Hydrogen as a fuel? Inside the technology Toyota is developing

I used to be a proponent of the hydrogen future, but for 30 years it's always BEEN a future 5-10 years away, due to the massive problems with it. It takes more energy to generate, it requires custom tanks that can handle the 10,000 psi that it must be stored at to get any sort of energy density out of it, as the smallest atom it can slip through other materials and is HIGHLY flammable making leaks a Really Big Deal. Hydrogen embrittlement is still a thing. And the fact that there's NO infrastructure for it, while there is electricity pretty much everywhere now, makes it a real hard sell (and you can't refuel at home like you can with electricity).

While the idea of quickly refilling with hydrogen is appealing as a positive, there are also problems that so far are not yet solved - for example, with economically generating hydrogen, and with doing so in an energy efficient way. The most appealing way from a clean energy perspective is to use electrolysis of water using wind and solar power. But this process isn't cheap, so the resulting hydrogen is a good deal more expensive than gas (while charging a BEV is a good deal cheaper than gas); and, you lose energy when you convert from electrical energy to chemical in electrolysis - it's a lot more direct/efficient to just use that electrical energy to charge BEVs. And then there will be a need for building out a very extensive network of hydrogen filling stations - which won't be trivial. These are not small problems.

No, this is a hedge against Japanese government regulations. That's all. Hydrogen is a non-starter globally for passenger cars. It might be good for trains and long haul trucks, if the hydrogen can be generated cheap enough

I think Toyota's making a wrong turn again. In terms of hydrogen infrastructure, it basically doesn't exist right now and it's a nightmare fuel to transport and store, while we already have liquid hydrocarbons at every gas station and electricity in most every structure. Hydrogen can only practically be made a liquid at cryogenic temperatures. A hydrogen-powered ICE is also still turning about 2 units of energy into waste heat for every 1 that makes it to the wheels. A fuel-cell hydrogen car doesn't have that issue, but it does have a high up-front cost and high weight like an EV.

Also right now, fueling a car with hydrogen costs about as much as fueling it with gas, and almost all of the hydrogen available is produced as a fossil fuel byproduct.

Kind of surprised they pivoted to ICEs instead of fuel cells- about a year ago Physics Girl did a long drive of a Toyota Fuel Cell car and talked alot about it on her YT channel.  

H2 ICE's need help to make equal power of gas- since H2 isn't as energy rich for it's proper combustion as gasoline is.

I'm also not going to say they are making a mistake in direction, as I know they are very active in EVs.  This seems to be hedging their bets where H2 may be a better option.

edit- also, the work to develop it isn't very expensive, it's not as if you have to develop an totally new engine, and most of the storage issues have been worked through.  The thing still hanging out there is emissions, as dealing with NOx is still a requirement.  I know I would have a blast working on that, as in recent years, I've learned some cool details on how to deal with it with no CO around.

In reply to alfadriver :

I have driven the Toyota Mirai, which uses a hydrogen fuel cell. To me it felt like driving an EV sedan that focused on comfort and a smooth ride rather than sheer sportiness like some trend toward. It also made bubbly sounds when you got on the gas ... err accelerator ... pedal.

I'd like to drive a H2 car. I'm curious what it would feel like - and sound like. From the videos I've seen, the cars sound like regular ICE cars.

Hey, I'm ready to go, I've already got the fuel tank.  2 miles away from me there already is a hydrogen fueling station which was the first in the nation experiment to run 3 pickups on hydrogen produced from 2 wind tower generators. They expanded it to run 2 diesel tractors also but for some reason, there is no follow up on the conclusions of the study.

Wind-to-hydrogen plant first in nation

alfadriver said:

Kind of surprised they pivoted to ICEs instead of fuel cells- about a year ago Physics Girl did a long drive of a Toyota Fuel Cell car and talked alot about it on her YT channel. 

I don't think they're pivoting but providing an option. You can have your fuel cell car for commuting and a combustion car for the track day when you want revs and noise. I'm sure development was pushed because now former CEO Akio Toyoda is a petrol head.

Keichi Tsuchiya got to drive the Corolla

Here's the actual press conference from the 2023 Tokyo Auto Salon, which includes english subtitles:

which I linked to in a thread about the BEV and H2 AE86's.  Watching that video about the two "mules", and the relative lack of power currently of the H2 combustion 4A-GE, I kinda wonder why they're not utilizing H2 combustion in one of their hybrid synergy systems?  Seems to me like that would be another place where their edge in integrating EV's would well supplement the lack of power and torque on the H2 combustion.

