Consumer Energy Report is now Energy Trends Insider -- Read More »

By Robert Rapier on Sep 17, 2013 with 10 responses

The Hydrogen Economy Revisited

My Energy Quest in the Desert

Some readers are aware that I am presently in Arizona working on a project. At some point I will write an in-depth article about the things I am working on, but today I want to pull the curtain back just a bit.

In a series of articles in 2010, I wrote about methanol’s potential as an alternative fuel. I dealt with the common criticisms about methanol — toxicity, corrosion, energy density — and I argued that methanol was a more economical and better technical solution to diversifying our energy options away from oil than is corn ethanol. (In fact, it doesn’t have to be either/or, but methanol has never stood a chance against corn ethanol politics).

In response to my methanol articles, BiofuelsDigest wrote Methanol: Biofuel to love or hate?, which suggested that I might have a conflict of interest with my defense of methanol. My response to that was that I had zero financial interests in methanol, and my company had zero financial interests in methanol. We had never produced methanol, and we had no plans to produce methanol. So there was no conflict of interest except as someone who was interested in the technical and economic merits of methanol from an energy policy standpoint.

Fast forward to September 2013 — more than 3 years after I wrote those methanol articles — and I am now involved in a methanol project. Again, I am not yet ready to do a deep dive here, but I want to put some food for thought out there and open the floor to comments and criticism.

Hydrogen Economy 1.0

I was a critic of the original hydrogen economy as envisioned by President George W. Bush in his 2003 State of the Union address. I wrote an internal report for ConocoPhillips at that time critiquing the plan, and identifying multiple very large technical hurdles that would have to be overcome in order to realize a hydrogen economy.

One thing I have always said is that one major technical hurdle may prove to be challenging to a project, but stack up three or four and it ends up like nuclear fusion — always 30 years away.  To illustrate, imagine that you have a 10 percent chance of solving a major technical problem over the span of a decade, and that this would enable success for a project. Now, increase that to three major technical problems and your odds of success have gone from 1 in 10 to 1 in 1,000. Incidentally, when you hear someone use that phrase — “30 years away” — what they are really saying is that they have no idea how they are going to get there.

Without a total rehash of all the issues (and there are a few), one of the major challenges for a hydrogen economy is transport and storage. The volumetric energy density of hydrogen is quite low, and a lot of energy is consumed in compressing hydrogen and moving it around. Another issue was that the hydrogen was being used in extremely expensive fuel cell vehicles that would be out of reach for ordinary consumers for the foreseeable future (i.e., we have no idea if they might ever be economical).

Hydrogen Economy 2.0

But instead of this scenario, imagine that the hydrogen is liberated from a liquid and then burned in an engine with a high compression ratio. Enter methanol.

Methanol undergoes a reaction with steam to produce hydrogen and carbon dioxide. This steam reforming reaction is:

CH3OH(g) + H20(g) → 3 H2 + CO2

Or, in plain English:

Methanol + Water + heat  → 3 Hydrogen + Carbon Dioxide

The advantage of this reaction is that the hydrogen produced has almost 20 percent more energy content than the methanol input. This is possible because the reaction takes place in the range of 250 degrees C, which means the reaction can be driven by engine exhaust. So you essentially are capturing some of the energy back from the exhaust heat.

The result is that methanol’s energy density deficit to gasoline can be partially closed with both the higher energy content of the hydrogen and the higher compression ratio of the engine. (Ethanol, natural gas, and longer-chain hydrocarbons can also be reformed in this way, but most approaches require a temperature too high to be driven by engine exhaust — and this is the key to the methanol approach).

Now, further consider the possibility that — particularly for stationary power applications — the hydrogen could be separated out and burned and the carbon dioxide could be captured. Carbon capture could be as simple as pumping it into a greenhouse (albeit not extremely efficient), but more sophisticated methods of capture are possible. It’s just that they are for the most part uneconomical.

But imagine for a moment that this carbon dioxide capture problem is solvable. That opens up the possibility of running an engine with zero carbon emissions at a much lower cost than with a fuel cell. Further, if the methanol is produced from renewable sources (like biomass or biogas), you now have the possibility of running an engine that actually results in the sequestration of carbon (which was taken up by the renewable feedstock during photosynthesis).

Still Lots of Work Ahead

This hints at the project that I am working on in Arizona. As I start to explain it to people, some hear “hydrogen”, and then have a knee-jerk reaction that it can never work. But to paraphrase Obi-Wan Kenobi, “this is not the hydrogen you were looking for.” This is a different animal. At least it is derived from a different animal and used in a different way.

At a later date I will be able to talk about this project and the company’s objectives in greater detail. The company is still very much in stealth mode, and they are being very cautious with the claims they make. But for now, that gives at least a sense of the kind of problems that are keeping me busy.

Link to Original Article: The Hydrogen Economy Revisited

By Robert Rapier. You can find me on TwitterLinkedIn, or Facebook.

  1. By GreenEngineer on September 17, 2013 at 6:09 pm

    Thanks for the peek in Robert. This is fascinating, and I look forward to hearing more.

