Advertisement

Implementation of Hydrogen Gas as a Transport Fuel

  • Otto Andersen
Chapter
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)

Abstract

There are high expectations for the use of hydrogen as a transport fuel in the future. However, as this chapter will show, sometimes these expectations are unrealistic, and are based on industrial actors’ own agendas and strategies. The implementation of hydrogen energy in Norway has been heavily supported with governmental and industrial funding through the Hydrogen-road HyNor, but without expected advances in fuel cell technology and carbon capture and storage (CCS), the implementation has been rather limited. Residential opposition of hydrogen filling stations, because of health and safety concerns thwarted a pilot scheme in London, as will be shown. The life cycle GHG emissions from today’s hydrogen fuels are high, in addition, the consequences from leakage of hydrogen gas from future production and distribution systems are potentially damaging to the stratospheric ozone layer.

Keywords

Hydrogen Production Hydrogen Energy Transport Fuel Noctilucent Cloud Hydrogen Economy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Andersen O (2006) Ikke-teknologiske barrierer for hydrogen som energibærer i transport. Hva kan vi lære av CUTE, ECTOS og HySociety? (Non-technological barriers for hydrogen as energy carrier in transport. What can we learn from CUTE, ECTOS and HySociety?). Western Norway Research Institute: Sogndal. http://www.vestforsk.no/ filearchive/notat11-06-hydrogen.pdf. Accessed 17 sep 2013
  2. 2.
    Andersen O (2007) Hydrogen as transport fuel in Iceland. The political, technological and commercial story of ECTOS. Int J Altern Propul 1(4)(4):339–351Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen I-C, Fukushima Y, Kikuchi Y, Hirao M (2012) A graphical representation for consequential life cycle assessment of future technologies - Part 1: methodological framework. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:119–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    European Commission (2005) HySOCIETY ‘An innovative (accompanying) measure aiming to support the introduction of a safe and dependable hydrogen-based society in Europe’. Power PointGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flynn R, Bellamy P, Ricci M (2006) Risk perception of an emergent technology: The case of hydrogen energy. Forum: Qualitative Social Research/Forum: Qualitative Sozialforschung 7(1): Art. 19. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0601194. Accessed 17 sep 2013
  6. 6.
    de Forster P and Shine K (2002) Assessing the climate impact of trends in stratospheric water vapor. Geophys Res Lett 29(6):10–1—10–4Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hertwich EG (2005) Consumption and the Rebound Effect: An Industrial Ecology Perspective. J Ind Ecol 9(1–2):85–98Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hertwich EG and Strømman A (2004) The environmental benefit of direct hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. An analysis of the assessment literature. Norwegian: Trondheim, Norway. University of Science and Technology, Industrial Ecology ProgrammeGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    IPCC (2001) Third Assessment Report (TAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) prepared by Working Group III: Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Intergovernmental panel on climate change. http://www.ipcc.ch/ ipccreports/tar/wg3/index.php?idp = 144. Accessed 17 sep 2013
  10. 10.
    Kaarstein A (2008) HyNor - den norske hydrogenveien? En studie av en stor tekno-politisk hybrid (HyNor - the Norwegian hydrogen road? A study of a large techno-political hybrid). PhD Thesis, Trondheim, Norway, Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet. http://ntnu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:139432/FULLTEXT01. Accessed 17 sep 2013
  11. 11.
    Kalnay E, Kanamitsu M, Kistler R, Collins W, Deaven D, Gandin L, Iredell M, Saha S, White G, Woollen J, Zhu Y, Leetmaa A, Reynolds R, Chelliah M, Ebisuzaki W, Higgins W, Janowiak J, Mo K, Ropelewski C, Wang J, Jenne R, Joseph D (1996) The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year Reanalysis Project. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 77(3):437–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khalil M, Rasmussen R (1990) Global increase of atmospheric molecular hydrogen. Nature 347:743–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Letexier H, Solomon S, Garcia R (1988) The Role of Molecular-Hydrogen and Methane Oxidation in the Water-Vapor Budget of the Stratosphere. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meterological Society 114(480):281–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pehnt M (2003) Life-cycle analysis of fuel cell system components. Handbook of fuel cells—fundamentals, technology and applications. Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, pp 1293–1317Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sanden B, Karlstroem M (2007) Positive and negative feedback in consequential life-cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 15(15):1469–1481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sherif S, Zeytinoglu N, Veziroglu T (1997) Liquid hydrogen: Potential, problems, and a proposed research program. Int J Hydrogen Energy 22(7):683–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Solomon S (1999) Stratospheric ozone depletion: A review of concepts and history. Rev Geophys 37(3):275–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tromp T, Shia R-L, Allen M, Eiler J, Yung Y (2003) Potential environmental impact of a hydrogen economy on the stratosphere. Science 300(5626):1740–1742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang M (2002) Fuel choices for fuel-cell vehicles: well-to-wheels energy and emission impact. J Power Sources 112(1):307–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    WMO (2011) Scientific assessment of ozone depletion: 2010. Global ozone research and monitoring project. World Meteorological Organization: Genova. US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, US National Aeronautics and Space Administration, United Nations Environment Programme, European CommissionGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zittel W and Altman M (1996) Molecular Hydrogen and Water Vapour Emissions in a Global Hydrogen Energy Economy. In: Veziroglu T, Winter C-J, Baselt J and Kreysa G (eds) Proceedings of the 11th World Hydrogen Energy Conference. Stuttgart, Germany: Schön & Wetzel, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 71–82Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zurek R, Manney G, Miller A, Gelman M, Nagatani R (1996) Interannual variability of the north polar vortex in the lower stratosphere during the UARS mission. Geophys Res Lett 23(3):289–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Western Norway Research InstituteKaupangerNorway

Personalised recommendations