Connect with us

Published

on

In this edition of CleanTech Talk, Paul Martin and I discuss Michael Liebreich’s hydrogen ladder. Paul is a working chemical process engineer, and has spent his career building prototypes of biofuel, hydrogen, and chemical processing plants as part of scaling them to full, modularized production systems for clients. Paul’s piece in CleanTechnica on why hydrogen is not suitable as a replacement for natural gas in buildings is a must read.

Liebreich is an entrepreneur, founder of what has become Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), chairman on multiple boards, has engineering and business degrees, and represented the UK on their skiing team in 1992. He’s had a rich and interesting life, but for the purposes of this pair of podcasts and attendant articles, it’s his iteratively improving hydrogen ladder Paul Martin and I are focusing on.

Regular readers of CleanTechnica will know that I have been assessing hydrogen’s place in the decarbonized economy in the areas of transportation, oil refining, and industry, among others. Paul and I share a strong opinion that “blue” hydrogen, which is sourced from fossil fuels with 10-30 times the mass of CO2 which is theoretically going to be sequestered or used, is a fossil-fuel industry lobbying effort and not a viable climate solution.

Michael Liebreich’s Hydrogen Ladder v4.1, used with permission under Creative Commons license.

Listeners are recommended to keep the hydrogen ladder in front of them as Paul and I talk through aspects of it.

We start with a discussion of one of Paul’s frequently used hashtags, #hopium, which he defines as the drug that is made out of our own hope to overcome our faculties and divert government money to things which aren’t useful. We agree that the fossil fuel industry are masters of PR when it comes to giving false hope to governments and individuals that we can just vacuum CO2 out of the air or out of smokestacks after emitting it, rather than the reality that we leave most fossil fuels unburned and unused.

Paul steps through existing hydrogen production, pointing out that of the 120 million tons used annually today, less than 0.1% could be considered green hydrogen, intentionally cracked from water using renewably generated electricity. All hydrogen today is actually black, at least 30% blacker per unit of energy than the fossil fuel it was made from. For coal, up to 30 kg of CO2 is created for every kg of hydrogen, with one data point suggesting a proposal in Australia to make hydrogen from low-grade coal with 35 kg of CO2 for each kg of hydrogen. For natural gas, it’s up to 10 kg, but there is also methane leakage with its 86x worse than CO2 on 20 years global warming potential. Creation of hydrogen from natural includes an almost equal amount of GHGs in methane leakage, which is typically not counted in the emissions.

We continue with a discussion of ground transportation, where there is no place for hydrogen, in our opinion. Paul draws out the efficiency versus effectiveness argument first. Gasoline isn’t efficient, as perhaps 15% turns into useful energy, but it is effective due to being cheap, easily poured into gas tanks, and easily transported.

Hydrogen is neither efficient or effective for ground transportation. The misleading truths that are used for #hopium are that it’s the most common element in the universe and has excellent energy density for its mass.

The first truth is not helpful, as all hydrogen available to us is tightly chemically coupled with other substances, whether that is fossil fuels or water. It takes a lot of energy to break those bonds.

The second truth is not helpful either. Hydrogen, as the lightest element and lightest gas, has very poor energy density by volume, regardless of whether you compress it to 700 atmospheres, a little over 10,000 pounds per square inch, or chill it to 24 degrees above absolute zero to liquify it. As a gas, it has less than a third the energy density by volume of methane, and as a superchilled liquid, its energy density by volume is only 75% better.

Paul points out that the Toyota Mirai vs Tesla Model 3, otherwise comparable cars, is illustrative in that the Mirai weighs as much as the Tesla, even though it only carries 5.6 kilograms of hydrogen. The tanks weigh hundreds of kilograms. A standard hydrogen cylinder weighs 65 kg and only delivers 0.6 kg of hydrogen, a problem that transportation uses have to overcome with expensive thin-walled aluminum tanks wrapped in carbon fiber. It’s also worth noting that hydrogen cars have less interior and luggage room due to the hydrogen storage and fuel cell component space requirements.

