Review and Report

Jordan,
I will have a review and rough outline of what I plan on covering for our report posted later this evening, your previous entry looks good. I hope this doesn't slow down progress on your end.

Peter

Hydrogen Fuel Cell

Bringing the research full circle through an analysis of the intensive report produced in 2008 by the EIA on hydrgen fuel cell and its reciprocal use and implementation in our economy
here is the link for chapter two which i have just read and taken comprehensive notes on which we will later compile into our paper
chapter one was merely an introduction however i will also post a basic page provided by the EIA on Hydrogen Fuel Cell without an economic analysis

Chapter 2 of this report systematically reviews the components of existing industrial hydrogen production, capacity, and use, as well as those elements associated with the contemplated future hydrogen economy. The review proceeds from sources of supply and production technologies through distribution and storage issues, and then to dispensing and end uses. End-use issues are related to HICEs and FCVs as well as stationary applications of hydrogen fuel cells.

· Supply-Production-Distrbution-Dispensing and End use

· # of potential feedstock and production pathways is much larger than depicted in 2.1 e.g. commited solar supplies for electrical provision or wind powered

· Hydrogen is an energy carrier not primary energy resource- similar to electricity

· Cellulosic biomass can also produce as well as natural gas, coal, oril and so forth

· 10 quadrillion BTU per year in 2030 of estimated biomass supply

· ^^polysys comp model

· Another source is simply electrolysis of water – NASA has used such however its rather expensive compared to alternatives and would require diverting energy use from the 49% of electric generation vis a vis coal burning plants

· Constructing a renewable capacity for exclusive purpose of hydrogen from electrolysis is undesirable from investment perspectives because ti would require the cost of electricity to be less than the wholesale price at which could be sold to the grid

· Standalone wind systems in production face this challenge and thus seem economically unfeasible

· Direct biomass gastircation would prove better economically if engineering challenges of raising max capacity to atleast 80% were overcome

· Hydrogen production would require reforming natural gas and hydrogen byproducts of petroleum processing

· Nuclear is a possibility that hasn’t fully been explored

· Hydrogen could be produced as a byproduct o some other exisiting industrial process

· ^^^clearly production could be accomdated

· Reforming- highly favorable because it wouldn’t require much infastructe change and industry already ecists for natural gas feedstock

· Partial Oxidation- typically produces at faster rate than the later but less from the same qunaityt moreover, fluxating natural gas prices are a detriment however

· Electrolysis- cost prohibitice and net energy losss associated with production

· Advanced techonoligies e.g. thermochemical reactions, nuclear fission, photosynthesis, fermentation and so forth however nothing is guaranteed on this new frontier

· ECONOMICS of production depends upon the underlying efficiency of technology employed, current state of industrial development, scale of plant, annual utilization and cost of its feed back, see chart 2.1 for reference

· We need investors to cover the plant capital costs in order to establish a dependeable production method less sensitive to production costs

· Smaller plants that would require less infrastructure tend to have higher feedstock and utility costs, lower effiences, and higher operation and maintence costs

· HYDROGEN TRANSMISSION and DISTRI

· Currently 20% of hydrogen production could be transported without modifying the 180,000 mile natural gas pipeline infrastructure

· Amount of quantity production will affect how we transport- e.g. midsized over the road and via rail cars- generally longer distances- larger quantities via pipes over shorter distances

· Hydrogen is highly volatile and safety is a necessary consideration in facilitating transport

· 99%^ of all hydrogen gas is transported via compressed gas in pipelies

· However, integrating transport into the already established natural gas pipelines could facilitate the shift although those are all headed toward homes and require a shift in processing through technology in home heating and so forth

· How this system will evolve is unknown and its costs cannot be estimated within reason because of this

· Quantities and distance determine cost of distribution and modes of transport also liquid versus gaseous stae

· One of the greatest challenges in developing a hydrogen economy is efficient storage

· **various storage methods** dk if its necessary though

· Hydrogen dispensing and hydrogen highway intiatives- see chart 2.3 California is winning the race

· Hydrogen end use applications currently

· Petroleum refining—to remove sulfur from crude oil as well as to convert heavy crude oil to lighter products

· Chemical processing—to manufacture ammonia, methanol, chlorine, caustic soda, and hydrogenated non-edible oils for soaps, insulation, plastics, ointments, and other chemicals

· Pharmaceuticals—to produce sorbitol, which is used in cosmetics, adhesives, surfactants, and vitamins

· Metal production and fabrication—to create a protective atmosphere in high-temperature operations, such as stainless steel manufacturing

· Food processing—to hydrogenate oils, such as soybean, fish, cottonseed, and corn oil

· Laboratory research—to conduct research and experimentation

· Electronics—to create a special atmosphere for the production of semiconductor circuits

· Glass manufacturing—to create a protective atmosphere for float glass production

· Power generation—to cool turbo-generators and to protect piping in nuclear reactors.

