The\u00a0major benefit of Hydrogen over electrification is its flexibility.\u00a0 A Hydrogen truck can be refuelled in approximately the same time as a diesel truck and the operating range and operating patterns are similar.\u00a0 So Hydrogen-powered trucks could fit into the existing logistics system without too much change.\u00a0 However Hydrogen is much more energy intensive than electricity and consequently is inherently\u00a0more expensive for the economy, the environment and\u00a0probably for the vehicle operator.\u00a0 Conversely, electrification of road freight transport would require some modifications to logistics practice [1], but would be significantly lower cost and lower environmental impact to operate.\u00a0 Both would require infrastructure investments at large scale. Given the urgent need to limit Carbon emissions in the short term to avoid the 1.5 deg C global temperature rise, there is a\u00a0further imperative to deploy solutions quickly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The decision about which \u2018energy vector\u2019 to use for lorries is very important.\u00a0 Proponents of both electricity and hydrogen recognise that the choice of energy systems for freight transport interacts with the overall energy economy: including electric power, all modes of transport and heat.\u00a0 Consequently, system-level considerations are\u00a0needed.\u00a0 So \u2018electricity vs hydrogen\u2019 is a milestone decision, with major long-term ramifications at national and international levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. Hydrogen<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nThere are two main ways that Hydrogen can be manufactured to power future heavy lorries:\u00a0 (i) \u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen, manufactured by electrolysis \u2013 using electricity to split water into Hydrogen and Oxygen; and (ii) \u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen, manufactured by Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) \u2013 using high temperature steam to convert Methane into Hydrogen.\u00a0 (Click here for definitions of \u2018Green\u2019, \u2018Blue\u2019 and \u2018Grey\u2019 Hydrogen<\/a>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen Generated by Electrolysis<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nFigure 1 shows three option for powering long-haul vehicles.\u00a0 It follows the same methodology as used in my\u00a0previous blog on hydrogen-powered vehicles<\/a>.\u00a0 The left hand pathway illustrates\u00a0use of 100 kWh of renewable electricity to generate\u00a0\u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen by electrolysis and use of the resulting Hydrogen\u00a0to power fuel-cell electric vehicles.\u00a0 Each step in the process introduces energy losses and the overall energy performance is the product of the individual efficiencies.\u00a0 The \u2018round-trip\u2019 process of using renewable electricity to make Hydrogen by electrolysis, storing and transporting it on a vehicle, then converting it back to electricity in a fuel-cell and powering the electric motors \u2013 is only about 23% efficient overall.\u00a0 That is, for every 100 kWh of \u2018renewable electricity\u2019 purchased from the grid, only 23 kWh will reach the road wheels of the lorry.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe middle pathway shows that \u00a069kWh (of the original 100 kWh) reach the wheels of a battery electric vehicle and the right hand pathway shows that 77 kWh reach the wheels of a lorry travelling on an Electric Road System (ERS). The ERS is the most efficient pathway because the motors are powered directly from the electricity supply (via an inverter), avoiding energy loss\u00a0through charging and discharging\u00a0a battery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/EV-Options-new.jpg\")
Fig. 1.\u00a0\u00a0Efficiencies of long-haul vehicle energy pathways: (i) Fuel cell Electric Vehicle running on \u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen; (ii) Battery Electric Vehicle; (iii) Electric Road System vehicle.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nThe\u00a0very low efficiency of the \u2018green\u2019 Hydrogen (electrolysis) pathway means that the process uses a lot of renewable electricity to make the necessary quantity of Hydrogen.\u00a0 The (unsubsidised) cost of Hydrogen created by electrolysis is therefore high and the amount of power required is very large.\u00a0 This latter point can be illustrated by estimating the land area of renewable energy generation systems (assumed here to be land-based wind turbines) needed to supply the power\u00a0used\u00a0by the UK\u2019s lorries \u2013 either by direct electrification (ERS) or via the Green Hydrogen (electrolysis) route.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The UK\u2019s HGV fleet transports about 189 billion t.km of freight per year.\u00a0 A 44t lorry at 75% load factor uses about 0.19 kWh\/t.km.\u00a0 Spreading this over 12 hours per day, 365 days per year, the power requirement is approximately 8.2 GW. \u00a0If the \u2018wind turbine to road wheel\u2019 efficiency is 77% (as for the ERS solution), powering the vehicles would require 10.6 GW, ie approximately 3,500 x 3MW wind turbines.\u00a0 These would require a land area of about 5,300km2<\/sup>, as shown to scale by the smaller circular area on the map in Figure 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIf the \u2018wind to wheel\u2019 efficiency is 23%, as for the Green Hydrogen pathway, powering the vehicles would require 35.6 GW, ie approximately 12,000 x 3MW wind turbines. \u00a0These 12,000 wind turbines would require a land area of 18,000 km2<\/sup>\u00a0as shown by the larger circular area\u00a0on the map.\u00a0\u00a0(For reference,\u00a0the\u00a0average<\/em>\u00a0electricity demand of\u00a0GB in 2019<\/a>\u00a0was 31 GW.\u00a0 So an additional 35.6 GW would approximately double the average electricity demand of the country.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg\")
Fig. 2 Estimated land areas of wind turbines needed for powering the UK\u2019s heavy goods vehicles by electric road system or via \u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen (electrolysis)<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nThe world\u2019s largest electrolysis plant is currently being built by\u00a0Hydrogenics in Canada<\/a>.\u00a0 It has a capacity of 20 MW, which is\u00a0about 1\/1800 of 35.6 GW needed to run the UK\u2019s truck fleet.\u00a0 Given the amount of scaling-up to be done, it is questionable\u00a0whether\u00a0a Green Hydrogen economy could be deployed in time (by 2030) to avoid the 1.5 deg C global temperature rise.<\/p>\n\n\n\nConclusions: The Green Hydrogen route would require approximately 3.3 times\u00a0more power (from whatever renewable source), 3.3 times more land area and\u00a03.3 times more money to\u00a0power the same vehicles as\u00a0an ERS solution.\u00a0 It is unlikely that Green Hydrogen could be scaled to power UK road freight before 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Green Hydrogen for Energy Storage?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
A key issue in the low carbon future is energy storage. Because of the variability of sustainable electricity (wind, solar) and its lack of synchronicity with the peaks of electricity demand, there is a need to store electricity at times of excess supply for use at times of high demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Proponents of a Green Hydrogen Economy\u00a0propose to solve the electricity demand problem by using excess electricity to make Hydrogen by electrolysis; storing it in underground salt caverns; and converting it back to electricity at peak times.\u00a0 However\u00a0the low round-trip efficiency of approx 32% (electricity-Hydrogen-electricity<\/a>) makes the Green Hydrogen route very expensive per stored kWh.\u00a0 A hydrogen-based electricity storage scheme\u00a0would only break even financially with large subsidies, because 68% of the energy would be wasted through the low conversion efficiencies and only the remaining 32% would available to be sold back to the electricity grid by the storage company.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThere are much more efficient electricity storage technologies \u2013 such as pumped-storage hydroelectricity (efficiency 70-85%), lead acid batteries (80-90%), Li-ion batteries (85-95%); flywheels (70-95%); compressed air (40-70%),\u00a0liquid air<\/a>\u00a0(cryogenic) (70%), and others.