I think we'd be get farther faster by putting more energy into biofuel development.

In reply to Driven5 :

That's actually out side of the automotive industry, and more a combination of the ag industry plus some oil.  That's been a massive part of the work for a really long time- IIRC, the first time switchgrass based fuel was brought up was in the 70s.  

Especially the work to try to get butanol- which is closer to gasoline than ethanol is.  But it requires some special tools.

Basically, everyone is working on everything, trying to find that magical breakthrough to make their path a better one than all of the others.

One thing that doesn't get mentioned much about hydrogen is refueling speed. Everyone expects it to be like gasoline, you just hook up a hose and 2 minutes later you're on your way. But if I understand correctly, that means a high pressure supply tank since the car stores the fuel at 350-700 bar. Normal industrial storage of H2 is something like 200 bar. So you need a high pressure transfer tank, which means a whole lot of pumping action to refill that's slower than filling the car. It's like trying to use a high-consumption air tool on your compressor. So after a few cars have suckled at the transfer tank, there's a delay while it refills. This article refers to a 15 minute "refresh" time. So while it might only take 5-7 minutes to refuel, you may end up having to wait more like 20-22 if your timing is wrong.

I think the only real advantage H2 has over a battery EV is the ability to store more energy, which benefits the heavy users like commercial vehicles the most. And those commercial vehicles are more likely to be operating out of hubs with coordination, so they can work around the lack of infrastructure and the "refresh" time constraints. That makes me think that big over the road trucks are going to be the first real use, switching to electric trucks for last mile delivery. Think of the big triple trailer FedEx road trains and the local delivery vans, for example.

Private passenger vehicles see wildly random use, they need far more infrastructure. That's the biggest complaint/concern about EVs for a lot of people, and this is in a country that has a very well established electrical grid.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

The infrastructure issue is the biggest hurdle to hydrogen adoption, be it fuel cell or combustion. I agree that it's a misstep for Toyota to be doing this. Since it basically shares gasoline infrastructure and it's already in mass production, I'm assuming that the future of ICEs is Ethanol. More than likely, pump gas will get a higher and higher percent ethanol until it's at 100%, like they do in Brazil. It will function as a transition fuel as EVs take on a higher market share each year, and I'd be happy to have it around permanently as an option for legacy vehicles. 

In reply to Qaaaaa :

A potential problem with E100 fuel in the US is cold starting due to a low vapor pressure. Even E85 has problems in this regard, which is why it's often a lower percentage of ethanol in the winter. E85 can be as little as 51% ethanol. Brazil has less of a problem in this regard.

I agree that increasing ethanol content in gasoline is really low-hanging fruit. It's pretty much a zero effort switch at the station, you just have to fill the holding tank and change the labelling.

In reply to alfadriver :

The only reason the development of a technology remains outside of an industry that would substantially benefit from it, is because they choose to let it be. Batteries were also 'outside of the automotive industry' prior to Tesla coming along and turning that model on its head. Now everybody is rushing to dump money into battery partnerships.

That's why Toyota isn't just investing in the automotive consumption side of Hydrogen, they're also investing in (partnering with) Hydrogen production and infrastructure development.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Eh, the cold starting problems are overblown. I've been running E85 all winter in Ohio, and it's been fine, just cranks a little longer some days. Probably be a lot worse if you live in a colder state, but most of the US doesn't. I only had to hit it with ether once, when it was -5F out. 

Qaaaaa said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Eh, the cold starting problems are overblown. I've been running E85 all winter in Ohio, and it's been fine, just cranks a little longer some days. Probably be a lot worse if you live in a colder state, but most of the US doesn't. I only had to hit it with ether once, when it was -5F out. 

That's because you weren't really running 85% ethanol. You were running a lower percentage, to avoid problems with cold starts. You don't know this is happening, but it is. If you have a proper flex fuel car, it has an ethanol sensor to check what's actually running through the fuel lines and adjust accordingly.
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethanol_e85_specs.html

Get yourself some summer blend E85 and store it until winter. Then fill your tank with it and see how it starts.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Will report back next year!