· Transportation end uses are mainly in the conceptual stage however LDV’s conversion could conserve and cut down on import enormously

· HICE’s VERSUS FCV’s

· HICE- modified mass produced vehicle designed, considerably lower cost and could be deployed much sooner, development of this vehicle type could facilitate massive infrastructure change

· 1000$ for on board electrolyzer and for has demonstrated the ability to optimize the combustion of hydrogen fuel given the design of the vehicle. These HICE’s could also include for a relatively low cost LDV onboard storage with equally effeicient fuel standards

· EV’s and PHEVS

· Major automakers hold the EV as a legitimate immediate emission free replacement however long range capabilities are still the challenge

· FCVS – instiallation of R and D fuel cells to work as an onboard electricity generaor storage system replacement

· Constant source of necessary chemicals for battery like reaction is the jist

· However major automotive companies eg Chrysler and GM require billion dollar expenditures in order to develop the system

· Current impediments to the sytem is costm fuel cell durability, and expanding operational temp range of cell – also necessary minimum range for consumers

· The fuel cell itself which last half as long as an internal combustion engine – where do the batteries go? Is it safe to throw them away- the study doesn’t say

· Stationary power systems are now in use and demonstrate the burgeoning industry

Whoops. Actually concluding perspectives on p-series

It seems that the lack of research pertaining to P-Series fuel and its potential economic and environmental benefits has to do with both the lack of demand in the current market for such a fuel type and also, the premature, co-dependent industry of hydro-fracking. P-Series fuels, although potentially beneficial to both the American economy and the environment, require byproducts from hydrofracking, which although is currently in practice, is not only still in development as an industry, but is also a topic of immense controversy among the public regarding its reciprocal environmental effects. Although our present concern is alternative fuels and not the environmental hazards related to hydrofracking, a brief synopsis of the concern is relevant not only to the discussion of potential p-series fuels but to fossil fuels as well.

Although the benefits of this burgeoning industry to the American economy could be immense, there is a mounting contingent of people opposed to the practice mainly because of the content of the liquid that is pumped into the ground which is mainly water but in an effort to make the most money possible includes a mixture of various toxic chemicals. Empirical evidence of these claims can be cited in the following article which details the accumulation of these chemicals over twenty years :

- http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/natural_gas_drilling/12_23_2009_final_assessment_report.pdf

Indeed concern has also been raised as for long term use and the necessity to switch to renewable resources to begin combating global warming. Furthermore, critics of the method cite the necessity to evaluate the full life cycle of the fuel, that is, over time the amount of methane released by this process could result in an even larger carbon footprint than previously projected. These are some of the many dangers that could and or will result from continued practice of hydrofracking. However, thousands of jobs, and the chance to develop efficient p-series fuels are also at stake which have innumerable benefits, not the least of which is decreasing our dependency on foreign oil. It might be in everybody’s interest to explore technological advancement in the process due to its potential benefits for both the economy and environment if producers could curb the level of toxins used. Where this industry goes should be interesting to follow within the next couple of years, but presently its being met with great opposition and consequently that means that p-series fuels will have to take a back seat as an alternative fuel.

Further research should be directed at the hydrogen fuel cell- hybrid electronic vehicles and the electric car and their impact environmentally as well as economically lets finish up these loose ends so that we can conclude our research on alt fuels

in opposition to fracking

Given p-series requires hydrofraulic byproducts the below demonstrate the challenge facing the developing fuel source

http://www.earthtimes.org/energy/dangers-hydraulic-fracturing-poisoned-water-supplies-earthquakes/552/

- Cites water contamination in Pennsylvania and West Virginia and potential earth quakes in Arkansas

- Is this dodging the need to actually find a renewable energy resource

- Full life cycle of emissions 20 year time scale indicates an even larger carbon footprint due to:

- Methane is emitted from the actual process, which is more detrimental than carbon emissions

http://www.heatingoil.com/blog/nyc-study-warns-of-dangers-of-hydrofracking1231/

- Over time toxic chemcicals will build up

- http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/natural_gas_drilling/12_23_2009_final_assessment_report.pdf

- Big study usually understates risk however the latter seems to emphasize risk

- Other conclusions from the DEP’s report include:

-

- • “Withdrawals [of water to support hydraulic fracturing] during dry periods could increase the duration of drought watch, warning, or emergency conditions.”

