Cost of electrolytic hydrogen
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Working on a future history setting; the question arises, since the world cannot run on fossil fuels forever, one way or another, something must end up replacing them; what will that something be?
A co-author has suggested using nuclear energy to electrolyze water for hydrogen which is combined with carbon dioxide to produce methanol. The chemistry of this is sound but I'm not sure about the economics of getting hydrogen that way. As I understand it, hydrogen produced by electrolysis currently costs several times as much as that produced from natural gas, which suggests methanol produced by this method will always be at least a few times more expensive than current fossil fuels (assuming future nuclear energy will never be as cheap as current solar for applications like this that don't need external storage); it seems likely to me that the world will be very reluctant to accept a several-fold increase in the cost of fuel. (I'm not talking about what should happen, but what plausibly will happen.)
On the other hand, it turns out to my surprise that there already exists a facility making methanol by the above method except geothermal substituted for nuclear: https://www.chemicals-technology.com/projects/george-olah-renewable-methanol-plant-iceland/
On the third hand, that article does not discuss the economics of the hydrogen source; for all I know, maybe it's a pilot project built as proof of concept that is not, nor expected to be, economically competitive.
I can't find a clear answer as to how much hydrogen costs from various sources. Google finds estimates all over the map, ranging from a dollar per gram to a dollar per kilogram.
So my question is:
Assuming advanced nuclear reactors can provide a reasonably cheap (and clean and safe enough to satisfy political requirements) source of heat, and the technology is mature and acquires relevant economies of scale, how much would electrolytic hydrogen end up costing? Either in dollars per kilogram, dollars per joule, or relative to the price of oil or natural gas?
science-based energy
|
show 11 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Working on a future history setting; the question arises, since the world cannot run on fossil fuels forever, one way or another, something must end up replacing them; what will that something be?
A co-author has suggested using nuclear energy to electrolyze water for hydrogen which is combined with carbon dioxide to produce methanol. The chemistry of this is sound but I'm not sure about the economics of getting hydrogen that way. As I understand it, hydrogen produced by electrolysis currently costs several times as much as that produced from natural gas, which suggests methanol produced by this method will always be at least a few times more expensive than current fossil fuels (assuming future nuclear energy will never be as cheap as current solar for applications like this that don't need external storage); it seems likely to me that the world will be very reluctant to accept a several-fold increase in the cost of fuel. (I'm not talking about what should happen, but what plausibly will happen.)
On the other hand, it turns out to my surprise that there already exists a facility making methanol by the above method except geothermal substituted for nuclear: https://www.chemicals-technology.com/projects/george-olah-renewable-methanol-plant-iceland/
On the third hand, that article does not discuss the economics of the hydrogen source; for all I know, maybe it's a pilot project built as proof of concept that is not, nor expected to be, economically competitive.
I can't find a clear answer as to how much hydrogen costs from various sources. Google finds estimates all over the map, ranging from a dollar per gram to a dollar per kilogram.
So my question is:
Assuming advanced nuclear reactors can provide a reasonably cheap (and clean and safe enough to satisfy political requirements) source of heat, and the technology is mature and acquires relevant economies of scale, how much would electrolytic hydrogen end up costing? Either in dollars per kilogram, dollars per joule, or relative to the price of oil or natural gas?
science-based energy
Assuming that this is carbon-neutral because the carbon is captured, are governments subsidizing carbon capture and taxing carbon-dioxide emissions?
– Davislor
4 hours ago
@Davislor Maybe, depending on various factors. I think political support for carbon-neutral energy sources is an available resource, but experience shows it is a limited one. Besides the proposed solution has to compete not only with fossil fuels, but also with other carbon-neutral solutions such as battery-powered cars charged with renewable electricity. So it still depends on just how expensive the hydrogen source will be.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
What is the methanol for?
– RonJohn
3 hours ago
it seems you are saying neglect that nuclear power aspect, and just deal with the electrolysis cost - which is hard to do, since that is the principle component, other than infrastructure & distribution, which are nothing new. maybe i'm missing something - but that seems like a question for industrial engineering experts doing long analyses.
– theRiley
3 hours ago
@RonJohn Replacing gasoline as a transport fuel.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
|
show 11 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Working on a future history setting; the question arises, since the world cannot run on fossil fuels forever, one way or another, something must end up replacing them; what will that something be?