Hydrogen in high duty cycles like heavy work or racing seems like a good fit. For passenger vehicles in the near term it's not likely the best option.

Using it as a fuel in an ICE is an intermediate step that can be done relatively easily. They don't require much rework of a gasoline or diesel ICE application. They use the same cooling systems, fuel storage can be in the same locations, they'll bolt into the same spot as a gas/diesel ICE. It's an inexpensive, easy option that's fairly similar in engineering, design, assembly, usage, fueling, and servicing to what we've been doing for the last century or so. It's easy for the car makers, the customers, and the mechanics to understand and implement.

In places where hydrogen is being incentivized (primarily India, Eastern Asia, and Europe for now), hydrogen ICE's will be an option while the infrastructure is rolled out. As demand grows and scale builds (say 2025-2040), fuel cells become more financially viable. Maybe by 2045-2050 there's enough infrastructure in place, and production scale to make fuel cells a viable option.

I think there could be a case to be made for direct hydrogen ICE if it can be retrofitted to existing ICE to decarbonize. I don't totally understand the use case for new ICE powered by hydrogen if you can do BEV or FCEV... but I'm not the president of Toyota. We will see some e-fuels for shipping and aviation first but likely ammonia, methanol, kerosene and not more complex structures unless the economics change a lot.

As far as investment the IRA is financing at least FOUR hydrogen hubs and likely quite a few more if private investment gets behind it as well. 

The Mirai was almost given away by Toyota a few years ago , a Lexus class car for about $20k , 

and they included a big "gas" card to refuel for a couple years , the fuel ends up about 2x what gasoline costs  per mile , 

Like always the "Got ya" is there are only a few filling stations even in California, and none in most of the USA , 

There is a lot more Hydrogen in fleets , but not available to the public to fill up !

if you could snap your fingers and have filling stations of "green" hydrogen it may work.

In reply to Driven5 :

At least with batteries, there's a degree of manufacturing that the industry is good at.  And OEM's were making batteries for EV's well before Tesla came along- the only thing they brought to the table is the use of the more dangerous LiIon chemistry- and the different shape that cars can use for battery shapes.   The Nissan Leaf beat any of Tesla's cars by a year.

Growing stuff isn't in the industries wheel house.  Nor is fermenting it and distilling it.  Those are already heavily specialized in ag and food.  Heck, the original movement to oxygenate the fuel came from the farm industry, not the automotive one.  It's not as if bio fuels need a new system to make it.  But OEMs do contribute to trying to find ways of turning "waste" into something that can be used.

H2 barely exists.  So it needs a lot of help ramping up.

alfadriver said:

In reply to Driven5 :

At least with batteries, there's a degree of manufacturing that the industry is good at.  And OEM's were making batteries for EV's well before Tesla came along- the only thing they brought to the table is the use of the more dangerous LiIon chemistry- and the different shape that cars can use for battery shapes.   The Nissan Leaf beat any of Tesla's cars by a year.

Growing stuff isn't in the industries wheel house.  Nor is fermenting it and distilling it.  Those are already heavily specialized in ag and food.  Heck, the original movement to oxygenate the fuel came from the farm industry, not the automotive one.  It's not as if bio fuels need a new system to make it.  But OEMs do contribute to trying to find ways of turning "waste" into something that can be used.

H2 barely exists.  So it needs a lot of help ramping up.

Well at least carbon free. Us makes 10Mt a year and is 10% of the total global supply. Almost all natural gas based though. 

Someone has to do the research and investment if hydrogen is going to go from 'always 5 to 10 years away' to available.  The same was said of electric cars until Tesla just went ahead and did it.

A major reason why Toyota (and Japan) are pushing forward with hydrogen is because they have no natural fuel resources other than renewables and their nuclear plants, so they have a surplus of electricity and a lot of ocean.  Hydrogen doesn't require them to import fuels or the heavy metals necessary for batteries, and the batteries being built these days are largely dependent on China and Korea - two countries Japan doesn't exactly get along with.

Energy independence is their biggest national security priority.

Another separation of EV's and H2- there have been wires to homes to provide electricity for over 100 years now.    Let alone to distribute it literally every where.  

That does not exist for H2.  

BTW, a lot of demands that an H2 infrastructure be made....

Who do you want to pay for it?