\u00a0(See\u00a0Appendix A of [2]<\/a>\u00a0for an excellent summary.) All\u00a0of these would be\u00a0much lower cost per kWh of storage than Hydrogen and all could be implemented at scale, without significant subsidies, given an appropriate market structure for electricity storage.<\/p>\n\n\n\nConclusion:\u00a0\u00a0Storage of electricity using Green Hydrogen would\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0be competitive with readily-available alternatives. So electricity storage is not a reason for selecting Hydrogen to power the economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen generated by SMR<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Steam Methane Reformation (SMR) strips the Carbon atoms from Methane (CH4<\/sub>), creating CO2<\/sub>\u00a0and Hydrogen (H2<\/sub>).\u00a0 See Figure 3. It has been argued that \u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen\u00a0generated by SMR could replace natural gas for heating and transport in a Hydrogen Economy.\u00a0 For example, \u2018H21\u2019 project in the North of England [3] proposes to extract natural gas from the North Sea oil fields, convert it to Hydrogen by SMR at facilities on the UK coast, inject the Hydrogen into the National Transmission System (NTS = the \u2018gas grid\u2019) and pump the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0back into empty oil\/gas wells, to be sequestered under the sea (\u2018Carbon Capture and Storage\u2019 \u2013 CCS).<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/SMR-Process-2-1024x460.jpg\")
Fig.\u00a03 \u00a0Summary of the SMR Process<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nIn\u00a0the \u2018net zero\u2019 Carbon scenario,\u00a0all\u00a0natural gas used by the nation will have to be replaced by Blue (or Green) Hydrogen and 100% of the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0generated by SMR will have to be captured and stored.\u00a0 It is questionable\u00a0whether CCS technology can achieve\u00a0the necessary level of storage fidelity, with many predictions that significant leakage of CO2<\/sub>\u00a0is likely in large-scale CCS schemes [4].\u00a0 Since there are no existing large scale carbon capture facilities in the UK, there is also an important question of whether this technology\u00a0could be rolled-out in-time for full-scale deployment for the entire UK energy system, by 2030, 2040 or even 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHydrogen has a significantly lower energy content per unit volume (10.8 MJ\/m3\u00a0<\/sup>) than Methane (35.8 MJ\/m3\u00a0<\/sup>) [5], see Fig. 3.\u00a0 The factor of 35.8\/10.8 = 3.3 means that\u00a0transferring the same amount of energy to consumers through the NTS using Blue Hydrogen instead of Methane, at the same transmission pressure, would require most gas pipes in the system to carry 3.3 times higher volume flow rate of gas.\u00a0 To do this they would\u00a0need 3.3 times larger flow area or 1.8 times larger internal diameter. It is not simply a matter of using the existing gas grid and pumping Hydrogen instead of Methane. The entire gas grid would have to be replaced by pipes with 3.3 times the capacity.\u00a0 This problem is recognised by the H21 project, which plans to install an extensive network of new Hydrogen gas mains across the North of England [3].<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt is difficult to compare the energy efficiency of Blue Hydrogen with electricity because of the fundamental inefficiencies\u00a0of converting chemical into mechanical\/electrical energy in a power station.\u00a0 One fair comparison is shown in figure\u00a04 below.\u00a0 On the right is the pathway for\u00a0creating Blue Hydrogen from 100 kWh of Methane by SMR; compressing\u00a0and transporting\u00a0it in a lorry, and converting it to electricity to propel the vehicle.\u00a0\u00a0Accounting for all the energy losses in the process chain, 29kWh would be available at the wheels of the vehicle.\u00a0 On the left of figure\u00a04 is the pathway for\u00a0using the same 100kWh of methane to generate \u2018clean electricity\u2019 in a Combined Cycle Gas Turbine, CCGT, (as used in modern gas-fired power stations), then transmitting the electricity via the grid and using it to power\u00a0an ERS lorry.\u00a0 In this case 49kWh would be available at the wheels of the vehicle.\u00a0 Both processes would require capturing and sequestering the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0 to make them \u2018clean\u2019 (zero carbon).<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/Energy-from-Methane-2.jpg\")
Fig. 4 Two pathways for fuelling electric vehicles using Methane: (i) Using a Combined Cycle Gas Turbine with CCS to create clean electricity; (ii) Using an SMR plant plus CCS to create \u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nThe amount of\u00a0methane (natural gas) needed to power the UK\u2019s heavy vehicle fleet for a year by these two pathways can be calculated using some of the assumptions in Figure 2.\u00a0 The answer is 73 TWh (TerraWatt hours = billions of kWh) of Methane (263 PetaJoules) for\u00a0the electrification route and 124 TWh\u00a0of Methane (446 PJ) for\u00a0the Blue Hydrogen route.\u00a0 So 70% more natural gas would be needed to fuel Blue Hydrogen vehicles than to generate clean electricity and power electric vehicles.\u00a0 That inevitably means 70% higher energy costs.\u00a0 (Note that this calculation assumes that the CCS processes in both pathways have the same level of inefficiency. This is probably inaccurate, but will cause a relatively small errors in the numbers.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Why is the Blue Hydrogen route so much less efficient than the CCGT route?\u00a0 Because every time you convert energy from one form to another (change colour in figure 4) you waste energy.\u00a0 The electrification route involves one conversion (Methane-electricity). The Blue Hydrogen route\u00a0involves two conversions (Methane-Hydrogen-electricity).\u00a0 The Blue Hydrogen route is therefore fundamentally less efficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Natural-Gas-2018.jpg\")
Fig. 5\u00a0 Natural Gas supply and demand in the UK in 2018. Numbers indicate TerraWatt hours (TWh).\u00a0 From\u00a0 [6].<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nFigure 5 shows the quantities of methane calculated in the previous discussion, in comparison with the total flows of natural gas in the UK in 2018, from UK government statistics [6].\u00a0 On the left, it can be seen that the UK produced 450 TWh and imported 518 TWh of gas: ie 53% of gas was imported.\u00a0 If the additional 124TWh of methane needed to manufacture Blue Hydrogen for powering lorries was added to the imports, they\u00a0would increase by a quarter to 642 TWh or 59% of the total.\u00a0 This increase in gas imports would have a detrimental effect on the country\u2019s energy security (most UK gas imports come from Russia and Qatar) and would cause a significant dent in the balance of trade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One final observation about gas\u2026 If the UK\u2019s truck fleet was converted to use efficient \u2018High Pressure Direct Injection\u2019 (HPDI) gas engines, they could burn biomethane with very low equivalent carbon emissions.\u00a0 The amount of biomethane needed for this would be around 90TWh.\u00a0 This compares with 3.3 TWh of biomethane\u00a0entering the gas system\u00a0on the left side of Fig. 5.\u00a0 The Biomethane supply would therefore need to be increased by a factor of 90\/3.3 = 27 to fuel the UK\u2019s lorries. This\u00a0is probably not a practical proposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Conclusions: Use of Blue Hydrogen (SMR + CCS) to provide heating for UK homes would require replacing the entire gas grid with higher capacity pipes.\u00a0 \u00a0Use of Blue Hydrogen to power UK freight would cost about 70% more in ongoing energy costs than using the natural gas to fuel the conventional electricity generation system, with CCS to capture the Carbon dioxide, and using the electricity in ERS lorries.\u00a0 It is unlikely that the necessary facilities for manufacturing Blue Hydrogen (SMR + CCS) could be built in time for 2030, 2040 or 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2.\u00a0Direct Electrification<\/h2>\n\n\n\nElectrification with large batteries and fast chargers<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
