I daresay that, even as readers of this petroleum-oriented journal, most of us would like to see hydrogen become an economically viable transportation fuel that could supplement traditional automotive fuels. However, Duncan Macleod in his article “Oil industry ramps up for hydrogen vehicles” offers us little encouragement (OGJ, Dec. 8, 2008, p. 26). He writes glowingly of hydrogen as an ideal, pollution-free fuel, which cannot be denied, but he does not address the issue of the cost of the energy required to produce the hydrogen necessary to fuel the vaunted hydrogen economy.
The laws of thermodynamics are the problem. It simply takes more energy to extract hydrogen from water using electrolysis or to extract it from methane using steam reformation than can be obtained from the subsequent use of the extracted hydrogen as a fuel. This imbalance of more energy in than out is the barrier to a broadly based, economically viable hydrogen economy.
Small facilities using solar or wind power to produce locally used electrolytic hydrogen from water may have some potential. This is predicated on the assumption that solar or wind power used to generate the hydrogen could not otherwise be used. However, as soon as significant production of solar or wind-based power is developed at any single location, it would be siphoned away and put to more efficient use. This suggests that hydrogen can never be more than a boutique fuel with specialized niche markets.
I certainly would like to be proven wrong, but it’s hard to argue with the laws of thermodynamics. If Mr. Macleod can offer some insight on this apparent dilemma, he should be invited to do so. Otherwise, the pursuit of the hydrogen economy brings to mind the age-old search for the perpetual motion machine!
Thomas Wyman
Palo Alto, Calif.
