Shell's first US hydrogen station is open, reports John Vidal. But will we all be filling up soon?
It was billed as the "team of dreams" when in 2003 Shell, the world's second's largest oil company, linked with General Motors (GM), the largest car maker, to invest up to a billion dollars over 10 years to develop the world's "hydrogen economy". Last week, in a small ceremony near Washington DC, one of the fruits of the relationship was shown off.
In front of US department of energy and industry leaders, Shell opened its first American hydrogen service station.
Car and chemical makers, as well as governments are pumping money into hydrogen and fuel cell vehicle research and the infrastructure for a hydrogen economy. New interest in what is called "tomorrow's petrol" follows President Bush's December 2003 decision to put hydrogen at the centre of US renewable technologies.
Jeremy Bentham, Shell's head of hydrogen, was upbeat: "The opening of this station marks a new phase of development of the infrastructure for the hydrogen economy. In the next few years, fuel cell vehicles will be commercially viable. By 2050 we believe that hydrogen will be playing a significant role as an energy carrier, increasingly made from non-fossil fuels." The decision may be linked to September 11th, American love of technology or US foreign oil dependency, but, says Bentham, it's also about making money.
Shell's filling station in Washington is one of 22 new stations for fuel cell and hydrogen-powered vehicles built in the past year, making about 90 worldwide, but critics say solving problems of producing, distributing and storing the gas will require hundreds of billions of dollars.
But the hydrogen/fuel cell route has serious scientific critics. A committee of the US National Academy of Sciences earlier this year said it will not solve energy problems, that fuel cell vehicles only marginally reduce greenhouse gases, and that there are safety, cost and distribution barriers to overcome.
Dr Joe Romm, assistant energy secretary to Bill Clinton and now director of the Centre for Energy and Climate Solutions, was in charge of the US hydrogen programme for five years. He says the hydrogen economy is being overhyped, and touting it as a clean energy panacea is diverting money from simpler conservation technologies and kidding the public that hydrogen is "green" while the gas will most likely be produced using fossil fuels.
More than $7 billion (€5.39 billion) is earmarked by US, EU and Japanese governments and industry for hydrogen/fuel cell R&D.
GM says it wants to be the first car company to sell a million hydrogen/fuel cell vehicles, while California's governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, promises a $100 million (€77 million) "hydrogen highway" with more than 200 stations by 2010. "Pursue it or rue it," said one car industry executive last week.
Producing hydrogen and handling large quantities are not the problem, claims Bentham. Shell alone produces 7,000 tonnes a day from its refineries and world annual hydrogen output is about 50 million tonnes and growing by 10 per cent a year. It is largely used to make nitrogen-based fertilisers and to convert low-grade crude oil into transport fuels.He says that in combination with a fuel cell engine, it is far cleaner than conventional fuel.
But what is overlooked, says Romm, is that hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. The cost of producing hydrogen from renewable sources, he says, is between $10 to $20 (€7.70 and €15.40) a gallon of petrol equivalent.
Shell says the claim that it's just good PR is too cynical. "There was a lot of hype in the late 1990s. But it is a very realistic view that by 2010-2012 vehicles will be commercially viable," says Bentham. "Whether they will be mass-produced depends on governments and car manufacturers."