    [link]      
  2. By Forrest on September 17, 2013 at 8:27 pm

    Nice to utilize the exhaust heat per the steam reformer. Also, minimal pollution stream of pure water and CO2. Lots of technology to work out with variable H2 supply needed such as water injection, control, storage, and start-up conditions. Water supply adds weight and another fueling requirement. Ethanol processors are also trying to economically capture the pure CO2 for commercial purposes. Some soft drink companies utilizing this source.

    Some auto companies have signed with manufacturer of turbo exhaust generator. It’s a higher voltage hybrid technology that competes with typical hybrid battery technology, but at lower cost. Appears auto technology is targeting the exhaust to recoup power, but the reformer could operate per bottoming cycle. The auto could start on methanol fuel and switch to h2 after achieving operating conditions. Condense and recycle water from exhaust would help solve the water storage problem.

    [link]      
    • By JonathanMaddox on April 28, 2014 at 9:51 pm

      Water supply? The steam for the reformation reaction is the exhaust from burning the hydrogen.

      [link]      
  3. By Craig Phillips on September 18, 2013 at 3:22 pm

    I watched the Thorium remix on youtube and at one point Kirk Sorenson speaks about using energy from liquid flouride Thorium reactors to combine carbon dioxide and hydrogen from water to make methanol – possible to do because the power cost would be very low and the resulting fuel carbon neutral – however that is at a utility level whereas you are talking about in the motor vehicle itself.

    [link]      
    • By Robert Rapier on September 19, 2013 at 1:25 am

      I think this will be done initially with a stationary power application, but the ultimate goal would be capture from large engines. Think ships, trains, and large trucks that return to a hub every night.

      [link]      
  4. By Bro-in-law on September 20, 2013 at 6:37 pm

    It is always nice to see/hear some of what you are up to…
    Ron

    [link]      
  5. By Optimist on September 20, 2013 at 6:42 pm

    Interesting… Sounds like it COULD work. Burning methanol, via hydrogen, to improve efficiency. Does that still qualify as the hydrogen economy? I mean you won’t buy hydrogen from the filling station, it is only generated onboard.

    Would it be possible to use the combustion product (H2O) as a reactant? That means you won’t have to carry a tank of water in the vehicle.

    OTOH – it WOULD be pretty hilarious if this works out and we are all filling our cars with water (and methanol, but still)…

    [link]      
    • By Robert Rapier on September 20, 2013 at 10:21 pm

      “Would it be possible to use the combustion product (H2O) as a reactant? That means you won’t have to carry a tank of water in the vehicle.”

      Yes, that’s the beauty of it. Burn hydrogen and what do you get? Steam. What is one of the reactants of the reforming reaction? Steam. So in theory you could supply the steam with 1/3rd of the exhaust (but you probably need more heat than that). So there are some technical details to make sure you can get the heat and the proper amount of steam into the reaction. You may have 1/3rd injected directly with the methanol and 2/3rds exchanging heat on the outside of a cylinder.

      [link]      
  6. By Dave Runyon on September 21, 2013 at 9:49 am

    Fascinating concept and I very much look forward to the details. Thanks for sharing!

    [link]      
  7. By ben on September 24, 2013 at 12:20 am

    Good to hear methanol has moved into the cross-hairs. This will increasingly make sense as the cost of carbon comes into sharper relief in the days ahead.
    I heartily point to the efforts of Dr. George Olah, Loker Distinguished Professor of Organic Chemistry at USC, as the man who put methanol on my radar with his promotion of the Methanol Economy. This ’94 Nobel Prize recipient has been a passionate advocate of methanol’s attributes for several decades and has gained the confidence of a growing number of thought-leaders here in the US and globally. While some of his predictions for methanol’s adoption have proven optimistic, he has encouraged a good deal of debate that lends itself to much keener insights on the potential of this secure and abundant energy source.
    With the passing of Haldor Topsoe this past spring on the cusp of his 100th birthday,
    progress on one aspect of the Methanol Economy in the form of dimethyl ether (DME) lost an important ally in the advancement of this fuel source in Europe and Asia.
    Be it from natural gas or renewable feedstocks, DME shows promise as a power generating/transport fuel supply for a global economy very much in transition.
    Progress in recent years via a demonstration project with collaboration between the likes of Chemrec, Total, Delphi, Volvo and Haldor Topsoe in producing/road-testing BioDME in Volvo’s freight fleet. As a sulphur-free, sootless fuel offering 90% less NOx emissions, BioDME introduces a clean motor fuels option promising to deliver a higher degree of overall sustainability. Catalytic dehydration is the heart of the HT process and the provision of their catalysts are integral to the initiative’s efficacy.
    It will be good to learn more of RR’s efforts, as we all know that many hands help make the work lighter. Lord knows there is plenty of work to be done, as we strive to make our economy internationally competitive, more securer and environmentally sustainable in the days ahead.
    Ben

    [link]      
Register or log in now to save your comments and get priority moderation!