As described in a\u00a0previous blog\u00a0about the Tesla electric truck<\/a>, electrification of long haul lorries\u00a0using large batteries and fast chargers requires the vehicles to carry batteries with capacities of 300\u00a0kWh-600\u00a0kWh or more. Typical power consumption levels for articulated HGVs are 2-3 kWh\/km, so these battery sizes correspond to ranges of 100-300km.\u00a0 Such batteries are expensive, heavy and contain large amounts of scarce Cobalt.\u00a0 For example, the stated capabilities of the Tesla Semi would require batteries of mass at least 7 t (with a corresponding reduction in payload) and would cost $100k-$200k.<\/p>\n\n\n\nCharging the batteries quickly would require high local electric power capacity at depots, etc.\u00a0 For example, the Tesla Semi would need\u00a0a 2 MW charger to meet\u00a0the stated 30 minute fast charge [7].\u00a0 This implies very large and expensive substations at depots, distribution centres and motorway services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Electric Road Systems (ERS)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
ERS technology, particularly the \u2018eHighway<\/a>\u2019 version which uses overhead catenary cables, contacted by pantographs carried on the vehicles is well developed and has been tested in\u00a04\u00a0major trials<\/a>\u00a0in the past few years.\u00a0 The trials have demonstrated that\u00a0eHighway technology could be deployed reasonably quickly around the UK\u2019s Strategic Road Network (\u2018SRN\u2019 = 7000 km of motorways and major A-roads), within the next 10-15 years, or possibly sooner.\u00a0 The cost of deployment over the entire SRN is estimated to be about \u00a320b, which is comparable with \u00a328.8b announced in the UK Government\u2019s\u00a02018 Budget for the \u2018National Roads Fund<\/a>\u2018\u00a0for spending on roads\u00a0in 2020-2025; and about\u00a01\/5\u00a0of the projected cost of the HS2 railway project.\u00a0 Since 2\/3 of all HGV kms occur on the SRN, this single measure would go much of the way to decarbonising the entire road freight system in the UK.\u00a0 The series hybrid and battery electric vehicles could all have batteries with capacities of 100kWh or less [1] and would carry relatively inexpensive pantograph mechanisms on their roofs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/ehighway-teaser-1-1024x576.jpg\")
Fig.\u00a05 eHighway \u2013 Electric Road System.\u00a0 (Image courtesy of Siemens)<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nERS technology would provide deep decarbonisation (approximately 90% from 2016 levels by 2040) [1].\u00a0 Such a system would distribute the electricity charging requirements around the UK land area, with consistent power requirements through the day,\u00a0instead of major electricity hot-spots\u00a0in depots at night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The remaining 1\/3 of journeys mainly occur in urban environments. Current indications are that in the relatively near future, these journeys will be performed by battery electric lorries with modest ranges and battery sizes and possibly some\u00a0opportunity charging<\/a>\u00a0at delivery points.<\/p>\n\n\n\n3. Overall Conclusions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n- The available evidence indicates that Hydrogen by electrolysis or by SMR are poor choices for energy vectors to power heavy goods vehicles and to power the economy as a whole.\u00a0 Both systems are fundamentally wasteful in energy terms.\u00a0 Consequently they would have high economic costs and would require major government subsidies to be economically viable.<\/li>
- An economy based on \u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen would require very large amounts of renewable electricity to account for the energy losses in electricity-Hydrogen-electricity conversions.\u00a0 Using\u00a0\u2018Blue\u2019 hydrogen to power fuel cell lorries would cost about 70% more than an equivalently\u00a0clean system\u00a0that used the Methane to generate electricity for powering ERS vehicles.<\/li>
- In an electrical economy,\u00a0buildings can be heated using heat pumps and electricity demand can be managed using efficient, modern storage systems to store electricity.\u00a0 Using Blue (or Green) Hydrogen to meet these needs would be wasteful and very expensive.<\/li>
- A better solution for long-haul HGVs is direct electrification, particularly using an electric road system \u2013 ERS.\u00a0 This could be implemented in the UK within 10-15 years, for a cost significantly less than the UK Government\u2019s planned expenditure on roads for 2020-2025.\u00a0 The combination of a national ERS and battery electric\u00a0urban delivery vehicles would decarbonise almost all of the UK\u2019s road freight operations.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
So the ultimate question for politicians is whether the future road freight system\u00a0should be more flexible for operators but have high energy consumption, high costs and high carbon emissions in the medium term,\u00a0or be a bit less flexible but much lower energy, carbon and \u00a3 in the shorter term.\u00a0 The jury is out at the moment.\u00a0 But with the climate change imperative becoming much more urgent, I know which one I would choose\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
References<\/h3>\n\n\n\n- Nicolaides, D., Cebon, D., & Miles, J. (2018). \u201cProspects for Electrification of Road Freight.\u201d IEEE Systems Journal, 12, 1838-1849.\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/JSYST.2017.2691408<\/a><\/li>
- Delloite, \u2018Energy storage: Tracking the technologies that will transform the power sector\u2019, 2015,\u00a0https:\/\/www2.deloitte.com\/content\/dam\/Deloitte\/no\/Documents\/energy-resources\/energy-storage-tracking-technologies-transform-power-sector.pdf<\/a><\/li>
- \u2018H21 North of England\u2019 project\u00a0https:\/\/www.northerngasnetworks.co.uk\/event\/h21-launches-national\/<\/a><\/li>
- Vinca, a. Emmerling, J, Tavoni, M. \u2018Bearing the cost of stored carbon leakage\u2019, Front. Energy Res., 15 May 2018\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fenrg.2018.00040<\/a><\/li>
- \u2018Fuels \u2013 Higher and Lower Calorific Values\u2019, The Engineering Toolbox,\u00a0https:\/\/www.engineeringtoolbox.com\/fuels-higher-calorific-values-d_169.html<\/a><\/li>
- https:\/\/assets.publishing.service.gov.uk\/government\/uploads\/system\/uploads\/attachment_data\/file\/820685\/Chapter_4.pdf<\/a><\/li>
- Nicolaides, D. (2018). \u201cPower infrastructure requirements for road transport electrification.\u201d PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.\u00a0\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.17863\/CAM.28055<\/a><\/li><\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There is an increasingly vociferous debate between those who think that future long-haul heavy goods vehicles should be powered by Hydrogen and those who favour direct electrification.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":3046,"template":"blog.php","yoast_head":"\n