A co-author has suggested using nuclear energy to electrolyze water for hydrogen which is combined with carbon dioxide to produce methanol. The chemistry of this is sound but I'm not sure about the economics of getting hydrogen that way. As I understand it, hydrogen produced by electrolysis currently costs several times as much as that produced from natural gas, which suggests methanol produced by this method will always be at least a few times more expensive than current fossil fuels (assuming future nuclear energy will never be as cheap as current solar for applications like this that don't need external storage); it seems likely to me that the world will be very reluctant to accept a several-fold increase in the cost of fuel. (I'm not talking about what should happen, but what plausibly will happen.)
On the other hand, it turns out to my surprise that there already exists a facility making methanol by the above method except geothermal substituted for nuclear: https://www.chemicals-technology.com/projects/george-olah-renewable-methanol-plant-iceland/
On the third hand, that article does not discuss the economics of the hydrogen source; for all I know, maybe it's a pilot project built as proof of concept that is not, nor expected to be, economically competitive.
I can't find a clear answer as to how much hydrogen costs from various sources. Google finds estimates all over the map, ranging from a dollar per gram to a dollar per kilogram.
So my question is:
Assuming advanced nuclear reactors can provide a reasonably cheap (and clean and safe enough to satisfy political requirements) source of heat, and the technology is mature and acquires relevant economies of scale, how much would electrolytic hydrogen end up costing? Either in dollars per kilogram, dollars per joule, or relative to the price of oil or natural gas?
science-based energy
Working on a future history setting; the question arises, since the world cannot run on fossil fuels forever, one way or another, something must end up replacing them; what will that something be?
A co-author has suggested using nuclear energy to electrolyze water for hydrogen which is combined with carbon dioxide to produce methanol. The chemistry of this is sound but I'm not sure about the economics of getting hydrogen that way. As I understand it, hydrogen produced by electrolysis currently costs several times as much as that produced from natural gas, which suggests methanol produced by this method will always be at least a few times more expensive than current fossil fuels (assuming future nuclear energy will never be as cheap as current solar for applications like this that don't need external storage); it seems likely to me that the world will be very reluctant to accept a several-fold increase in the cost of fuel. (I'm not talking about what should happen, but what plausibly will happen.)
On the other hand, it turns out to my surprise that there already exists a facility making methanol by the above method except geothermal substituted for nuclear: https://www.chemicals-technology.com/projects/george-olah-renewable-methanol-plant-iceland/
On the third hand, that article does not discuss the economics of the hydrogen source; for all I know, maybe it's a pilot project built as proof of concept that is not, nor expected to be, economically competitive.
I can't find a clear answer as to how much hydrogen costs from various sources. Google finds estimates all over the map, ranging from a dollar per gram to a dollar per kilogram.
So my question is:
Assuming advanced nuclear reactors can provide a reasonably cheap (and clean and safe enough to satisfy political requirements) source of heat, and the technology is mature and acquires relevant economies of scale, how much would electrolytic hydrogen end up costing? Either in dollars per kilogram, dollars per joule, or relative to the price of oil or natural gas?
science-based energy
science-based energy
asked 4 hours ago
rwallace
690414
690414
Assuming that this is carbon-neutral because the carbon is captured, are governments subsidizing carbon capture and taxing carbon-dioxide emissions?
– Davislor
4 hours ago
@Davislor Maybe, depending on various factors. I think political support for carbon-neutral energy sources is an available resource, but experience shows it is a limited one. Besides the proposed solution has to compete not only with fossil fuels, but also with other carbon-neutral solutions such as battery-powered cars charged with renewable electricity. So it still depends on just how expensive the hydrogen source will be.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
What is the methanol for?
– RonJohn
3 hours ago
it seems you are saying neglect that nuclear power aspect, and just deal with the electrolysis cost - which is hard to do, since that is the principle component, other than infrastructure & distribution, which are nothing new. maybe i'm missing something - but that seems like a question for industrial engineering experts doing long analyses.
– theRiley
3 hours ago
@RonJohn Replacing gasoline as a transport fuel.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
|
show 11 more comments
Assuming that this is carbon-neutral because the carbon is captured, are governments subsidizing carbon capture and taxing carbon-dioxide emissions?
– Davislor
4 hours ago
@Davislor Maybe, depending on various factors. I think political support for carbon-neutral energy sources is an available resource, but experience shows it is a limited one. Besides the proposed solution has to compete not only with fossil fuels, but also with other carbon-neutral solutions such as battery-powered cars charged with renewable electricity. So it still depends on just how expensive the hydrogen source will be.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
What is the methanol for?
– RonJohn
3 hours ago
it seems you are saying neglect that nuclear power aspect, and just deal with the electrolysis cost - which is hard to do, since that is the principle component, other than infrastructure & distribution, which are nothing new. maybe i'm missing something - but that seems like a question for industrial engineering experts doing long analyses.