Paul points out the lost mechanical energy of compression. He calculated once that the energy used to compress 5 kg of hydrogen to 700 atmospheres was equivalent to the kinetic potential energy of suspending the car 500 meters in the air, ready to drop. That energy is lost. If superchilled hydrogen were used instead, 40% of the energy in the hydrogen would have to be used to chill it.

The final devil in the details is thermal management. Hydrogen is an interesting gas in that unlike many other gases, it gets warmer as it expands. Anyone used to compressed air cans know that the jet of air comes out cold, but an equivalent jet of hydrogen would come out hot. Even though compressed hydrogen isn’t liquified, in other words, it has to be chilled in its tanks before being pumped into cars, another loss of energy.

This all leads to the common myth that hydrogen cars are quick and convenient to refuel. The reality is shown by Toyota’s entry in the 24-hour enduro Super Taikyu Series in Japan’s Shizuoka Prefecture. They prepped a racing Corolla with a hydrogen combustion engine. It had four huge carbon-fiber tanks in the area where you would normally have back seats. They brought four tractor trailers full of equipment to fuel the car. The car had to spend four hours of the 24 hours of the race refueling. Ineffective, inefficient, and with startling infrastructure requirements.

As Paul says, the devil isn’t hiding in the details, he’s waving his pitchfork in plain sight of anyone willing to see him.

We move on to agreeing in general that hydrogen might have a direct play in long-haul shipping, or at least hasn’t proven itself uncompetitive in that space. I recently assessed Maersk’s methanol drivetrain dual-fuel ships announcement, and 40-day journeys with thousands of tons of fuel are a very hard problem to crack. Maersk has proposed a green methanol manufacturing facility capable of producing enough synthetic green methanol annually to cover half of one trip for one of the eight ships.

For the rest of the first half of the podcast, aviation is in our sights. Paul and I agree that short- and medium-haul aviation — basically all air trips within the boundaries of most continents — are going to be battery electric. Hydrogen has no advantages for those ranges.

And we agree that long-haul aviation is another hard problem. I went deep on long-haul aviation’s global warming contributions and challenges recently, so had the concerns at top of mind. First was the problem of direct carbon dioxide emissions of course, but aviation also has contrail and nitrous oxides emissions problems.

Contrails are water vapor, effectively clouds. Due to the altitude of especially night-flying high-altitude planes, they keep more heat in than they reflect. That’s something that can partially be managed by changing operations, reducing altitude and night-time operations, but there are economic reasons why planes fly high and at night that need to be addressed with economic incentives.

Nitrous oxides are trickier. Any fuel burned in oxygen produces nitrous oxides with a bunch of the nitrogen from the air, which is, after all, 78% nitrogen. Nitrogen combined with oxygen in the form of N20, nitrous oxide or laughing gas, has a global warming potential of 265 times that of CO2, and persists in the atmosphere a long time.

Another form of nitrous oxide, NO2 or nitrous dioxide, is the chemical precursor to smog, causing asthma and other heart lung problems. For those following along, yes, if you have a natural gas stove or furnace in your home, it’s also putting NO2 into your home’s air along with carbon monoxide, which you need a detector for if you don’t have it. All the more reason to electrify to induction stove tops and heat pumps as your appliances age out.

Paul’s perspective is that hydrogen for long-haul aviation has multiple problems. The first is that it can’t be stored as a pressurized gas in airplanes due to the increasing loss of atmospheric pressure and bulk as planes ascend to 30,000 ft. The second is that even chilled, it’s much less dense by volume than kerosene, so it would have to be stored in the fuselage. The third is that fuel cells are bulky for energy output of sufficient electricity, so would also have to be within the fuselage, and fuel cells give off a lot of heat. So that means either jets lose a fair amount of passenger and luggage storage, or get a lot bigger and heavier, even before the cooling and venting requirements for the fuel cell heat. That makes the economics of jet travel problematic, which might be just fine, as it arguably should be more expensive than it is.

However, this means that it would be hydrogen jet engines that would be used if hydrogen were to be used directly as a fuel. And burning hydrogen in a jet engine will produce a lot of water vapor, hence the same contrails, and nitrous oxides, hence the high global warming potential. Hydrogen would only deal with two-thirds of the problem.