Long-Haul Lorries Powered by Hydrogen or Electricity? - The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Long-Haul Lorries Powered by Hydrogen or Electricity? - The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"There is an increasingly vociferous debate between those who think that future long-haul heavy goods vehicles should be powered by Hydrogen and those who favour direct electrification.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-08-20T14:42:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"986\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"721\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/\",\"name\":\"The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\",\"description\":\"Sustainable Road Freight through Research and Partnership\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/?s={search_term_string}\",\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg\",\"width\":986,\"height\":721},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/\",\"name\":\"Long-Haul Lorries Powered by Hydrogen or Electricity? - The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-02-09T15:20:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-08-20T14:42:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"item\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/\",\"name\":\"Home\"}},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"item\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#webpage\"}}]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","uagb_featured_image_src":{"full":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-150x150.jpg",150,150,true],"medium":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-300x219.jpg",300,219,true],"medium_large":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-768x562.jpg",768,562,true],"large":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"rpwe-thumbnail":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-45x45.jpg",45,45,true]},"uagb_author_info":{"display_name":"David Cebon","author_link":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/author\/dcebon\/"},"uagb_comment_info":0,"uagb_excerpt":"There is an increasingly vociferous debate between those who think that future long-haul heavy goods vehicles should be powered by Hydrogen and those who favour direct electrification.","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog\/3044"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/blog"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3046"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3044"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen Generated by Electrolysis<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nFigure 1 shows three option for powering long-haul vehicles.\u00a0 It follows the same methodology as used in my\u00a0previous blog on hydrogen-powered vehicles<\/a>.\u00a0 The left hand pathway illustrates\u00a0use of 100 kWh of renewable electricity to generate\u00a0\u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen by electrolysis and use of the resulting Hydrogen\u00a0to power fuel-cell electric vehicles.\u00a0 Each step in the process introduces energy losses and the overall energy performance is the product of the individual efficiencies.\u00a0 The \u2018round-trip\u2019 process of using renewable electricity to make Hydrogen by electrolysis, storing and transporting it on a vehicle, then converting it back to electricity in a fuel-cell and powering the electric motors \u2013 is only about 23% efficient overall.\u00a0 That is, for every 100 kWh of \u2018renewable electricity\u2019 purchased from the grid, only 23 kWh will reach the road wheels of the lorry.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe middle pathway shows that \u00a069kWh (of the original 100 kWh) reach the wheels of a battery electric vehicle and the right hand pathway shows that 77 kWh reach the wheels of a lorry travelling on an Electric Road System (ERS). The ERS is the most efficient pathway because the motors are powered directly from the electricity supply (via an inverter), avoiding energy loss\u00a0through charging and discharging\u00a0a battery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Fig. 1.\u00a0\u00a0Efficiencies of long-haul vehicle energy pathways: (i) Fuel cell Electric Vehicle running on \u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen; (ii) Battery Electric Vehicle; (iii) Electric Road System vehicle.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nThe\u00a0very low efficiency of the \u2018green\u2019 Hydrogen (electrolysis) pathway means that the process uses a lot of renewable electricity to make the necessary quantity of Hydrogen.\u00a0 The (unsubsidised) cost of Hydrogen created by electrolysis is therefore high and the amount of power required is very large.\u00a0 This latter point can be illustrated by estimating the land area of renewable energy generation systems (assumed here to be land-based wind turbines) needed to supply the power\u00a0used\u00a0by the UK\u2019s lorries \u2013 either by direct electrification (ERS) or via the Green Hydrogen (electrolysis) route.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The UK\u2019s HGV fleet transports about 189 billion t.km of freight per year.\u00a0 A 44t lorry at 75% load factor uses about 0.19 kWh\/t.km.\u00a0 Spreading this over 12 hours per day, 365 days per year, the power requirement is approximately 8.2 GW. \u00a0If the \u2018wind turbine to road wheel\u2019 efficiency is 77% (as for the ERS solution), powering the vehicles would require 10.6 GW, ie approximately 3,500 x 3MW wind turbines.\u00a0 These would require a land area of about 5,300km2<\/sup>, as shown to scale by the smaller circular area on the map in Figure 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIf the \u2018wind to wheel\u2019 efficiency is 23%, as for the Green Hydrogen pathway, powering the vehicles would require 35.6 GW, ie approximately 12,000 x 3MW wind turbines. \u00a0These 12,000 wind turbines would require a land area of 18,000 km2<\/sup>\u00a0as shown by the larger circular area\u00a0on the map.\u00a0\u00a0(For reference,\u00a0the\u00a0average<\/em>\u00a0electricity demand of\u00a0GB in 2019<\/a>\u00a0was 31 GW.\u00a0 So an additional 35.6 GW would approximately double the average electricity demand of the country.)<\/p>\n\n\n\nFig. 2 Estimated land areas of wind turbines needed for powering the UK\u2019s heavy goods vehicles by electric road system or via \u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen (electrolysis)<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nThe world\u2019s largest electrolysis plant is currently being built by\u00a0Hydrogenics in Canada<\/a>.\u00a0 It has a capacity of 20 MW, which is\u00a0about 1\/1800 of 35.6 GW needed to run the UK\u2019s truck fleet.\u00a0 Given the amount of scaling-up to be done, it is questionable\u00a0whether\u00a0a Green Hydrogen economy could be deployed in time (by 2030) to avoid the 1.5 deg C global temperature rise.<\/p>\n\n\n\nConclusions: The Green Hydrogen route would require approximately 3.3 times\u00a0more power (from whatever renewable source), 3.3 times more land area and\u00a03.3 times more money to\u00a0power the same vehicles as\u00a0an ERS solution.\u00a0 It is unlikely that Green Hydrogen could be scaled to power UK road freight before 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Green Hydrogen for Energy Storage?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
A key issue in the low carbon future is energy storage. Because of the variability of sustainable electricity (wind, solar) and its lack of synchronicity with the peaks of electricity demand, there is a need to store electricity at times of excess supply for use at times of high demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Proponents of a Green Hydrogen Economy\u00a0propose to solve the electricity demand problem by using excess electricity to make Hydrogen by electrolysis; storing it in underground salt caverns; and converting it back to electricity at peak times.\u00a0 However\u00a0the low round-trip efficiency of approx 32% (electricity-Hydrogen-electricity<\/a>) makes the Green Hydrogen route very expensive per stored kWh.\u00a0 A hydrogen-based electricity storage scheme\u00a0would only break even financially with large subsidies, because 68% of the energy would be wasted through the low conversion efficiencies and only the remaining 32% would available to be sold back to the electricity grid by the storage company.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThere are much more efficient electricity storage technologies \u2013 such as pumped-storage hydroelectricity (efficiency 70-85%), lead acid batteries (80-90%), Li-ion batteries (85-95%); flywheels (70-95%); compressed air (40-70%),\u00a0liquid air<\/a>\u00a0(cryogenic) (70%), and others.\u00a0(See\u00a0Appendix A of [2]<\/a>\u00a0for an excellent summary.) All\u00a0of these would be\u00a0much lower cost per kWh of storage than Hydrogen and all could be implemented at scale, without significant subsidies, given an appropriate market structure for electricity storage.<\/p>\n\n\n\nConclusion:\u00a0\u00a0Storage of electricity using Green Hydrogen would\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0be competitive with readily-available alternatives. So electricity storage is not a reason for selecting Hydrogen to power the economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen generated by SMR<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Steam Methane Reformation (SMR) strips the Carbon atoms from Methane (CH4<\/sub>), creating CO2<\/sub>\u00a0and Hydrogen (H2<\/sub>).