In conclusion, the future of mass-production of hydrogen is closer than many people recognize. Currently estimated at $185 billion, the green hydrogen market is set to increase by more than 600% over the next 25 years. This anticipated growth is reflective of the role green hydrogen is set to play in our energy future as well as anticipated reductions in electrolyzer costs (a crucial selling point for manufacturers).
However, this growth would not be possible without the improved efficiency and extended lifespans that have been achieved with recent electrolyzer advancements. Electrolyzers may have the most hidden potential of any green energy technology—the only question is which manufacturers are willing to capitalize.
A 10% reduction in operating cost is a significant improvement. But people continue to say hydrogen is too costly for wide scale adoption. Hydrogen from natural gas with carbon capture and sequestration is cheaper. And natural gas will always be cheaper still.
Very low cost green electricity may be essential for success. And no matter what the over voltage problem remains to be solved.
This great advancement means that green hydrogen just went from an extremely terrible waste of energy for most use cases to a terrible waste of energy.
Recall that the process starts (typically) from sunshine or wind, converted to electricity, then the electrolyzer (which just got a bit cheaper, maybe), then compression, liquefying, storage, then run back through a fuel cell, with a net loss of 60% to 80% of what you started with; compared to just putting it into a battery. The last couple of steps could be replaced with burning the hydrogen for some use cases.
One should note that the article never says what the net end-to-end energy loss is for any use case.
I still am in favor of continuing R&D on hydrogen because there are probably some minor uses where it can be useful…just like non-rechargeable AA batteries where no one cares that the cost per kwh is something like 100 or 1000 times what a plugin device would cost. These batteries are just for convenience
The article was quite light on cost figures. I suppose that is because this is still in the R&D phase.
“For starters, experts have speculated that thinner membranes allow electrolyzers to produce 150% more hydrogen or run at 10% lower energy consumption…”
Some think green hydrogen is the only alternative when battery electrics are not powerful enough. And we know it will be expensive. I still think cellulosic ethanol from waste paper may be a more economical alternative.
Sure. I think we know battery powered long distance heavy trucks, locomotives, airplanes, and ships have some limitations. Mostly limited range. Or limited power. We should use them where we can. As for local delivery etc.
Hydrogen is under consideration for all of these. But will be expensive–we are reminded again and again. Ethanol might be a better choice.