Paul and I agree that biofuels for hard-to-service transportation modes such as long-haul shipping and aviation, along with operational changes and reduced use, are likely the best we can do until we achieve a battery as much better than lithium-ion as lithium-ion is than lead acid, and that took a century.

But we’ve had biofuels certified for aviation use since 2011, and they just aren’t being used. They are more expensive, despite being much lower CO2 emissions cradle-to-grave than kerosene. Once again, negative externalities have to be priced.

The next half of the podcast discussion gets into places where hydrogen actually has a place in the sun, but makes it clear that hydrogen is actually a decarbonization problem, not a decarbonization solution.

 

Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.

 

 


Advertisement



 


Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.

Continue Reading

Environment

Genesis wants a bigger slice of the US luxury market with new EVs en route

Published

on

By

Genesis wants a bigger slice of the US luxury market with new EVs en route

If you haven’t noticed, Genesis is quickly making a name for itself in the US. The luxury automaker now has 60 sales outlets as it expands into new US states. With new EVs launching, Genesis is eyeing a bigger share of the US luxury market.

Hyundai Motor Group’s Genesis brand is quietly emerging as a powerhouse in the US luxury market. Genesis marked its entry into the luxury segment in 2008 as a Hyundai-branded model.

In 2015, Hyundai announced Genesis would become an independent luxury brand. Since launching its first vehicle in the US, the luxury brand’s sales have surged from 7,000 in 2016 to over 69,000 last year. It even outsold Nissan’s Infiniti.

According to Genesis, this is just the start. The Korean luxury brand wants an even bigger slice of the market as it eyes rivals like Porsche.

A big reason behind the brand’s confidence is its new lineup of stylishly electric models. Genesis sells three EVs in the US: The GV60, Electrified G80, and Electrified GV70.

After introducing the Electrified GV70 just last year, the electric SUV is already Genesis’ top-selling EV in the US. According to Kelley Blue Book, Genesis sold 2,343 electric GV70 models in the US through September.

Genesis-Electrified-GV70-NACS
2026 Genesis Electrified GV70 update (Source: Genesis)

Genesis eyes a bigger share of the US luxury market

Altogether, the luxury brand’s EV sales reached over 4,600 through the first nine months of 2024, topping Porsche (4,291) and Volvo (3,644).

Genesis made a statement at the LA Auto Show, unveiling the updated 2026 Electrified GV70. The luxury electric SUV now includes more range and an NACS port so drivers can charge at Tesla Superchargers. It will go on sale in the first half of 2025.

Genesis-US-luxury-EV-market
Genesis at the 2024 LA Auto Show (Source: Hyundai Motor Group)

Meanwhile, Genesis showcased its new GV60 Magma Concept at the event, its first dedicated high-performance EV. The brand sees its Magma performance brand rivaling that of Geman luxury brands like Mercedes AMG, BMW M, and Audi RS.

The Genesis GV60 Magma EV will launch next year, spearheading the brand’s “expansion into the realm of high-performance vehicles.”

Genesis-US-luxury-EV-market
Genesis GV60 Magma EV concept global debut at Goodwood (Source: Genesis)

Genesis enhanced the battery and motor while fine-tuning the chassis, thermodynamics, and profile for more power and efficiency.

It also features an aggressive new design, sitting much lower and wider than the current GV60 model. Genesis added a Magma-exclusive sound system to give it a sports car-like feel in the cockpit.

Genesis-G80-EV-Magma
Genesis G80 EV Magma Concept (Source: Genesis)

In April, we got our first look at the G80 EV Magma concept, which could be a potential challenger to Tesla’s Model S Plaid and the Porsche Taycan GT Turbo.

The luxury brand is expected to launch its flagship electric three-row SUV next year, the GV90. Genesis previewed the ultra-luxury EV in March after unveiling the Neolun concept.

Genesis now has 60 sales bases in the US, with new stores in Washington, Minnesota, New York, and Florida. It’s also building 30 in Canada as it expands its presence in the North American luxury market.