\u00a0 See Figure 3. It has been argued that \u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen\u00a0generated by SMR could replace natural gas for heating and transport in a Hydrogen Economy.\u00a0 For example, \u2018H21\u2019 project in the North of England [3] proposes to extract natural gas from the North Sea oil fields, convert it to Hydrogen by SMR at facilities on the UK coast, inject the Hydrogen into the National Transmission System (NTS = the \u2018gas grid\u2019) and pump the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0back into empty oil\/gas wells, to be sequestered under the sea (\u2018Carbon Capture and Storage\u2019 \u2013 CCS).<\/p>\n\n\n\nFig.\u00a03 \u00a0Summary of the SMR Process<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nIn\u00a0the \u2018net zero\u2019 Carbon scenario,\u00a0all\u00a0natural gas used by the nation will have to be replaced by Blue (or Green) Hydrogen and 100% of the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0generated by SMR will have to be captured and stored.\u00a0 It is questionable\u00a0whether CCS technology can achieve\u00a0the necessary level of storage fidelity, with many predictions that significant leakage of CO2<\/sub>\u00a0is likely in large-scale CCS schemes [4].\u00a0 Since there are no existing large scale carbon capture facilities in the UK, there is also an important question of whether this technology\u00a0could be rolled-out in-time for full-scale deployment for the entire UK energy system, by 2030, 2040 or even 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHydrogen has a significantly lower energy content per unit volume (10.8 MJ\/m3\u00a0<\/sup>) than Methane (35.8 MJ\/m3\u00a0<\/sup>) [5], see Fig. 3.\u00a0 The factor of 35.8\/10.8 = 3.3 means that\u00a0transferring the same amount of energy to consumers through the NTS using Blue Hydrogen instead of Methane, at the same transmission pressure, would require most gas pipes in the system to carry 3.3 times higher volume flow rate of gas.\u00a0 To do this they would\u00a0need 3.3 times larger flow area or 1.8 times larger internal diameter. It is not simply a matter of using the existing gas grid and pumping Hydrogen instead of Methane. The entire gas grid would have to be replaced by pipes with 3.3 times the capacity.\u00a0 This problem is recognised by the H21 project, which plans to install an extensive network of new Hydrogen gas mains across the North of England [3].<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt is difficult to compare the energy efficiency of Blue Hydrogen with electricity because of the fundamental inefficiencies\u00a0of converting chemical into mechanical\/electrical energy in a power station.\u00a0 One fair comparison is shown in figure\u00a04 below.\u00a0 On the right is the pathway for\u00a0creating Blue Hydrogen from 100 kWh of Methane by SMR; compressing\u00a0and transporting\u00a0it in a lorry, and converting it to electricity to propel the vehicle.\u00a0\u00a0Accounting for all the energy losses in the process chain, 29kWh would be available at the wheels of the vehicle.\u00a0 On the left of figure\u00a04 is the pathway for\u00a0using the same 100kWh of methane to generate \u2018clean electricity\u2019 in a Combined Cycle Gas Turbine, CCGT, (as used in modern gas-fired power stations), then transmitting the electricity via the grid and using it to power\u00a0an ERS lorry.\u00a0 In this case 49kWh would be available at the wheels of the vehicle.\u00a0 Both processes would require capturing and sequestering the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0 to make them \u2018clean\u2019 (zero carbon).<\/p>\n\n\n\nFig. 4 Two pathways for fuelling electric vehicles using Methane: (i) Using a Combined Cycle Gas Turbine with CCS to create clean electricity; (ii) Using an SMR plant plus CCS to create \u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nThe amount of\u00a0methane (natural gas) needed to power the UK\u2019s heavy vehicle fleet for a year by these two pathways can be calculated using some of the assumptions in Figure 2.\u00a0 The answer is 73 TWh (TerraWatt hours = billions of kWh) of Methane (263 PetaJoules) for\u00a0the electrification route and 124 TWh\u00a0of Methane (446 PJ) for\u00a0the Blue Hydrogen route.\u00a0 So 70% more natural gas would be needed to fuel Blue Hydrogen vehicles than to generate clean electricity and power electric vehicles.\u00a0 That inevitably means 70% higher energy costs.\u00a0 (Note that this calculation assumes that the CCS processes in both pathways have the same level of inefficiency. This is probably inaccurate, but will cause a relatively small errors in the numbers.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Why is the Blue Hydrogen route so much less efficient than the CCGT route?\u00a0 Because every time you convert energy from one form to another (change colour in figure 4) you waste energy.\u00a0 The electrification route involves one conversion (Methane-electricity). The Blue Hydrogen route\u00a0involves two conversions (Methane-Hydrogen-electricity).\u00a0 The Blue Hydrogen route is therefore fundamentally less efficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Fig. 5\u00a0 Natural Gas supply and demand in the UK in 2018. Numbers indicate TerraWatt hours (TWh).\u00a0 From\u00a0 [6].<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nFigure 5 shows the quantities of methane calculated in the previous discussion, in comparison with the total flows of natural gas in the UK in 2018, from UK government statistics [6].\u00a0 On the left, it can be seen that the UK produced 450 TWh and imported 518 TWh of gas: ie 53% of gas was imported.\u00a0 If the additional 124TWh of methane needed to manufacture Blue Hydrogen for powering lorries was added to the imports, they\u00a0would increase by a quarter to 642 TWh or 59% of the total.\u00a0 This increase in gas imports would have a detrimental effect on the country\u2019s energy security (most UK gas imports come from Russia and Qatar) and would cause a significant dent in the balance of trade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One final observation about gas\u2026 If the UK\u2019s truck fleet was converted to use efficient \u2018High Pressure Direct Injection\u2019 (HPDI) gas engines, they could burn biomethane with very low equivalent carbon emissions.\u00a0 The amount of biomethane needed for this would be around 90TWh.\u00a0 This compares with 3.3 TWh of biomethane\u00a0entering the gas system\u00a0on the left side of Fig. 5.\u00a0 The Biomethane supply would therefore need to be increased by a factor of 90\/3.3 = 27 to fuel the UK\u2019s lorries. This\u00a0is probably not a practical proposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Conclusions: Use of Blue Hydrogen (SMR + CCS) to provide heating for UK homes would require replacing the entire gas grid with higher capacity pipes.\u00a0 \u00a0Use of Blue Hydrogen to power UK freight would cost about 70% more in ongoing energy costs than using the natural gas to fuel the conventional electricity generation system, with CCS to capture the Carbon dioxide, and using the electricity in ERS lorries.\u00a0 It is unlikely that the necessary facilities for manufacturing Blue Hydrogen (SMR + CCS) could be built in time for 2030, 2040 or 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2.\u00a0Direct Electrification<\/h2>\n\n\n\nElectrification with large batteries and fast chargers<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
As described in a\u00a0previous blog\u00a0about the Tesla electric truck<\/a>, electrification of long haul lorries\u00a0using large batteries and fast chargers requires the vehicles to carry batteries with capacities of 300\u00a0kWh-600\u00a0kWh or more. Typical power consumption levels for articulated HGVs are 2-3 kWh\/km, so these battery sizes correspond to ranges of 100-300km.\u00a0 Such batteries are expensive, heavy and contain large amounts of scarce Cobalt.\u00a0 For example, the stated capabilities of the Tesla Semi would require batteries of mass at least 7 t (with a corresponding reduction in payload) and would cost $100k-$200k.<\/p>\n\n\n\nCharging the batteries quickly would require high local electric power capacity at depots, etc.\u00a0 For example, the Tesla Semi would need\u00a0a 2 MW charger to meet\u00a0the stated 30 minute fast charge [7].\u00a0 This implies very large and expensive substations at depots, distribution centres and motorway services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Electric Road Systems (ERS)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
