The Energy Department estimates that 95 percent of the United States’ hydrogen
is produced from natural gas. The abundance of that contentious fossil fuel has
revised the cost equation for fuel-cell vehicles. Even hydrogen skeptics like
Energy Secretary Steven Chu are taking a second look.
On May 10, Dr. Chu participated in a closed-door subcommittee meeting of the
department’s Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee, or H.T.A.C.
Though the secretary’s comments at the meeting were not made public, his
attendance indicated a heightened level of engagement, given his previously
expressed skepticism toward hydrogen. In a 2011 letter, the committee chairman,
Robert W. Shaw Jr., urged Dr. Chu “to engage with your H.T.A.C.” The secretary’s
attendance at the meeting was applauded by major automakers.
“The evolution of his position over the past half year is very encouraging,”
Edward B. Cohen, vice president for government and industry relations at Honda
North America, said of Dr. Chu in an interview. “The secretary now appreciates
to a greater extent than he has previously the potential of fuel-cell
technology.”
Inexpensive natural gas helps Honda’s deployment plans, he added, but he cited
infrastructure as “the major hurdle right now.”
Early in the Obama administration, Dr. Chu requested striking hydrogen cutbacks
from the Energy Department budget, though his cuts were largely restored by
Congress. In a 2009 interview with Technology Review, Dr. Chu said hydrogen for
fuel cells could not be produced or stored efficiently, and the distribution
infrastructure was not nearly robust enough to ensure widespread adoption. “That
makes it unlikely,” he said.
The department’s position on hydrogen, however, appears to be changing. “The
development of America’s tremendous shale gas resources is also helping to
reduce the costs of producing hydrogen and operating hydrogen fuel cells,” Bill
Gibbons, a spokesman for the department, wrote in an e-mail. “The cost of
hydrogen production alone can be cut in half based on earlier projections.” The
department predicts hydrogen could be produced, compressed and dispensed at the
pump for the gasoline-cost equivalent of less than $4 per gallon.
Cheap natural gas “puts a fair amount of wind in our sails,” said Chip Bottone,
president and chief executive of FuelCell Energy, which makes large stationary
fuel-cell power plants. He claimed the company could produce electricity for
about 13 to 15 cents per kilowatt-hour, a price comparable to grid power
produced from coal in some areas though the hydrogen cost equation ought to
include the amortization of the fuel-cell cost.
Automakers like Daimler, Hyundai, Toyota and Honda, which plan to start
commercial production of fuel-cell cars in 2015, cite a lack of a widespread
refueling network as their biggest obstacle to public adoption of these
vehicles.
Cheap Natural Gas
General Motors deployed a test fleet of more than 100 fuel-cell vehicles
beginning in 2007, but has not committed to a commercial program. Charles Freese,
executive director of the company’s global fuel-cell activities, said in an
interview that getting enough hydrogen stations to meet the needs of early
adopters remained a challenge, especially because some stations may initially be
underutilized. But cheaper gas made the business case for building filling
stations more attractive. “Lower-cost inputs mean lower-cost hydrogen coming out
the other end,” he said.
Patrick Serfass, vice president of the Hydrogen Education Foundation, a
nonprofit hydrogen-fuel advocacy group, called Dr. Chu’s evolving position
“inevitable,” given breakthroughs in fuel-cell programs supported by the Energy
Department. In an e-mail, Mr. Serfass described Dr. Chu’s earlier positions on
hydrogen as “ancient history.”
David Friedman, deputy director of the vehicles program at the Union of
Concerned Scientists, agreed with that assessment. “Rethinking previously held
positions is what a good scientist does,” he said.
.jpg)