Same applies to the massive expansion of the EV infrastructure.  If the system is going to support 100% of all new cars, that's a lot of chargers to install - even the cheap small ones for +4 hours of a car sitting still.  

One suggestion I've seen is that the utilities should be allowed to do that in a manner to sell the electricity to EVs, like oil companies do now.  OEM's are going to reach a limit where they don't want to pay for that anymore, especially since it's a 100% loss- as they get nothing from the electricity.

A few years back, the town of Whistler British Columbia bought a fleet of 20 hydrogen powered buses. Correction, two levels of government paid $95 million to buy them the buses to prove to the world how green they were. But all of the fuel had to be brought in by diesel truck from Quebec where it was made from natural gas. After a few years they got rid of them and went back to conventional buses. That tells me everything I need to know about hydrogen. I think the people and companies who boost hydrogen as a fuel source either have access to government funds, or are hoping to access government funds.

Keith Tanner said:

Qaaaaa said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Eh, the cold starting problems are overblown. I've been running E85 all winter in Ohio, and it's been fine, just cranks a little longer some days. Probably be a lot worse if you live in a colder state, but most of the US doesn't. I only had to hit it with ether once, when it was -5F out. 

That's because you weren't really running 85% ethanol. You were running a lower percentage, to avoid problems with cold starts. You don't know this is happening, but it is. If you have a proper flex fuel car, it has an ethanol sensor to check what's actually running through the fuel lines and adjust accordingly.
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethanol_e85_specs.html

Get yourself some summer blend E85 and store it until winter. Then fill your tank with it and see how it starts.

The bargain in E85 is buying 85% ethanol in December & January.  $2 a gallon.  Maybe  a little more   So it's at least$  1&1/2 a gallon cheaper.  Yes in really cold weather my truck will drop down to 18mpg  with that.  But I still save money.  How much depends on what the price of gas is and how cold it is.   
     I think the coldest it's been in the morning is 18 below and it still fired right up.   Granted it's not the 40 below we've had in the past but I've had this since Feb. of 2017.  In that period it's never failed to start. 
   OK I changed my spark plugs at 60,000 miles. Maybe with 100,000 miles it might be harder to start in real sub Zero weather. 
      I understand the myth of hard starting in the cold.  Sprint cars that used to 100% methanol were pretty hard to start when the temps were down in the 30 degree area.  They are push started  and the process is put it in gear and the push truck pushes the car until oil pressure comes on the gauge.  Then the magneto is turn on.  In the mean time a lot of methanol has been pumped into the cylinder.  Basically flooding the plugs.    They might get 1/2-3/4 of a lap in before even one cylinder fires.   Once it does start running the cold formed by the evaporating alcohol is frosting up the intake and with it the injector.    Typically there isn't enough heat to melt the frost so  they have yeti come in and using a propane torch, heat up the  injector and try again.  

Having worked in refineries and hydrogen plants, I'll pass on a hydrogen power vehicle for me or my family.  Hydrogen is a tiny molecule that leaks easily and has a huge flammability range.  Its low energy content per unit volume means that it has to be compressed to tremendous pressures while still containing a fraction of the energy per unit volume vs gasoline.

I think an EV would make a neat around the neighborhood shopping vehicle.  Maybe I'll build an electric Fiat Jolly after I retire.

Read somewhere recently about adding hydrogen to current natural gas  systems to stretch the supply and burn cleaner. Same idea as E10 etc.

CNG burns so clean and has a good distribution network in place I wish that would be the alt fuel of choice, even as a stepping stone....(of course nothings 'good enough' for some points of view)

In case you missed this 

Toyoda said "I hope to dismiss the fear that we won’t be able to drive our beloved cars when we go carbon neutral. On the contrary, there is a carbon neutral path that car lovers can take.”

Did anyone else read this? "We go carbon neutral." The "we" could mean Japan. They have bullet trains. We do not. They have hotel rooms the size of a high-school locker. We do not. They will have cars that drive without CO2..... 

