What to know about DOE's hydrogen hubs


hydrogen energy storage

CSA Z462 Arc Flash Training - Electrical Safety Essentials

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 6 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$249
Coupon Price:
$199
Reserve Your Seat Today

U.S. Clean Hydrogen Hubs aim to scale production, storage, transport, and use as DOE and the Biden administration fund regional projects under the infrastructure law, blending green and blue hydrogen, carbon capture, renewables, and pipelines.

 

Key Points

Federally funded regional projects to make, move, and use low-carbon hydrogen via green, blue, and pink routes.

✅ $7B DOE funding via infrastructure law

✅ Mix of green, blue, pink hydrogen pathways

✅ Targets 10M metric tons annually by 2030

 

New details are emerging about the Biden administration’s landmark plans to build out a U.S. clean hydrogen industry.

On Friday, the Department of Energy named the seven winners of $7 billion in federal funds to establish regional hydrogen hubs. The hubs — funded through the infrastructure law — are part of the administration’s efforts to jump-start an industry it sees as key to achieving climate goals like the goal of 100 percent clean electricity by 2035 set by the administration. The aim is to demonstrate everything from the production and storage of hydrogen to its transport and consumption.

“All across the country, from coast to coast, in the heartland, we’re building a clean energy future here in America, not somewhere else,” President Joe Biden said while announcing the hubs in Philadelphia.

From 79 initial proposals, DOE chose the following: the Mid-Atlantic Hydrogen Hub, Appalachian Hydrogen Hub, California Hydrogen Hub, Gulf Coast Hydrogen Hub, Heartland Hydrogen Hub, Midwest Hydrogen Hub and Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Hub.

Many of the winning proposals are backed by state government leaders and industry partners, and by Southeast cities that have ramped up clean energy purchases in recent years as well. The Midwest hub, for example, is a coalition of Illinois, Indiana and Michigan — supported by politicians like Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), as well as such companies as Air Liquide, Ameren Illinois and Atlas Agro. The mid-Atlantic hub is supported by Democratic members of Congress representing the region, including Delaware Sens. Chris Coons and Tom Carper and Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester.

The administration hopes the hubs will produce 10 million metric tons of “clean” hydrogen annually by 2030. But much about the projects remains unknown — including how trends like cheap batteries for solar could affect clean power supply — and dependent on negotiations with DOE.


A win for ‘blue’ hydrogen?
Nearly all hydrogen created in the U.S. today is extracted from natural gas through steam methane reformation. The emissions-intensive process produces what is known as “grey” hydrogen — or “blue” hydrogen when combined with carbon capture and storage.

Four recipients — the Appalachian, Gulf Coast, Heartland and Midwest hydrogen hubs — include blue hydrogen in their plans, though the infrastructure law only mandated one.

That has drawn the ire of environmentalists, who argue blue hydrogen is not emissions-free, partly because of the potential for methane leaks during the production process.

“This is worse than expected,” Clean Energy Group President Seth Mullendore said after the recipients were announced Friday. “The fact that more than half the hubs will be using fossil gas is outrageous.”

Critics have also pointed out that many of the industry partners backing the hub projects include oil and gas companies. The coalitions are a mix of private-sector groups — often including renewable energy developers — and government stakeholders. Proposals have also looped in universities, utilities, environmental groups, community organizations, labor unions and tribal nations, among others.

“The massive build out of hydrogen infrastructure is little more than an industry ploy to rebrand fracked gas,” said Food & Water Watch Policy Director Jim Walsh in a statement Friday. “In a moment when every political decision that we make must reject fossil expansion, the Biden administration is going in the opposite direction.”

The White House has emphasized that roughly two-thirds of the $7 billion pot is “associated” with the production of “green” hydrogen, which uses electricity from renewable sources. Two of the chosen proposals — in California and the Pacific Northwest — are making green hydrogen their focus, reflecting advances such as offshore green hydrogen being pursued by industry leaders, while three other hubs plan to include green hydrogen alongside hydrogen made with natural gas (blue) or nuclear energy (pink).