The luxury brand is opening a new dedicated design center in California. The “Genesis Design California” will open in the first half of 2025 as it builds out its US network.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

No, BYD is not taking over NIO as fake rumors claim

Published

on

By

No, BYD is not taking over NIO as fake rumors claim

A rumor spreading like wildfire on social media claims BYD will be taking over NIO (NYSE: NIO) as the EV giant gobbles up market share in China. The rumor was posted by a suspected BYD employee, but NIO is denying the claim.

BYD acquiring NIO would be a massive move as China’s leading EV maker continues to dominate the market. But that’s not going to happen.

According to CnEVPost, NIO’s assistant vice president for branding and communications, Ma Lin, denied the rumors that BYD is taking over the company on Friday.

Ma posted a screenshot on social media asking BYD’s general manager of branding and PR, Li Yunfei if the person who posted the fake rumor was an employee.

Earlier today, the suspected employee claimed BYD and NIO were setting up a joint venture. In a Weibo post, the suspect said BYD would have majority control of the partnership with a 51% share while NIO would get the remaining 49% ownership.

Ma told Li that if it was, in fact, a BYD employee, he needed to issue an official clarification and apologize. If not, they can get the police involved together. Li also denied the rumors, saying the claim was seriously untrue.

BYD-taking-over-NIO
NIO Onvo L60 electric SUV at the 2024 Guangzhou International Auto Show (Source: NIO Onvo)

NIO denies rumors that BYD is taking over the company

This is not the first time rumors surfaced that BYD will be taking over NIO, but because it is a suspected employee, the post has garnered more attention.

BYD is on a major hiring spree as it ramps up production to meet the higher demand. The EV giant now has over 900,000 employees, making it by far the largest A-share listed company in China.

BYD-taking-over-NIO
BYD Dolphin (left) and Atto 3 (right) Source: BYD

After selling over 500,000 vehicles for the first time in a single month in October, BYD’s surge is heating up as the EV giant expands overseas for growth.

October was BYD’s fifth consecutive record sales month as it closes in on auto leaders like Ford in global deliveries.

BYD-taking-over-NIO
Onvo L60 electric SUV models (Source: NIO Onvo)

NIO is also gaining momentum, with sales topping the 20,000 mark for the sixth straight month in October. With output of its new lower-priced Onvo L60 electric SUV ramping up, NIO expects to continue seeing higher demand.

Ma said on Friday that NIO’s “recent situation is quite good.” The company’s head of PR added, “Cash flow turned positive in the third quarter, gross profit improved in October, earning an extra RMB 100 million, and Onvo (deliveries) will exceed 10,000 in December.”

NIO is launching its third brand, Firefly, with deliveries kicking off in the first half of 2025. The company expects sales to double next year as it works to become profitable by 2026.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Hyundai recalls more than 145,000 EVs

Published

on

By

Hyundai recalls more than 145,000 EVs

Hyundai Motors is recalling 145,235 EVs and other “electrified” vehicles in the US, citing concerns about a loss of driving power, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said on Friday.

The NHTSA announced this morning that the recall affects selected IONIQ 5 and IONIQ 6 EVs, as well as certain luxury Genesis models, including the GV60, GV70, and G80 electrified variants, from the 2022-2025 model years, Reuters reported.

2025-Hyundai-IONIQ-5-prices
2025 Hyundai IONIQ 5 (Source: Hyundai)

It looks like the issue stems from “the integrated charging control units in these vehicles, which may become damaged and fail to charge the 12-volt battery. This malfunction could lead to a complete loss of drive power, posing safety risks for drivers,” the NHTSA stated.

If you’re an owner of one of these Hyundai models dating 2022-2025, stay tuned. Hyundai has not yet provided a timeline as to when affected vehicles will be repaired.

To make that happen, the company’s dealers will inspect and replace the charging unit and its fuse if necessary, NHTSA said. Free of charge, of course.

Importantly, no crashes, injuries, fatalities, or fires due to this issue have been reported in the US, Hyundai reported.


If you’re an electric vehicle owner, charge up your car at home with rooftop solar panels. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing on solar, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them. 

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending