toyota Mirai gets 400 miles on a full tank. While a full tank is 122 liter, hydrogen is so light that the weight of the hydrogen is 5 kg. The weight of the tank itself is 87.5 kg. Those are thick tanks.

The energy density of hydrogen is 3 times gasoline, but a full tank of gasoline has about 40 kg of gasoline, so a regular car is carrying more energy potential than a hydrogen car. (The reason it doesn't get more mileage is because it's way less efficient than a fuel cell.)

The explosive potential of hydrogen if it leaks is noted, but has to be compared to the likelihood of a battery electric vehicle spontaneously getting on fire. Those fires are rare, but exploding hydrogen fuel cell cars are even rarer. So far, zero cases, though the number of hydrogen fuel cells vehicle on the road as still small (over a hundred thousand total) so the actual rate is not known.

The economics offer a better argument for the drawback of hydrogen vehicles. But basically Toyota and Hyundai don't agree with that, since they are still putting money on hydrogen tech. It may be seen as a hedge. Sure BEV looks good, but they have billions of cash, so why not bet a hundred million on a side bet. If it doesn't work as good, eh, they can afford the loss. That's what the R&D budget is for. And if the bet pays off, they will hold the patents.

 

[John Fedup]

The other negative against EV is the massive infrastructure costs. How do people that have to park on the street get charged? What about all the old condo underground parking lots, retrofitting chargers will be hugely expensive and all those batteries being charged in one confined space, enhanced fire risk IMHO (to be fair all those hydrogen tanks would be as well). However the biggest challenge is the power grid and expansion of generating stations which has to include a huge commitment to nuclear. I can envision a huge increase in EV vehicles with the grid implementation falling way behind. It is why plug in hybrids are the best solution until grids and batteries get sorted.

 

[Ananda]

Both EV and Hydrogen will need massive infrastructure investments. I don't have much confidence on previous Hydrogen Cells tech, but I and some of my colleagues in financial markets watch this Hydrogen Combustion tech with interest.

Simply the Hydrogen Combustion using existing Combustion engine tech and infrastructure support that many customers already familiar and comfortable with. In the end combination of government infrastructure support and customers experience will determine which going to be taken.

However I do agree this is going to be developed more both EV and Hydrogen, thus why big car companies in Japan seems betting both ways. I do see some markets can develop different preference but also some will take both.

 

[John Fedup]

Both EV and Hydrogen will need massive infrastructure investments. I don't have much confidence on previous Hydrogen Cells tech, but I and some of my colleagues in financial markets watch this Hydrogen Combustion tech with interest.

Simply the Hydrogen Combustion using existing Combustion engine tech and infrastructure support that many customers already familiar and comfortable with. In the end combination of government infrastructure support and customers experience will determine which going to be taken.

However I do agree this is going to be developed more both EV and Hydrogen, thus why big car companies in Japan seems betting both ways. I do see some markets can develop different preference but also some will take both.

Agree, both technologies could be developed. Depends on geography to a certain extent, Warmer areas are better for EV batteries, colder areas not so much. Hot desert areas are good for solar that could be used for both hydrogen and electricity production but realistically hydrogen production requires a huge increase in electricity assuming electrolysis remains the main process for hydrogen production. I guess we can dream fusion is just around the corner.

 

[Ananda]

guess we can dream fusion is just around the corner.

If that tech happening, we can also get around solar system more economically. We can also extract H3O in the astroid belt or in the moon, thus can get relatively cheap and abundance Hydrogen.

That way we are really have substitute oil and still able to use existing engines tech for transportation. Turboprop and Jet power Hydrogen can also be achieved much more economically.

 

[Vivendi]

The Toyota Mirai gets 400 miles on a full tank. While a full tank is 122 liter, hydrogen is so light that the weight of the hydrogen is 5 kg. The weight of the tank itself is 87.5 kg. Those are thick tanks.

The energy density of hydrogen is 3 times gasoline, but a full tank of gasoline has about 40 kg of gasoline, so a regular car is carrying more energy potential than a hydrogen car. (The reason it doesn't get more mileage is because it's way less efficient than a fuel cell.)

The explosive potential of hydrogen if it leaks is noted, but has to be compared to the likelihood of a battery electric vehicle spontaneously getting on fire. Those fires are rare, but exploding hydrogen fuel cell cars are even rarer. So far, zero cases, though the number of hydrogen fuel cells vehicle on the road as still small (over a hundred thousand total) so the actual rate is not known.

The economics offer a better argument for the drawback of hydrogen vehicles. But basically Toyota and Hyundai don't agree with that, since they are still putting money on hydrogen tech. It may be seen as a hedge. Sure BEV looks good, but they have billions of cash, so why not bet a hundred million on a side bet. If it doesn't work as good, eh, they can afford the loss. That's what the R&D budget is for. And if the bet pays off, they will hold the patents.

Teslabjørn, a Norwegian/Thai/German Youtuber, has recently tested the Mirai, and showed that it has a good range. However he also discovered that at high speeds (120 km/h) the range drops significantly (400km). This is somewhat surprising, and no better than modern, long-range EVs. Toyota Mirai range test - YouTube

In another video he also discusses some of the issues with Hydrogen. Hydrogen pumps are much more expensive than rapid DC chargers. Also, only a very limited number of cars can be refilled per 24 hours, with the current technology.
Toyota Mirai final review and hydrogen discussion - YouTube

Sales of hydrogen cars is very poor -- 0.02% last year. Dismal sales undercut Toyota and Hyundai as they push hydrogen fuel-cell cars | The Japan Times

In the US sales of hydrogen car dropped by 30% in Q1 2023. US: Hydrogen Fuel Cell Car Sales Fell By 30% In Q1 2023 (insideevs.com)

 

[Vivendi]

Toyota are investing in new battery technology and claim they will launch EV with a range of 600 miles in 2026 and 900 miles after 2028. New battery expected to be available around 2026-2027 will cut costs by 40%.

Toyota’s Newly Revealed EV Plans Include 900-Mile Batteries (insideevs.com)

They will keep pushing Hydrogen tech in parallel but honestly, I see no future for hydrogen cars if they can deliver EVs like this.

 

[John Fedup]

Toyota are investing in new battery technology and claim they will launch EV with a range of 600 miles in 2026 and 900 miles after 2028. New battery expected to be available around 2026-2027 will cut costs by 40%.

Toyota’s Newly Revealed EV Plans Include 900-Mile Batteries (insideevs.com)

They will keep pushing Hydrogen tech in parallel but honestly, I see no future for hydrogen cars if they can deliver EVs like this.

Perhaps achievable in warm climates in sedan design.

 

[Vivendi]

Perhaps achievable in warm climates in sedan design.

I am quite sure they can do it. Already today it's quite easy (but somewhat expensive) to build a 900-mile EV, using today's technology.

On the other hand, how many people need 900 mile range?

What many tend to forget is that range is also dropping for gasoline cars in winter. However since range is already more than enough for most needs, most people don't notice or don't care...

In a modern EV with a good heat pump, range typically drops 10-30% during winter, depending on temperature etc.

 

[koxinga]

For gasoline vehicles, the averge range is around 300 miles, give or take the consumption, condition of vehicles etc. The only reason for that in my opinion is becaue of the availability of gas stations and the portability of energy. Run out of gas? Flag down another vehicle and get them to drive you to the nearest gas station or share some gas. A bigger tank doesn't make much sense.

As for EVs, it is a trade off between charging time and availability of infrastructure. Personally, I think a 900 mile EV will just be more expensive and heavy and possibly longer to charge (assuming you want or need a full charge). But if they can build the same 900 mile battery at the same cost and marginal weight to a 300 mile battery, then it opens up other possibilities.

 

[Ananda]

Scientists Leap Forward In Sustainable Hydrogen Production | OilPrice.com

Researchers from the University of Kansas and Brookhaven National Laboratory have made a breakthrough in the understanding of water-splitting catalysts.

oilprice.com

The table from Sgh2 sites, which talk about Hydrogen development. In sense the development of Hydrogen still attract investment on that area, shown several market will more going to work developing Hydrogen infrastructure, Several others more on battery and EV, while others combination on both.

This is talking only for transportation energy. In such so far there's no 'just' one solution on replacing fossil fuel. Hydrogen as on previous fuel cell tech, will not going to be as attractive as Hydrogen Combustion engine tech.

Market will then decide which solutions will be more acceptable. EV relies on battery, which so far also expensive to build, and have cost problem to recycling. Hydrogen now more on the costs to produce, but if they can reduce it, it will also reduce the costs on infrastructure.

Thus as mention above, I don't see either EV or hydrogen so far (base on their present and near future tech) can be the sole solutions for Fossil Fuel. Heck most likely fossil fuel will still be available for decades to come, not only developing nations but also in some OECD ones. Not all OECD publics wants to pay more for green energy.

Green energy more and more has to relies on combination solutions as fossil fuels alternatives. Each market will take different acceptance and preference on each Green Energy solutions as alternative.

 

[Vivendi]

The table from Sgh2 sites, which talk about Hydrogen development. In sense the development of Hydrogen still attract investment on that area, shown several market will more going to work developing Hydrogen infrastructure, Several others more on battery and EV, while others combination on both.

This is talking only for transportation energy. In such so far there's no 'just' one solution on replacing fossil fuel. Hydrogen as on previous fuel cell tech, will not going to be as attractive as Hydrogen Combustion engine tech.

Market will then decide which solutions will be more acceptable. EV relies on battery, which so far also expensive to build, and have cost problem to recycling. Hydrogen now more on the costs to produce, but if they can reduce it, it will also reduce the costs on infrastructure.

Thus as mention above, I don't see either EV or hydrogen so far (base on their present and near future tech) can be the sole solutions for Fossil Fuel. Heck most likely fossil fuel will still be available for decades to come, not only developing nations but also in some OECD ones. Not all OECD publics wants to pay more for green energy.

Green energy more and more has to relies on combination solutions as fossil fuels alternatives. Each market will take different acceptance and preference on each Green Energy solutions as alternative.

I agree Hydrogen has an important place in the future, however I think it will be a niche product, mainly due to the high cost of hydrogen. It's not just the production costs, also the distribution costs will be very high, in particular in the beginning since there is no infrastructure and the cost of building that infrastructure needs to be paid, one way or another. Not sure about Hydrogen for ICE -- I would expect efficiency to be lower than fuel cell? Then the price goes up... if one decides to stick to ICE for some markets, why not use biofuel or synthetic "green" fuel instead of hydrogen? Perhaps as "green", and much more compatible with today's technology and infrastructure.

Considering how difficult and expensive it is to store and transport hydrogen, I think one should have a long hard look at those technologies as well. Using H2 in a fuel cell makes a lot of sense. Not sure if it's worth all the hassle if it's going to be used in an ICE.

Can green synthetic fuels save the internal combustion engine? | WIRED UK
Biofuels: Using the forest to fill the tank (statkraft.com)

 

[Ananda]

Too soon to say which energy option going to be the main ones or the niche ones. All the alternative energy tech still early and all still more expensive then fossil fuel.

Japan’s Big Bet on Hydrogen

Going all in on a technology still in its infancy has had some drawbacks for Japan, forcing the government to reassess its hydrogen strategy.

www.esginvestor.net

This article actually quite critical toward Japan Hydrogen drive, but I put it because it also actually shown why Japan betting on Hydrogen, which couple of important points:

1. Hydrogen can reduce import reliance, as it's produce using Japan own resources, thus there's strategic issue in here.
2. Hydrogen cost on production and distribution costs has big potential to be reduce as the tech and supporting infrastructure mature.

Using H2 in a fuel cell makes a lot of sense. Not sure if it's worth all the hassle if it's going to be used in an ICE.

Using hydrogen combustion engine is making much more sense then hydrogen fuel cells. Which is why Japanese auto makers even Cummins Diesels looking on Internal Combustion hydrogen. It is simply making sense as it is using existing tech thus can use existing maintenance support ecosystem.

Combustion engine now can give options for Regular Fuel, Green Fuel and now being developed for Hydrogen. It is making much more sense economically then fuel cells. It is giving each market options on using existing tech on the fuel that they're prefer. For Japan, if they're manage to build infrastructure of hydrogen economically, it is giving them advantage against any other energy option including battery and green fuel that potentially need more import materials.

When people goes to switch from steam engines to internal combustion, factors that matter is economic costs. So whoever can produce and distributed more economically, will win the market.

The article also shown China eventough seems betting on battery tech, actually also big producers on hydrogen. Not surprisingly as for large population market, they will try every options. Because so far no one tech options can replace fossil fuels.

 

[John Fedup]

There are increased measures being taken against NG for home heating/cooking in BC and elsewhere. Electricity will play role as a prime substitute but hydrogen for heating may be an option albeit only for locations where hydrogen can be obtained at a reasonable cost, Heat pumps powered by electricity will be the likely substitute for NG furnaces.

 

[ngatimozart]

A look at a new methodology for creating hydrogen fuel.

Video on wind generation at the micro scale(for houses).

 

[Vivendi]

Physicist Sabine Hossenfelder explain some of the issues with Hydrogen:

German city to retire all Hydrogen buses after one year, saying they have no intention of ever using Hydrogen buses again: German city to retire its one-year-old hydrogen fuel-cell buses after €2.3m filling station breaks down | Hydrogen news and intelligence (hydrogeninsight.com)

French city drops 51-bus Hydrogen project after they realize it's 6-fold more expensive than battery buses -- in spite of receiving 18M€ support! French city drops order for 51 hydrogen buses after realising electric ones six times cheaper to run | Recharge (rechargenews.com)

UK study shows that using Hydrogen for heating will increase accidents fourfold: 'Hydrogen in the home would be four times more dangerous than natural gas': government report | Hydrogen news and intelligence (hydrogeninsight.com)

A UK firm refuse to release a report on Hydrogen safety, saying that releasing the report will "undermine funding" for Hydrogen: Hydrogen trial fears loss of funding if explosion testing results published (theferret.scot)

A lot of challenges related to production, transport, storage in a safe and economic manner needs to be addressed before Hydrogen can become a viable option. Safety imposes significant costs.

Hydrogen economy could also open up new options for terrorists.

I think battery technology will keep evolving and make Hydrogen a niche product in the future. Some developments to keep an eye on:
Breakthrough EV battery pack could last 2 million kms, or 130 years of average driving (thedriven.io)

300% More Capacity: New Battery Technology Could Significantly Lower Energy Storage Costs (scitechdaily.com)

A new concept for low-cost batteries | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

There is much more of course..

Some of these new batteries will be used together with solar or wind farms to store energy in a cost-effective manner. Countries with an existing strong electricity infrastructure (e.g., South Korea, Japan) will probably focus more and more on battery technology when they realize the safety and cost concerns of Hydrogen.