– theRiley
3 hours ago
@RonJohn Replacing gasoline as a transport fuel.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
Assuming that this is carbon-neutral because the carbon is captured, are governments subsidizing carbon capture and taxing carbon-dioxide emissions?
– Davislor
4 hours ago
Assuming that this is carbon-neutral because the carbon is captured, are governments subsidizing carbon capture and taxing carbon-dioxide emissions?
– Davislor
4 hours ago
@Davislor Maybe, depending on various factors. I think political support for carbon-neutral energy sources is an available resource, but experience shows it is a limited one. Besides the proposed solution has to compete not only with fossil fuels, but also with other carbon-neutral solutions such as battery-powered cars charged with renewable electricity. So it still depends on just how expensive the hydrogen source will be.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
@Davislor Maybe, depending on various factors. I think political support for carbon-neutral energy sources is an available resource, but experience shows it is a limited one. Besides the proposed solution has to compete not only with fossil fuels, but also with other carbon-neutral solutions such as battery-powered cars charged with renewable electricity. So it still depends on just how expensive the hydrogen source will be.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
What is the methanol for?
– RonJohn
3 hours ago
What is the methanol for?
– RonJohn
3 hours ago
it seems you are saying neglect that nuclear power aspect, and just deal with the electrolysis cost - which is hard to do, since that is the principle component, other than infrastructure & distribution, which are nothing new. maybe i'm missing something - but that seems like a question for industrial engineering experts doing long analyses.
– theRiley
3 hours ago
it seems you are saying neglect that nuclear power aspect, and just deal with the electrolysis cost - which is hard to do, since that is the principle component, other than infrastructure & distribution, which are nothing new. maybe i'm missing something - but that seems like a question for industrial engineering experts doing long analyses.
– theRiley
3 hours ago
@RonJohn Replacing gasoline as a transport fuel.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
@RonJohn Replacing gasoline as a transport fuel.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
|
show 11 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
$3-6 per gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge)
In 2009 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory assembled a panel to generate 80% confidence intervals for the future costs of hydrogen production. The report is here. This panel used technology available in 2005, but capitalized with a full industrial infrastructure, to make the best use of production scale (this is the 'central production model' discussed in the report). They panel focused on two technologies: alkaline water electrolysis and polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis.
A kg of hydrogen is referred to as a gallon of gasoline equivalent, since it has roughly the same amount of energy as a gallon of gasoline.
The average cost was strongly dependent on the cost of electricity. The assumed 'high' price for electricity was $80 per MWh, whereupon hydrogen costs are $4.78 per gge. However, the levelized cost of nuclear power is currently around $120 per MWh. If we introduce this increase in electricity power, we get an assumption of more like $6 per gge in costs.
The low costs for electricity at $0.03 per kWh, and all other factors minimized would be about $1.70 per gge.
-1 @kingledion I have commented,My deleted comment stands. I profoundly disagree with it's deletion in the context. Especially since I have neither been notified of it's deletion nor told why.
– Duckisaduckisaduck
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
$3-6 per gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge)
In 2009 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory assembled a panel to generate 80% confidence intervals for the future costs of hydrogen production. The report is here. This panel used technology available in 2005, but capitalized with a full industrial infrastructure, to make the best use of production scale (this is the 'central production model' discussed in the report). They panel focused on two technologies: alkaline water electrolysis and polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis.
A kg of hydrogen is referred to as a gallon of gasoline equivalent, since it has roughly the same amount of energy as a gallon of gasoline.
The average cost was strongly dependent on the cost of electricity. The assumed 'high' price for electricity was $80 per MWh, whereupon hydrogen costs are $4.78 per gge. However, the levelized cost of nuclear power is currently around $120 per MWh. If we introduce this increase in electricity power, we get an assumption of more like $6 per gge in costs.
The low costs for electricity at $0.03 per kWh, and all other factors minimized would be about $1.70 per gge.
-1 @kingledion I have commented,My deleted comment stands. I profoundly disagree with it's deletion in the context. Especially since I have neither been notified of it's deletion nor told why.
– Duckisaduckisaduck
1 hour ago
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
$3-6 per gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge)
In 2009 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory assembled a panel to generate 80% confidence intervals for the future costs of hydrogen production. The report is here. This panel used technology available in 2005, but capitalized with a full industrial infrastructure, to make the best use of production scale (this is the 'central production model' discussed in the report). They panel focused on two technologies: alkaline water electrolysis and polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis.
