Hydrogen myths are without a doubt our favorite topic. Therefore, for the second time, we will try to take hydrogen to the defense and convince you that it is not always as bad as they paint it.
We have covered the topic of hydrogen myths before. If they interest you as much as they do us you can find the previous article here: 3 Myths About Hydrogen That Raise Strong Market Concerns. Today we clarify two more myths, and this time they concern hydrogen-based transportation.
Myth 4. Hydrogen vehicles are not competitive with electric vehicles and there is no future for them
Comparing hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCEVs) and battery electric (BEVs) is one of the most frequently discussed topics. Not without reason. Electromobility is crucial to achieving decarbonization goals in the transportation sector. Its rapid growth will be dictated by regulations mandating the phasing out of production and registration of new vehicles using conventional fuels.
What is often forgotten in these discussions is that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are electric vehicles. Compared to BEVs, they have a smaller battery with a capacity on the order of kWh. Of course, there are also hydrogen-powered internal combustion engines in development (Toyota, BMW), but due to the early technological maturity and limited production of such solutions, at this point, the focus is mainly on the use of fuel cells.
These are devices that allow the extraction of electricity directly in a chemical reaction. They use fuel in the form of hydrogen, which reacts with oxygen to produce water and electrical voltage, which is transferred to drive the vehicle. There are different types of fuel cells. The transportation sector uses proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs), which already power cars, vans, and trains and are used in space vehicles.
We often encounter the opinion that FCEVs are not competitive enough with BEVs to popularize (although battery vehicles also still do not exceed a 3-4% share of the total transportation in the EU).
The price of FCEVs varies for the specific model, country, and offers from individual dealers. Depending on these criteria, it can range from 200 to even more than 300 thousand PLN. Thus, it is not difficult to see that the cost of their purchase remains relatively high compared to other EVs. Despite a price reduction of several times over the years. However, we point out that such a comparison is always dependent on the specific model and class of vehicles analyzed.
The operating costs of FCEVs are much more favorable than the purchase price. The high energy efficiency of hydrogen means that a passenger car consumes about 1 kg of hydrogen for every 100 km and a bus 10 kg. What’s more, FCEV passenger vehicles achieve an average range of more than 600 km on a single refueling. However, this range can be much higher, as evidenced by the record set in 2021 by the Toyota Mirai, which covered 1,360 km on one refueling. Correspondingly for buses, the range can exceed 350 km, which translates into higher efficiency. It is influenced not only by the range, but also by the shorter refueling time, which is only about 4-7 minutes for cars, and about 15-20 minutes for buses. In comparison, charging a BEV, depending on the capacity of the battery and the station itself, can take from 10 minutes to as much as 8 hours.
Assuming HRS development and the price of renewable hydrogen falls in line with forecasts, it could equal the price of conventional fuels and become commonplace in the coming years. As is the case with BEVs and the ever-expanding network of charging stations, the availability of which was much less just a few years ago. If we focus solely on cost-effectiveness, the cost of producing gray hydrogen is already about 1-1.80 USD per kilogram (4.30-7.80 PLN), with a significant carbon footprint, which ultimately does not go hand in hand with enhanced decarbonization goals in transportation. We must point out that to talk about full decarbonization, we can’t ignore the fact of emissions also in the case of battery cars. After all, the green nature of transportation is determined by the source of energy. In the case of Poland, whose energy system is, according to analyses, one of the most emission-intensive among European countries, it is difficult to talk about electric vehicles being a truly clean alternative to internal combustion engines.
Therefore, the target profitability of both types of vehicles is worth considering also considering a source such as RES. Electric power systems in most countries are dominated by conventional sources and are often not designed to handle multiple high-power chargers simultaneously. Hydrogen, on the other hand, can be produced anywhere and is expected to be transported even over long distances from places and regions with optimal production conditions, making the potential for its use increase.
Don’t get us wrong. We are not trying to prove that FCEVs are better. We want to point out that ultimately the most environmentally beneficial and cost-effective model, from an environmental, social, and individual user perspective, is the spread of both types of vehicles, which will complement each other. Why? While BEVs with an average range of 100-150 kilometers and extended charging times work well in everyday situations, such as passenger transportation or public transportation (medium routes), FCEVs show advantages in sectors that require high vehicle efficiency, short refueling times and the provision of long range on a single refueling. Therefore, they are a better and more efficient alternative in freight transport, long-distance transport, and on railroads for non-electrified lines and sidings.
The use of fuel cells is particularly beneficial for long-distance transportation. This is because the electrification of trucks is hampered by the weight of the batteries, directly affecting ergonomics, high energy requirements, as well as a reduction in driving range and long charging times, which reduces efficiency and increases operating costs for logistics companies. Despite technological developments, it is difficult to expect that within the next few years, it will be possible to achieve sufficiently increased battery capacity to guarantee long-distance rides. Simply recharging them would require the construction of massive infrastructure capable of handling dozens of such vehicles per day and usually simultaneously.
Myth 5. Production of green hydrogen will be complicated and expensive
Another inaccuracy regarding hydrogen is the issue of its production. Or more precisely, the production of green hydrogen using RES sources. As for the process itself, it is based on the centuries-old known electrolysis of water, which involves the separation of water into its constituent parts – hydrogen and oxygen – under an electric voltage. This one, as an experiment, can be carried out even at home – all you need is a few commonly available instruments, such as a battery, table salt, a paper clip or pencil, and a glass of water. So, the process itself in practical terms is nothing complicated.
However, the fact is, that in the current initial phase of projects, large-scale production of hydrogen using RES installations will have certain costs. Both of the installations themselves, the operating costs of electrolyzers, water, and, depending on the model adopted, also electricity prices. At the same time, in countries where the share of RES in total electricity production is high, hydrogen production will be more profitable due to the possibility of using larger volumes of grid energy at a lower price.
It is also worth noting that hydrogen production can ultimately increase the efficiency and operational profitability of RES. Photovoltaic farms are characterized by seasonality not only on an annual basis but also on a single day, as well as instability related to current weather conditions. The result of these can be the creation of energy shortages or loss of energy related to the shortage of demand and grid capacity in situations of energy oversupply. Its use for hydrogen production offers the prospect of storage and subsequent use as fuel or reprocessing, thereby optimizing plant operations.
The advantage of FCEVs is that hydrogen can be produced anywhere in the world, and the resources needed (renewables, water) are common. This reduces the risks associated with dwindling resources, lack of supply, the emergence of market fluctuations, and dependence on countries with the most resources, as is the case with fossil fuels. A similar problem exists for the materials needed for battery production. Resources of cobalt, nickel, and lithium are limited and found in large quantities in specific regions of the world. Due to the increased production of electric cars, these resources are diminishing every year and thus becoming more expensive. In 2022, the price of lithium exceeded $81,000 per ton, while just a decade ago it was almost 18 times lower (about $4,500 per ton). What’s more, according to forecasts, the growing demand not only in mobility but also in electronics, means that we could face a significant shortage or depletion within 50-100 years.
Ultimately, FCEVs may also face risks associated with limited sourcing and high cost of materials, particularly platinum and iridium. One solution to this problem is expected to be the direct recycling of materials from FCEV catalysts.
Therefore, we are trying to clarify inaccuracies about hydrogen that may appear in the public space. Indeed, we should not demonize any of the types of electric vehicles under discussion. Their combined use will make it possible to decouple the exploitation of one type of material and flatten demand peaks, as well as ultimately decarbonize each of the challenging transportation sectors.