ERS technology, particularly the \u2018eHighway<\/a>\u2019 version which uses overhead catenary cables, contacted by pantographs carried on the vehicles is well developed and has been tested in\u00a04\u00a0major trials<\/a>\u00a0in the past few years.\u00a0 The trials have demonstrated that\u00a0eHighway technology could be deployed reasonably quickly around the UK\u2019s Strategic Road Network (\u2018SRN\u2019 = 7000 km of motorways and major A-roads), within the next 10-15 years, or possibly sooner.\u00a0 The cost of deployment over the entire SRN is estimated to be about \u00a320b, which is comparable with \u00a328.8b announced in the UK Government\u2019s\u00a02018 Budget for the \u2018National Roads Fund<\/a>\u2018\u00a0for spending on roads\u00a0in 2020-2025; and about\u00a01\/5\u00a0of the projected cost of the HS2 railway project.\u00a0 Since 2\/3 of all HGV kms occur on the SRN, this single measure would go much of the way to decarbonising the entire road freight system in the UK.\u00a0 The series hybrid and battery electric vehicles could all have batteries with capacities of 100kWh or less [1] and would carry relatively inexpensive pantograph mechanisms on their roofs.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFig.\u00a05 eHighway \u2013 Electric Road System.\u00a0 (Image courtesy of Siemens)<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nERS technology would provide deep decarbonisation (approximately 90% from 2016 levels by 2040) [1].\u00a0 Such a system would distribute the electricity charging requirements around the UK land area, with consistent power requirements through the day,\u00a0instead of major electricity hot-spots\u00a0in depots at night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The remaining 1\/3 of journeys mainly occur in urban environments. Current indications are that in the relatively near future, these journeys will be performed by battery electric lorries with modest ranges and battery sizes and possibly some\u00a0opportunity charging<\/a>\u00a0at delivery points.<\/p>\n\n\n\n3. Overall Conclusions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n- The available evidence indicates that Hydrogen by electrolysis or by SMR are poor choices for energy vectors to power heavy goods vehicles and to power the economy as a whole.\u00a0 Both systems are fundamentally wasteful in energy terms.\u00a0 Consequently they would have high economic costs and would require major government subsidies to be economically viable.<\/li>
- An economy based on \u2018Green\u2019 Hydrogen would require very large amounts of renewable electricity to account for the energy losses in electricity-Hydrogen-electricity conversions.\u00a0 Using\u00a0\u2018Blue\u2019 hydrogen to power fuel cell lorries would cost about 70% more than an equivalently\u00a0clean system\u00a0that used the Methane to generate electricity for powering ERS vehicles.<\/li>
- In an electrical economy,\u00a0buildings can be heated using heat pumps and electricity demand can be managed using efficient, modern storage systems to store electricity.\u00a0 Using Blue (or Green) Hydrogen to meet these needs would be wasteful and very expensive.<\/li>
- A better solution for long-haul HGVs is direct electrification, particularly using an electric road system \u2013 ERS.\u00a0 This could be implemented in the UK within 10-15 years, for a cost significantly less than the UK Government\u2019s planned expenditure on roads for 2020-2025.\u00a0 The combination of a national ERS and battery electric\u00a0urban delivery vehicles would decarbonise almost all of the UK\u2019s road freight operations.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
So the ultimate question for politicians is whether the future road freight system\u00a0should be more flexible for operators but have high energy consumption, high costs and high carbon emissions in the medium term,\u00a0or be a bit less flexible but much lower energy, carbon and \u00a3 in the shorter term.\u00a0 The jury is out at the moment.\u00a0 But with the climate change imperative becoming much more urgent, I know which one I would choose\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n
References<\/h3>\n\n\n\n- Nicolaides, D., Cebon, D., & Miles, J. (2018). \u201cProspects for Electrification of Road Freight.\u201d IEEE Systems Journal, 12, 1838-1849.\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1109\/JSYST.2017.2691408<\/a><\/li>
- Delloite, \u2018Energy storage: Tracking the technologies that will transform the power sector\u2019, 2015,\u00a0https:\/\/www2.deloitte.com\/content\/dam\/Deloitte\/no\/Documents\/energy-resources\/energy-storage-tracking-technologies-transform-power-sector.pdf<\/a><\/li>
- \u2018H21 North of England\u2019 project\u00a0https:\/\/www.northerngasnetworks.co.uk\/event\/h21-launches-national\/<\/a><\/li>
- Vinca, a. Emmerling, J, Tavoni, M. \u2018Bearing the cost of stored carbon leakage\u2019, Front. Energy Res., 15 May 2018\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fenrg.2018.00040<\/a><\/li>
- \u2018Fuels \u2013 Higher and Lower Calorific Values\u2019, The Engineering Toolbox,\u00a0https:\/\/www.engineeringtoolbox.com\/fuels-higher-calorific-values-d_169.html<\/a><\/li>
- https:\/\/assets.publishing.service.gov.uk\/government\/uploads\/system\/uploads\/attachment_data\/file\/820685\/Chapter_4.pdf<\/a><\/li>
- Nicolaides, D. (2018). \u201cPower infrastructure requirements for road transport electrification.\u201d PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.\u00a0\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.17863\/CAM.28055<\/a><\/li><\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There is an increasingly vociferous debate between those who think that future long-haul heavy goods vehicles should be powered by Hydrogen and those who favour direct electrification.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":3046,"template":"blog.php","yoast_head":"\n
Long-Haul Lorries Powered by Hydrogen or Electricity? - The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Long-Haul Lorries Powered by Hydrogen or Electricity? - The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"There is an increasingly vociferous debate between those who think that future long-haul heavy goods vehicles should be powered by Hydrogen and those who favour direct electrification.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-08-20T14:42:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"986\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"721\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/\",\"name\":\"The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\",\"description\":\"Sustainable Road Freight through Research and Partnership\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/?s={search_term_string}\",\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg\",\"width\":986,\"height\":721},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/\",\"name\":\"Long-Haul Lorries Powered by Hydrogen or Electricity? - The Centre For Sustainable Road Freight\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-02-09T15:20:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-08-20T14:42:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"item\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/\",\"name\":\"Home\"}},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"item\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/blog\/long-haul-lorries-powered-by-hydrogen-or-electricity\/#webpage\"}}]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","uagb_featured_image_src":{"full":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-150x150.jpg",150,150,true],"medium":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-300x219.jpg",300,219,true],"medium_large":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-768x562.jpg",768,562,true],"large":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2.jpg",986,721,false],"rpwe-thumbnail":["https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/UK-Map-2-45x45.jpg",45,45,true]},"uagb_author_info":{"display_name":"David Cebon","author_link":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/author\/dcebon\/"},"uagb_comment_info":0,"uagb_excerpt":"There is an increasingly vociferous debate between those who think that future long-haul heavy goods vehicles should be powered by Hydrogen and those who favour direct electrification.","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog\/3044"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/blog"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3046"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/novacom.group\/csrf\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3044"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
The middle pathway shows that \u00a069kWh (of the original 100 kWh) reach the wheels of a battery electric vehicle and the right hand pathway shows that 77 kWh reach the wheels of a lorry travelling on an Electric Road System (ERS). The ERS is the most efficient pathway because the motors are powered directly from the electricity supply (via an inverter), avoiding energy loss\u00a0through charging and discharging\u00a0a battery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The\u00a0very low efficiency of the \u2018green\u2019 Hydrogen (electrolysis) pathway means that the process uses a lot of renewable electricity to make the necessary quantity of Hydrogen.\u00a0 The (unsubsidised) cost of Hydrogen created by electrolysis is therefore high and the amount of power required is very large.\u00a0 This latter point can be illustrated by estimating the land area of renewable energy generation systems (assumed here to be land-based wind turbines) needed to supply the power\u00a0used\u00a0by the UK\u2019s lorries \u2013 either by direct electrification (ERS) or via the Green Hydrogen (electrolysis) route.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The UK\u2019s HGV fleet transports about 189 billion t.km of freight per year.\u00a0 A 44t lorry at 75% load factor uses about 0.19 kWh\/t.km.\u00a0 Spreading this over 12 hours per day, 365 days per year, the power requirement is approximately 8.2 GW. \u00a0If the \u2018wind turbine to road wheel\u2019 efficiency is 77% (as for the ERS solution), powering the vehicles would require 10.6 GW, ie approximately 3,500 x 3MW wind turbines.\u00a0 These would require a land area of about 5,300km2<\/sup>, as shown to scale by the smaller circular area on the map in Figure 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If the \u2018wind to wheel\u2019 efficiency is 23%, as for the Green Hydrogen pathway, powering the vehicles would require 35.6 GW, ie approximately 12,000 x 3MW wind turbines. \u00a0These 12,000 wind turbines would require a land area of 18,000 km2<\/sup>\u00a0as shown by the larger circular area\u00a0on the map.\u00a0\u00a0(For reference,\u00a0the\u00a0average<\/em>\u00a0electricity demand of\u00a0GB in 2019<\/a>\u00a0was 31 GW.\u00a0 So an additional 35.6 GW would approximately double the average electricity demand of the country.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n The world\u2019s largest electrolysis plant is currently being built by\u00a0Hydrogenics in Canada<\/a>.\u00a0 It has a capacity of 20 MW, which is\u00a0about 1\/1800 of 35.6 GW needed to run the UK\u2019s truck fleet.\u00a0 Given the amount of scaling-up to be done, it is questionable\u00a0whether\u00a0a Green Hydrogen economy could be deployed in time (by 2030) to avoid the 1.5 deg C global temperature rise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conclusions: The Green Hydrogen route would require approximately 3.3 times\u00a0more power (from whatever renewable source), 3.3 times more land area and\u00a03.3 times more money to\u00a0power the same vehicles as\u00a0an ERS solution.\u00a0 It is unlikely that Green Hydrogen could be scaled to power UK road freight before 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A key issue in the low carbon future is energy storage. Because of the variability of sustainable electricity (wind, solar) and its lack of synchronicity with the peaks of electricity demand, there is a need to store electricity at times of excess supply for use at times of high demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Proponents of a Green Hydrogen Economy\u00a0propose to solve the electricity demand problem by using excess electricity to make Hydrogen by electrolysis; storing it in underground salt caverns; and converting it back to electricity at peak times.\u00a0 However\u00a0the low round-trip efficiency of approx 32% (electricity-Hydrogen-electricity<\/a>) makes the Green Hydrogen route very expensive per stored kWh.\u00a0 A hydrogen-based electricity storage scheme\u00a0would only break even financially with large subsidies, because 68% of the energy would be wasted through the low conversion efficiencies and only the remaining 32% would available to be sold back to the electricity grid by the storage company.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are much more efficient electricity storage technologies \u2013 such as pumped-storage hydroelectricity (efficiency 70-85%), lead acid batteries (80-90%), Li-ion batteries (85-95%); flywheels (70-95%); compressed air (40-70%),\u00a0liquid air<\/a>\u00a0(cryogenic) (70%), and others.\u00a0(See\u00a0Appendix A of [2]<\/a>\u00a0for an excellent summary.) All\u00a0of these would be\u00a0much lower cost per kWh of storage than Hydrogen and all could be implemented at scale, without significant subsidies, given an appropriate market structure for electricity storage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conclusion:\u00a0\u00a0Storage of electricity using Green Hydrogen would\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0be competitive with readily-available alternatives. So electricity storage is not a reason for selecting Hydrogen to power the economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Steam Methane Reformation (SMR) strips the Carbon atoms from Methane (CH4<\/sub>), creating CO2<\/sub>\u00a0and Hydrogen (H2<\/sub>).\u00a0 See Figure 3. It has been argued that \u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen\u00a0generated by SMR could replace natural gas for heating and transport in a Hydrogen Economy.\u00a0 For example, \u2018H21\u2019 project in the North of England [3] proposes to extract natural gas from the North Sea oil fields, convert it to Hydrogen by SMR at facilities on the UK coast, inject the Hydrogen into the National Transmission System (NTS = the \u2018gas grid\u2019) and pump the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0back into empty oil\/gas wells, to be sequestered under the sea (\u2018Carbon Capture and Storage\u2019 \u2013 CCS).<\/p>\n\n\n\n In\u00a0the \u2018net zero\u2019 Carbon scenario,\u00a0all\u00a0natural gas used by the nation will have to be replaced by Blue (or Green) Hydrogen and 100% of the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0generated by SMR will have to be captured and stored.\u00a0 It is questionable\u00a0whether CCS technology can achieve\u00a0the necessary level of storage fidelity, with many predictions that significant leakage of CO2<\/sub>\u00a0is likely in large-scale CCS schemes [4].\u00a0 Since there are no existing large scale carbon capture facilities in the UK, there is also an important question of whether this technology\u00a0could be rolled-out in-time for full-scale deployment for the entire UK energy system, by 2030, 2040 or even 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hydrogen has a significantly lower energy content per unit volume (10.8 MJ\/m3\u00a0<\/sup>) than Methane (35.8 MJ\/m3\u00a0<\/sup>) [5], see Fig. 3.\u00a0 The factor of 35.8\/10.8 = 3.3 means that\u00a0transferring the same amount of energy to consumers through the NTS using Blue Hydrogen instead of Methane, at the same transmission pressure, would require most gas pipes in the system to carry 3.3 times higher volume flow rate of gas.\u00a0 To do this they would\u00a0need 3.3 times larger flow area or 1.8 times larger internal diameter. It is not simply a matter of using the existing gas grid and pumping Hydrogen instead of Methane. The entire gas grid would have to be replaced by pipes with 3.3 times the capacity.\u00a0 This problem is recognised by the H21 project, which plans to install an extensive network of new Hydrogen gas mains across the North of England [3].<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is difficult to compare the energy efficiency of Blue Hydrogen with electricity because of the fundamental inefficiencies\u00a0of converting chemical into mechanical\/electrical energy in a power station.\u00a0 One fair comparison is shown in figure\u00a04 below.