A kg of hydrogen is referred to as a gallon of gasoline equivalent, since it has roughly the same amount of energy as a gallon of gasoline.
The average cost was strongly dependent on the cost of electricity. The assumed 'high' price for electricity was $80 per MWh, whereupon hydrogen costs are $4.78 per gge. However, the levelized cost of nuclear power is currently around $120 per MWh. If we introduce this increase in electricity power, we get an assumption of more like $6 per gge in costs.
The low costs for electricity at $0.03 per kWh, and all other factors minimized would be about $1.70 per gge.
-1 @kingledion I have commented,My deleted comment stands. I profoundly disagree with it's deletion in the context. Especially since I have neither been notified of it's deletion nor told why.
– Duckisaduckisaduck
1 hour ago
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
$3-6 per gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge)
In 2009 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory assembled a panel to generate 80% confidence intervals for the future costs of hydrogen production. The report is here. This panel used technology available in 2005, but capitalized with a full industrial infrastructure, to make the best use of production scale (this is the 'central production model' discussed in the report). They panel focused on two technologies: alkaline water electrolysis and polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis.
A kg of hydrogen is referred to as a gallon of gasoline equivalent, since it has roughly the same amount of energy as a gallon of gasoline.
The average cost was strongly dependent on the cost of electricity. The assumed 'high' price for electricity was $80 per MWh, whereupon hydrogen costs are $4.78 per gge. However, the levelized cost of nuclear power is currently around $120 per MWh. If we introduce this increase in electricity power, we get an assumption of more like $6 per gge in costs.
The low costs for electricity at $0.03 per kWh, and all other factors minimized would be about $1.70 per gge.
$3-6 per gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge)
In 2009 the National Renewable Energy Laboratory assembled a panel to generate 80% confidence intervals for the future costs of hydrogen production. The report is here. This panel used technology available in 2005, but capitalized with a full industrial infrastructure, to make the best use of production scale (this is the 'central production model' discussed in the report). They panel focused on two technologies: alkaline water electrolysis and polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis.
A kg of hydrogen is referred to as a gallon of gasoline equivalent, since it has roughly the same amount of energy as a gallon of gasoline.
The average cost was strongly dependent on the cost of electricity. The assumed 'high' price for electricity was $80 per MWh, whereupon hydrogen costs are $4.78 per gge. However, the levelized cost of nuclear power is currently around $120 per MWh. If we introduce this increase in electricity power, we get an assumption of more like $6 per gge in costs.
The low costs for electricity at $0.03 per kWh, and all other factors minimized would be about $1.70 per gge.
answered 3 hours ago
kingledion
71.1k24237414
71.1k24237414
-1 @kingledion I have commented,My deleted comment stands. I profoundly disagree with it's deletion in the context. Especially since I have neither been notified of it's deletion nor told why.
– Duckisaduckisaduck
1 hour ago
add a comment |
-1 @kingledion I have commented,My deleted comment stands. I profoundly disagree with it's deletion in the context. Especially since I have neither been notified of it's deletion nor told why.
– Duckisaduckisaduck
1 hour ago
-1 @kingledion I have commented,My deleted comment stands. I profoundly disagree with it's deletion in the context. Especially since I have neither been notified of it's deletion nor told why.
– Duckisaduckisaduck
1 hour ago
-1 @kingledion I have commented,My deleted comment stands. I profoundly disagree with it's deletion in the context. Especially since I have neither been notified of it's deletion nor told why.
– Duckisaduckisaduck
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f131200%2fcost-of-electrolytic-hydrogen%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Assuming that this is carbon-neutral because the carbon is captured, are governments subsidizing carbon capture and taxing carbon-dioxide emissions?
– Davislor
4 hours ago
@Davislor Maybe, depending on various factors. I think political support for carbon-neutral energy sources is an available resource, but experience shows it is a limited one. Besides the proposed solution has to compete not only with fossil fuels, but also with other carbon-neutral solutions such as battery-powered cars charged with renewable electricity. So it still depends on just how expensive the hydrogen source will be.
– rwallace
3 hours ago
What is the methanol for?
– RonJohn
3 hours ago
it seems you are saying neglect that nuclear power aspect, and just deal with the electrolysis cost - which is hard to do, since that is the principle component, other than infrastructure & distribution, which are nothing new. maybe i'm missing something - but that seems like a question for industrial engineering experts doing long analyses.
– theRiley
3 hours ago
@RonJohn Replacing gasoline as a transport fuel.
– rwallace
3 hours ago