Many hubs plan to use several methods for hydrogen production, and globally, projects like Brazil's green hydrogen plant highlight the scale of investment, but the exact mix may change depending on which projects make it through the DOE negotiations process. The Midwest hub, for example, told E&E News it’s pursuing an “all-of-the-above” strategy and has projects for green, blue and “pink” hydrogen. The mid-Atlantic hub in southeastern Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey will also generate hydrogen with nuclear reactors.

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm has described clean hydrogen as a fresh business opportunity, especially for the natural gas industry, which has supported the concept of sending hydrogen to market through its pipeline network. Lawmakers like Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) — who said the Appalachian hub will make West Virginia the “new epicenter of hydrogen” — have pushed for continuing to use natural gas to make hydrogen in his state.

“Natural gas utilities are committed to exploring all options for emissions reduction as demonstrated by the 39 hydrogen pilot projects already underway and are eager to participate in a number of the hubs,” said American Gas Association President and CEO Karen Harbert in a statement Friday.

Green hydrogen also has faced criticism. Some groups argue that the renewable resources needed to produce green hydrogen are limited, even with sources such as wind, solar and hydropower technology, so funding should be reserved for applications that cannot be easily electrified, mostly industrial processes. There also is uncertainty about how the Treasury Department will handle hydrogen made from grid electricity — which can include power from fossil fuel plants — in its upcoming guidance on the first-ever tax credit for clean hydrogen production.

“Even the cleanest forms of hydrogen present serious problems,” Walsh said. “As groundwater sources are drying up across the country, there is no reason to waste precious drinking water resources on hydrogen when there are cheaper, cleaner energy sources that can facilitate a real transition off fossil fuels.”

But Angelina Galiteva, CEO of the hub in drought-prone California, said hydrogen will enable the state “to increase renewable penetration to reach all corners of the economy,” noting parallel initiatives such as Dubai's solar hydrogen plans that illustrate the potential.

“Transitioning to renewable clean hydrogen will pose significantly less stress on water resources than remaining on the current fossil path,” she said.

 

Related News

Related News

Biden's proposed tenfold increase in solar power would remake the U.S. electricity system

US Solar Power 2050 Target projects 45% electricity from solar, advancing decarbonization with clean energy, wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and scalable energy storage, while modernizing the grid and transmission to cut emissions and create jobs.

 

Key Points

A goal for solar to supply ~45% of US electricity by 2050, backed by energy storage and other low-carbon generation.

✅ Requires 1,050-1,570 GW solar and matching storage capacity

✅ Utility-scale buildout uses ~10M acres; rooftop 10-20% of capacity

✅ Complemented by wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and flexible turbines

 

President Joe Biden has called for major clean energy investments as a way to curb climate change and generate jobs. On Sept. 8, 2021, the White House released a report produced by the U.S. Department of Energy that found that solar power could generate up to 45% of the U.S. electricity supply by 2050, compared to less than 4% today, with about 3% in 2020 noted by industry observers. The Conversation asked Joshua D. Rhodes, an energy technology and policy researcher at the University of Texas at Austin, what it would take to meet this target.

Why such a heavy focus on solar power? Doesn’t a low-carbon future require many types of clean energy, even though wind and solar could meet about 80% of demand according to some research?
The Energy Department’s Solar Futures Study lays out three future pathways for the U.S. grid: business as usual; decarbonization, meaning a massive shift to low-carbon and carbon-free energy sources; and decarbonization with economy-wide electrification of activities that are powered now by fossil fuels.

It concludes that the latter two scenarios would require approximately 1,050-1,570 gigawatts of solar power, which would meet about 44%-45% of expected electricity demand in 2050, even as renewables approach one-fourth of U.S. generation in the near term. For perspective, one gigawatt of generating capacity is equivalent to about 3.1 million solar panels or 364 large-scale wind turbines.