\u00a0 On the right is the pathway for\u00a0creating Blue Hydrogen from 100 kWh of Methane by SMR; compressing\u00a0and transporting\u00a0it in a lorry, and converting it to electricity to propel the vehicle.\u00a0\u00a0Accounting for all the energy losses in the process chain, 29kWh would be available at the wheels of the vehicle.\u00a0 On the left of figure\u00a04 is the pathway for\u00a0using the same 100kWh of methane to generate \u2018clean electricity\u2019 in a Combined Cycle Gas Turbine, CCGT, (as used in modern gas-fired power stations), then transmitting the electricity via the grid and using it to power\u00a0an ERS lorry.\u00a0 In this case 49kWh would be available at the wheels of the vehicle.\u00a0 Both processes would require capturing and sequestering the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0 to make them \u2018clean\u2019 (zero carbon).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The amount of\u00a0methane (natural gas) needed to power the UK\u2019s heavy vehicle fleet for a year by these two pathways can be calculated using some of the assumptions in Figure 2.\u00a0 The answer is 73 TWh (TerraWatt hours = billions of kWh) of Methane (263 PetaJoules) for\u00a0the electrification route and 124 TWh\u00a0of Methane (446 PJ) for\u00a0the Blue Hydrogen route.\u00a0 So 70% more natural gas would be needed to fuel Blue Hydrogen vehicles than to generate clean electricity and power electric vehicles.\u00a0 That inevitably means 70% higher energy costs.\u00a0 (Note that this calculation assumes that the CCS processes in both pathways have the same level of inefficiency. This is probably inaccurate, but will cause a relatively small errors in the numbers.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why is the Blue Hydrogen route so much less efficient than the CCGT route?\u00a0 Because every time you convert energy from one form to another (change colour in figure 4) you waste energy.\u00a0 The electrification route involves one conversion (Methane-electricity). The Blue Hydrogen route\u00a0involves two conversions (Methane-Hydrogen-electricity).\u00a0 The Blue Hydrogen route is therefore fundamentally less efficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 5 shows the quantities of methane calculated in the previous discussion, in comparison with the total flows of natural gas in the UK in 2018, from UK government statistics [6].\u00a0 On the left, it can be seen that the UK produced 450 TWh and imported 518 TWh of gas: ie 53% of gas was imported.\u00a0 If the additional 124TWh of methane needed to manufacture Blue Hydrogen for powering lorries was added to the imports, they\u00a0would increase by a quarter to 642 TWh or 59% of the total.\u00a0 This increase in gas imports would have a detrimental effect on the country\u2019s energy security (most UK gas imports come from Russia and Qatar) and would cause a significant dent in the balance of trade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One final observation about gas\u2026 If the UK\u2019s truck fleet was converted to use efficient \u2018High Pressure Direct Injection\u2019 (HPDI) gas engines, they could burn biomethane with very low equivalent carbon emissions.\u00a0 The amount of biomethane needed for this would be around 90TWh.\u00a0 This compares with 3.3 TWh of biomethane\u00a0entering the gas system\u00a0on the left side of Fig. 5.\u00a0 The Biomethane supply would therefore need to be increased by a factor of 90\/3.3 = 27 to fuel the UK\u2019s lorries. This\u00a0is probably not a practical proposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conclusions: Use of Blue Hydrogen (SMR + CCS) to provide heating for UK homes would require replacing the entire gas grid with higher capacity pipes.\u00a0 \u00a0Use of Blue Hydrogen to power UK freight would cost about 70% more in ongoing energy costs than using the natural gas to fuel the conventional electricity generation system, with CCS to capture the Carbon dioxide, and using the electricity in ERS lorries.\u00a0 It is unlikely that the necessary facilities for manufacturing Blue Hydrogen (SMR + CCS) could be built in time for 2030, 2040 or 2050.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As described in a\u00a0previous blog\u00a0about the Tesla electric truck<\/a>, electrification of long haul lorries\u00a0using large batteries and fast chargers requires the vehicles to carry batteries with capacities of 300\u00a0kWh-600\u00a0kWh or more. Typical power consumption levels for articulated HGVs are 2-3 kWh\/km, so these battery sizes correspond to ranges of 100-300km.\u00a0 Such batteries are expensive, heavy and contain large amounts of scarce Cobalt.\u00a0 For example, the stated capabilities of the Tesla Semi would require batteries of mass at least 7 t (with a corresponding reduction in payload) and would cost $100k-$200k.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Charging the batteries quickly would require high local electric power capacity at depots, etc.\u00a0 For example, the Tesla Semi would need\u00a0a 2 MW charger to meet\u00a0the stated 30 minute fast charge [7].\u00a0 This implies very large and expensive substations at depots, distribution centres and motorway services.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ERS technology, particularly the \u2018eHighway<\/a>\u2019 version which uses overhead catenary cables, contacted by pantographs carried on the vehicles is well developed and has been tested in\u00a04\u00a0major trials<\/a>\u00a0in the past few years.\u00a0 The trials have demonstrated that\u00a0eHighway technology could be deployed reasonably quickly around the UK\u2019s Strategic Road Network (\u2018SRN\u2019 = 7000 km of motorways and major A-roads), within the next 10-15 years, or possibly sooner.\u00a0 The cost of deployment over the entire SRN is estimated to be about \u00a320b, which is comparable with \u00a328.8b announced in the UK Government\u2019s\u00a02018 Budget for the \u2018National Roads Fund<\/a>\u2018\u00a0for spending on roads\u00a0in 2020-2025; and about\u00a01\/5\u00a0of the projected cost of the HS2 railway project.\u00a0 Since 2\/3 of all HGV kms occur on the SRN, this single measure would go much of the way to decarbonising the entire road freight system in the UK.\u00a0 The series hybrid and battery electric vehicles could all have batteries with capacities of 100kWh or less [1] and would carry relatively inexpensive pantograph mechanisms on their roofs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ERS technology would provide deep decarbonisation (approximately 90% from 2016 levels by 2040) [1].\u00a0 Such a system would distribute the electricity charging requirements around the UK land area, with consistent power requirements through the day,\u00a0instead of major electricity hot-spots\u00a0in depots at night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The remaining 1\/3 of journeys mainly occur in urban environments. Current indications are that in the relatively near future, these journeys will be performed by battery electric lorries with modest ranges and battery sizes and possibly some\u00a0opportunity charging<\/a>\u00a0at delivery points.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So the ultimate question for politicians is whether the future road freight system\u00a0should be more flexible for operators but have high energy consumption, high costs and high carbon emissions in the medium term,\u00a0or be a bit less flexible but much lower energy, carbon and \u00a3 in the shorter term.\u00a0 The jury is out at the moment.\u00a0 But with the climate change imperative becoming much more urgent, I know which one I would choose\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is an increasingly vociferous debate between those who think that future long-haul heavy goods vehicles should be powered by Hydrogen and those who favour direct electrification.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":3046,"template":"blog.php","yoast_head":"\nGreen Hydrogen for Energy Storage?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\u2018Blue\u2019 Hydrogen generated by SMR<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
2.\u00a0Direct Electrification<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Electrification with large batteries and fast chargers<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Electric Road Systems (ERS)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
3. Overall Conclusions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
References<\/h3>\n\n\n\n