Category Archives: Green Products

Hydrogen Fuel Cells—Hit or Hogwash?

A recent online poll asked whether people should pay an additional tax to drive their gas guzzling vehicles – or as I call them, mini-tanks. The results showed that 60% thought it was a terrific idea that would “encourage the shift toward more efficient cars”. That got me thinking about hydrogen fuel cells and their touted efficiency and place as so-called green fuel-of-choice.

Then it hit me – hydrogen fuel cells are in fact not efficient or green when you consider their footprint over their life cycle (also known as “well to wheel” for cars). In fact, a careful analysis shows just the opposite—hydrogen fuel cells are far less efficient than conventional gasoline-based engines, and require much more energy to even make this hydrogen “usable”. Let’s see why…

Hydrogen does make an emission-less fuel cycle possible, but there’s a catch: hydrogen must be extracted from biomass or by electrolysis of water using …electricity! The statistics below are drawn from simple mathematical analysis using the known BTU of energy per barrel of oil, the energy needed to run a car, and process efficiencies for gasoline- and hydrogen-powered cars:

  • Gasoline-powered cars in 2007 had an energy efficiency of about 25%, well to wheel.
  • Hydrogen-powered cars, where the hydrogen is extracted by electrolysis, has an efficiency of about 12%–less than half that of gasoline-powered vehicles.

Why the pronounced difference? After all, isn’t hydrogen supposed to be a “green” fuel? In theory, hydrogen is a clean fuel. It’s the extraction of hydrogen that makes it dirty. Here’s why:

  • Electrolysis, used to extract hydrogen, is a 70% efficient process.
  • Within the fuel cell itself, some of that energy is converted into non-usable water vapour, and the potential energy yield drops by another 15%.
  • The best fuel cell we have is also about 70% efficient, lowering the potential energy yield by another 30%.
  • Because hydrogen is a gas, it takes up 3107 times the space of its gasoline equivalent. The energy needed in compressing it to fit in a tank is huge and further reduces the potential energy yield by another 27.4%
  • The U.S. relies on its supply of coal and coal-fired stations, which run at only 40% efficiency, to produce the electricity needed to extract the hydrogen.

Taking all the factors into consideration, it takes twice the energy that was used for gasoline-powered cars and one third that of the entire energy consumption of the U.S. to produce the hydrogen used in cars. Not to mention the little fact of increased CO2 emissions of about 270% from the coal-powered plants to produce hydrogen.

Even if we were to scrap the coal-fired stations, and go for renewable resources to muster up the huge energy (think 1.53 trillion kwh) needed to fuel this hydrogen production “process”, we wouldn’t be able to achieve it. It would take the entire area of the U.S. covered with solar panels to make a dent in the amount of energy needed to produce hydrogen for its cars. In such high numbers, wind power and solar would show the carbon payback and GHG contribution from the manufacturing process to be counterproductive and extremely high.

***

So there you have it—half the efficiency of gasoline-powered cars, and much higher carbon footprint once life cycle considerations are taken into account. I guess it’s back to skateboards for everyone!

If you’re interested in reading a more in-depth analysis of the numbers presented above, the New Atlantic Journal of Technology & Society has a great article titled, The Hydrogen Hoax.

Lightning electric cars available for pre-order

The Lightning GT is a new 100% electric car, now available for preorder in the UK for delivery in 2009. They’re working on bringing it to the US market.  It really is a sexy-looking car with all the usual bells and whistles and some special, noteworthy features:

  • Can be charged by simply plugging the car’s charging lead into your home’s electric power, as well as a mobile charging system. It can be charged in approximately 10 minutes for up to 200 miles of driving.
  • 0-60mph in 5 seconds for the standard version and less than 4 seconds for the sport version.
  • 10 x cheaper to run, using domestic electric power for charging as compared to the equivalent conventional gasoline engine.
  • Zero CO2 emissions, compared with 106 g/km of CO2 emissions for the Toyota Prius Hybrid.
  • State of the art NanoSafe™ battery system uses more thermally stable nano titanate materials instead of graphite and contain no toxic or heavy metals.  The battery lasts for 15 years.
  • The NanoSafe™ batteries are designed for temperatures between 75°C and minus 30°C, whereas standard Lithium-Ion batteries need to be kept cool when used or heated to perform in sub zero temperatures.
  • Enhanced occupant safety, with its composite monocoque structure, and aluminium honeycomb crushable impact cells in the bodywork; the same technology that’s used in Formula 1.
  • Advanced motor technology integrated right within the wheel assembly, eliminating the mechanical complexity and power losses of gearboxes, differential, axle and drive shafts.

The price? Apparently it’s £180,000 pounds, or $220,000 and counting (with the dollar continuing its downward slide). Talk about deflating your enthusiasm!! Picture a noisy, squeaky, stressed-out balloon… that was me when I found out.  Although exciting, the technology is still far from economically sustainable for the masses.  

Environment not high on the list of concerns

According to a study conducted by the market research firm Yankelovich, only 13 percent of Americans are passionate about environmental issues and 29 percent have virtually no interest at all. Green products represent only a “niche” opportunity, according to the report. Gallup’s annual Environment poll found that only 28% of Americans report that they’ve made “major changes” in their lifestyles to protect the environment.

So, contrary to popular belief, concerns about the environment haven’t yet made it into the hearts and minds of the mainstream population.  Furthermore, environmental concern usually declines when the economy is struggling. The way to get people to buy green still seems to be to focus on saving money or improving health.  For example, most people buy Energy Star rated products, not because they’re greener, but because they save money by using less energy.

The lack of perceived objectivity and validity of environmental claims being made in the marketplace are an increasingly visible barrier to reaching the hearts and minds of the consumer.  We may already be fatigued by all the stories of greenwashing and we’re throwing our hands up in the air, not knowing where to turn to make better choices.  Maybe it’s time to blog about something else already.

Consumer attitudes won’t change overnight.  The opportunity is for marketers (who are brave enough) to generate greater awareness and implement the processes and systems essential to objectively demonstrate the benefits of making the right choices for environmental sustainability.