The basic flaw of Hydrogen as a fuel isn't the fuel.  
 It's how it's used.   
 I'm a serious gear head. I love pistons and camshafts. The more the merrier.  2 is cooler than 1, 4 is cooler than 2 6 is better than 4. 8 is better than 6 and 12 is the best.  
  Same with valves. 2 is ok  but 48 is best.   Etc. Add boost of some sort, and it's even better. 
  But  none of it is efficient.  One stroke out of 4 is a power stroke? Pistons going down stopping and coming back up? Do it again to get a single power stroke?    
  Peak torque isn't at zero RPM rather at. 4800 rpm so you need a transmission. And a clutch or toque converter. 
       Electric motors don't need that.   But to use hydrogen as a fuel that's what's required.  
 

In reply to frenchyd :

Batteries and electric motors are great for some applications. That doesn't mean they work for all applications. Batteries struggle with weight and rapid discharge while doing constant, heavy work. So hydrogen may be an option for going carbon neutral in applications like trucking, construction, agriculture, aviation, and (relevant to our interests) racing. Unless batteries get much lighter and more energy dense at the same time they're not going to be a great option for applications like the ones above.

By implementing hydrogen as a fuel in ICEs, we can get closer to carbon neutrality sooner. It's not the most efficient process possible, but it's progress. And in locations where there's support, hydrogen ICEs will likely spawn hydrogen production and infrastructure development which are necessary steps if much more efficient hydrogen fuel cells are ever going to gain widespread acceptance.

In reply to STM317 :

  Steam powered trains only operated briefly when oil was used instead of coal.  Steam simply was too high maintenance to be efficient.  The same applies to ICE   Much as I love playing with my ICE toys. There really are better ways. 
     
I have an electric toothbrush. It and a lot of battery powered products charge not by direct contact but by proximity.   So there is no risk of a shock. .        Why carry heavy. & expensive  batteries around if there are other options?   Instead of $10-30,000 batteries in the vehicles ?  The same amount is spent upgrading the public roads?   Start with the interstates first. Since that's when the highest demand is.    Eisenhower built the whole interstate system from scratch and balanced the national budget while doing it.  
  For this we don't need to start from scratch, just carve out one lane at a time.   The right carbide  will quickly grind the required groove, the right wires could be preassembled to lay in place and leads run to the shoulders to pick up voltage from  solar panels and wind generators installed at the same time.   Once in place some sort of quick hardening epoxy  or plastic  is poured in place.  Basically  say a section of the freeway loses one lane at a time for an hour?   In congested urban areas that could be done during off peak hours for minimum traffic disruption.  
      Once freeways are done, state highways, then  less densely traveled roads.    All cars should have some battery range.   But maybe 50 miles is enough to reach freeways etc?  If not 50 then 100?   Especially if charging became normal st every gas station.   If only 50 miles is required charging would be time competitive with filling  a gas tank.   
      Yes the world is changing.  Perhaps a lot of trips previously requiring cars will be  taken with drones.  Distances will be reduced to as a crow fly's.  For me instead of traveling 23 miles, much of it the wrong direction it would be a trip less than 6 miles. 
      Yes I know, a whole new navigation system created.  
  
      
         

The Hindenburg incident guarantees Hydrogen will never be a mainstream power source.

Autovelox said:

Having worked in refineries and hydrogen plants, I'll pass on a hydrogen power vehicle for me or my family.  Hydrogen is a tiny molecule that leaks easily and has a huge flammability range.  Its low energy content per unit volume means that it has to be compressed to tremendous pressures while still containing a fraction of the energy per unit volume vs gasoline.

I think an EV would make a neat around the neighborhood shopping vehicle.  Maybe I'll build an electric Fiat Jolly after I retire.

This. The tanks needed to store hydrogen from an episode of Engineering Explained detailed they need more than 5 times the storage space for the equivalent in gas, even before getting to embrittlement. The fire it makes is invisible. This is all because fuel cells so far, likely won't replace gas since they really don't last long. As this interview from Hindenburg goes:

“I see in some news they said they have 5 year stacks. My guess is they may have 2.5 or 3 year stacks. In that range. They probably have 50% [efficiency] they can reach for 3 years.”

If anything will dethrone lithium now, my money currently is on sodium-ion or the glass batteries John Goodenough is making. 

bentwrench said:

The Hindenburg incident guarantees Hydrogen will never be a mainstream power source.

Its a good reason to not fill a zepplin with one. Other than that though it is used in a lot of places already very safely. 

bentwrench said:

The Hindenburg incident guarantees Hydrogen will never be a mainstream power source.

We will note to not make hydrogen pressure vessels out of highly flammable materials in the future.