The rest would come mostly from a mix of other low- or zero-carbon sources, including wind, nuclear, hydropower, biopower, geothermal and combustion turbines run on zero-carbon synthetic fuels such as hydrogen. Energy storage capacity – systems such as large installations of high-capacity batteries – would also expand at roughly the same rate as solar, with record growth in solar and storage anticipated by industry in coming years.

One advantage solar power has over many other low-carbon technologies is that most of the U.S. has lots of sunshine. Wind, hydropower and geothermal resources aren’t so evenly distributed: There are large zones where these resources are poor or nonexistent.

Relying more heavily on region-specific technologies would mean developing them extremely densely where they are most abundant. It also would require building more high-voltage transmission lines to move that energy over long distances, which could increase costs and draw opposition from landowners – a key reason the grid isn't yet 100% renewable according to experts – in many regions.

Is generating 45% of U.S. electricity from solar power by 2050 feasible?
I think it would be technically possible but not easy. It would require an accelerated and sustained deployment far larger than what the U.S. has achieved so far, even as the cost of solar panels has fallen dramatically, and wind, solar and batteries are 82% of the utility-scale pipeline across the country. Some regions have attained this rate of growth, albeit from low starting points and usually not for long periods.

The Solar Futures Study estimates that producing 45% of the nation’s electricity from solar power by 2050 would require deploying about 1,600 gigawatts of solar generation. That’s a 1,450% increase from the 103 gigawatts that are installed in the U.S. today, even as wind and solar trend toward 30% of U.S. electricity in some outlooks. For perspective, there are currently about 1,200 gigawatts of electricity generation capacity of all types on the U.S. power grid.

The report assumes that 10%-20% of this new solar capacity would be deployed on homes and businesses. The rest would be large utility-scale deployments, mostly solar panels, plus some large-scale solar thermal systems that use mirrors to reflect the sun to a central tower.

Assuming that utility-scale solar power requires roughly 8 acres per megawatt, this expansion would require approximately 10.2 million to 11.5 million acres. That’s an area roughly as big as Massachusetts and New Jersey combined, although it’s less than 0.5% of total U.S. land mass.

I think goals like these are worth setting, but are good to reevaluate over time to make sure they represent the most prudent path.

 

Related News

View more

Ukraine sees new virtue in wind power: It's harder to destroy

Ukraine Wind Energy Resilience shields the grid with wind power along the Black Sea, dispersing turbines to withstand missile attacks, accelerate clean energy transition, aid EU integration, and strengthen energy security and rapid recovery.

 

Key Points

A strategy in Ukraine using wind farms to harden the grid, ensure clean power, and speed recovery from missile strikes.

✅ Distributed turbines reduce single-point-of-failure risk

✅ Faster repair of substations and lines than power plants

✅ Supports EU-aligned clean energy and grid security goals

 

The giants catch the wind with their huge arms, helping to keep the lights on in Ukraine — newly built windmills, on plains along the Black Sea.

In 15 months of war, Russia has launched countless missiles and exploding drones at power plants, hydroelectric dams and substations, trying to black out as much of Ukraine as it can, as often as it can, even amid talk of limiting attacks on energy sites that has surfaced, in its campaign to pound the country into submission.

The new Tyligulska wind farm stands only a few dozen miles from Russian artillery, but Ukrainians say it has a crucial advantage over most of the country’s grid, helping stabilize the system even as electricity exports have occasionally resumed under fire.

A single, well-placed missile can damage a power plant severely enough to take it out of action, but Ukrainian officials say that doing the same to a set of windmills — each one tens of meters apart from any other — would require dozens of missiles. A wind farm can be temporarily disabled by striking a transformer substation or transmission lines, but these are much easier to repair than power plants.