-

- • “[C]hronic and persistent occurrence of small scale surface spills and contamination incidents will inevitably accompany . . . hydrofracking . . . [and will] reduce public and regulatory agency confidence in the quality and safety of the water supply.”

-

- • “[H]yrodfracking . . . will produce an industrial-strength waste stream characterized by exceptionally high concentrations of a wide range of substances with the potential for adverse health and water quality effects which can be expected to exceed existing treatment and assimilative capacities. . .”

-

- • “There is high level of uncertainty as to whether effective waste treatment processes and sufficient capacity will be available in the future.”

- However its not all bad, there are places it can be implemented and have less environmental and societal affect as well as methods that are less dangerous to human health e.g. using only water- is bound to tons of jobs and natural gas production striking the balance is the challenge not necessarily completely outlawing it

This is rather long and I have not read through all of it but my assessment currently is that it may indeed go beyond our projected scope. Regardless there are some decent links and summaries of alternate fuels that may be worth checking out!

Link

Gasland

Jordan, as a follow up to your previous post-
Here is a link to view Gasland online, seems fairly reliable

Assignment Questions/Ideas

Jordan-
What are your feelings on the overall assignment as it stands now? Would you be interested in looking at the three fuel/energy alternatives I suggested before? Would you like to add or exclude any in particular? Does looking at the economic and environmental implications of these alternatives sound like something worthwhile? Let me know what your thoughts are.

Professor O'Donnell-
Does this sound like something that would acceptable for a final report? I'm just trying to get the ball rolling ASAP so we can begin working with the information we have found thus far- Also, is Carla still in our group or has she switched?

Peter

Shale Drilling and its role in P-Series

Given that MeTHF is an element of P-Series fuel that typically composes 20% of its mixture and its produced from the byproducts of natural gas production it is important to note that P-Series fuel would necessarily- for better or for worse- facilitate an even greater rise in mining shale deposits in this country.

With that in mind here is a clip from Gasland, which is a bit sensationalized, but may offer a valid perspective when it comes to internalizing externalities associated with this potential and continually developing new market in the American Economy.

I am still trying to find the film online for free but I can't at this point-

Similarly- **to Prof. O'Donnel, from a scientific perspective, how valid do you think the aforementioned clip could be in documenting possible externalities? Is going around and collecting first hand reports valid in terms of establishing any possible negative affects on human health?

P-Series Clarification

This link is probably what you intended to post and I am just posting it for the blogs documentation. The link is here
Will then begin to get some perspectives on the economics of this topic!


Jordan

Additional Info

Here is a nice, easily understood PDF. presentation of Hydrogen Economics by Prof. Joan Ogden at the Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Davis.
More additional insight into Hydrogen here.

Here is a report done on the impact plug-in vehicles will have on power grid economics. While not directly dealing with the transportation aspects this paper includes a few graphics that display the impacts of widespread plug-in vehicles and hybrid electrics.

While there is no vast economic structure surrounding P-Series fuels I was able to find information regarding impacts on the oil industry. While P-Series fuels will never ever fully replace oil, they are useful as supplements, but on a limited scale. From the institute for the analysis of global security--
"As of May, 2003, the projected retail (pump) price for P-Series (89 mid-grade) incl. all taxes is $1.49 per gallon (based on NJ state taxes). This about $.13 /gallon less than mid-grade gasoline, but the lower price reflects the lower energy content of the ethanol. On a BTU basis, P-Series is more efficient than gasoline, but on a gallon basis, the fuel mileage is about 10% less than gasoline. The upshot is that the operating cost -- in $/mile -- is about the same as mid-grade gasoline. Fortunately, the scale of production to reach this price point is very modest, only 10 MBD (150 million gallons per year), or about 5% of the production volume of even a small oil refinery. Economies are met even at such a small scale because revenue is obtained for accepting the waste as well as producing the fuel. Because of the small size and scale, multiple plants can be distributed geographically so that no one neighborhood need become the trash importer for the region. "