“It is our response to Russians,” said Maksym Timchenko, CEO of DTEK Group, the company that built the turbines in the southern Mykolaiv region — the first phase of what is planned as Eastern Europe’s largest wind farm. “It is the most profitable and, as we know now, most secure form of energy.”

Ukraine has had laws in place since 2014 to promote a transition to renewable energy, both to lower dependence on Russian energy imports, with periods when electricity exports resumed to neighbors, and because it was profitable. But that transition still has a long way to go, and the war makes its prospects, like everything else about Ukraine’s future, murky.

In 2020, 12% of Ukraine’s electricity came from renewable sources — barely half the percentage for the European Union. Plans for the Tyligulska project call for 85 turbines producing up to 500 megawatts of electricity. That’s enough for 500,000 apartments — an impressive output for a wind farm, but less than 1% of the country’s prewar generating capacity.

After the Kremlin began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the need for new power sources became acute, prompting deliveries such as a mobile gas turbine power plant to bolster capacity. Russia has bombarded Ukraine’s power plants and cut off delivery of the natural gas that fueled some of them.

Russian occupation forces have seized a large part of the country’s power supply, and Russia has built power lines to reactivate the Zaporizhzhia plant in occupied territory, ensuring that its output does not reach territory still held by Ukraine. They hold the single largest generator, the 5,700-megawatt Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which has been damaged repeatedly in fighting and has stopped transmitting energy to the grid, with UN inspectors warning of mines at the site during recent visits. They also control 90% of Ukraine’s renewable energy plants, which are concentrated in the southeast.

The postwar recovery plans Ukraine has presented to supporters including the European Union, which it hopes to join, feature a major new commitment to clean energy, even as a controversial proposal on Ukraine’s nuclear plants continues to stir debate.

 

Related News

View more

US: In 2021, Plug-Ins Traveled 19 Billion Miles On Electricity

US Plug-in EV Miles 2021 highlight BEV and PHEV growth, DOE and Argonne data, 19.1 billion electric miles, 6.1 TWh consumed, gasoline savings, rising market share, and battery capacity deployed across the US light-duty fleet.

 

Key Points

They represent 19.1 billion electric miles by US BEVs and PHEVs in 2021, consuming 6.1 TWh of electricity.

✅ 700 million gallons gasoline avoided in 2021

✅ $1.3 billion fuel cost savings estimated

✅ Cumulative 68 billion EV miles since 2010

 

Plug-in electric cars are gradually increasing their market share in the US (reaching about 4% in 2021), which starts to make an impact even as the U.S. EV market share saw a brief dip in Q1 2024.

The Department of Energy (DOE)’s Vehicle Technologies Office highlights in its latest weekly report that in 2021, plug-ins traveled some 19.1 billion miles (31 billion km) on electricity - all miles traveled in BEVs and the EV mode portion of miles traveled in PHEVs, underscoring grid impacts that could challenge state power grids as adoption grows.

This estimated distance of 19 billion miles is noticeably higher than in 2020 (nearly 13 billion miles), which indicates how quickly the electrification of driving progresses, with U.S. EV sales continuing to soar into 2024. BEVs noted a 57% year-over-year increase in EV miles, while PHEVs by 24% last year (mostly proportionally to sales increase).

According to Argonne National Laboratory's Assessment of Light-Duty Plug-in Electric Vehicles in the United States, 2010–2021, the cumulative distance covered by plug-in electric cars in the US (through December 2021) amounted to 68 billion miles (109 billion miles).

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, December 2021 Traffic Volume Trends, 2022.

The report estimates that over 2.1 million plug-in electric cars have been sold in the US through December 2021 (about 1.3 million all-electric and 0.8 million plug-in hybrids), equipped with a total of more than 110 GWh of batteries, even as EV sales remain behind gas cars in overall market share.

It's also estimated that 19.1 billion electric miles traveled in 2021 reduced the national gasoline consumption by 700 million gallons of gasoline or 0.54%.

On the other hand, plug-ins consumed some 6.1 terawatt-hours of electricity (6.1 TWh is 6,100 GWh), which sounds like almost 320 Wh/mile (200 Wh/km), aligning with projections that EVs could drive a rise in U.S. electricity demand over time.

The difference between the fuel cost and energy cost in 2021 is estimated at $1.3 billion, with Consumer Reports findings further supporting the total cost advantages.

Cumulatively, 68 billion electric miles since 2010 is worth about 2.5 billion gallons of gasoline. So, the cumulative savings already is several billion dollars.

Those are pretty amazing numbers and let's just imagine that electric cars are just starting to sell in high volume, a trend that mirrors global market growth seen over the past decade. Every year those numbers will be improving, thus tremendously changing the world that we know today.

 

Related News

View more

Nova Scotia EV Charging Infrastructure Faces Urgent Upgrade Needs

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure remains limited, with only 14 fast chargers across the province. As electric vehicle adoption grows, urgent upgrades are needed to support long-distance travel and public charging convenience.

 

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure refers to the province’s public and private network of stations that power electric vehicles (EVs).

✅ Limited availability of fast-charging stations for long-distance travel

✅ Growing demand as EV adoption increases province-wide

✅ Key factor in reducing range anxiety and promoting clean transportation

 

Nova Scotia’s EV charging network is struggling to keep pace with a growing fleet of electric vehicles. As of today, only 14 public DC fast chargers are operational across the province, a significant shortfall for drivers navigating long distances. This creates not only logistical hurdles but also growing consumer hesitation — particularly as EV sales continue to surge across Canada.

In response, the Canadian government has announced a $1.1 million (US$0.88 million) investment into a new smart-charging pilot program. Led by Nova Scotia Power, this initiative will explore how electric vehicles can better integrate with the local grid using a centralized, utility-managed control system. Up to 200 participants are expected to join the program, which aims to test both smart charging and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies.

These systems allow EVs to act as distributed energy storage, helping to manage electricity demand and improve renewable energy integration — a strategy already being tested in other jurisdictions. For example, Ontario’s charging network expansion has provided a model for scaling fast-charging accessibility. Similarly, British Columbia has recently accelerated its rollout of faster charging stations to support mass EV adoption.

The Nova Scotia pilot will assess local EV charging behaviors, including drivers’ willingness to participate in V2G services based on incentives, driving patterns, and access to clean power. “We know customers want clean, affordable, reliable energy for their homes and businesses,” says Dave Landrigan, VP Commercial at Nova Scotia Power. “Through our electric vehicle smart charging pilot, we will test these technologies to learn how they can benefit all customers, creating clean, smarter options without changing a person’s driving habits.”

The funding comes through Natural Resources Canada’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Demonstration program, which supports the development of cutting-edge charging and hydrogen refueling solutions across the country. To date, the federal government has invested over $600 million to support EV affordability and infrastructure deployment, with a particular focus on a coast-to-coast fast-charging network.

At the same time, other provinces are stepping up their leadership roles. In Québec, Hydro-Québec is expanding its EV ecosystem through a strategic partnership with Propulsion Québec, a key industry cluster for sustainable mobility. Their focus includes reliable public charging, clean grid integration, and stakeholder collaboration — all essential factors for scalable transportation electrification.

“In Québec, we are fortunate to be able to make transportation electrification possible by easily replacing gas imported from outside with our clean energy,” said France Lampron, Director – Transportation Electrification at Hydro-Québec. “To do this, we need to develop synergies between various stakeholders in the sustainable mobility sector.”

While Nova Scotia’s current fast-charging availability is limited, the province now has an opportunity to follow a similar trajectory. With funding in place, stakeholder alignment, and public interest growing, the expansion of Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure could soon match the pace of rising EV demand. As governments and utilities nationwide focus on electrification, Nova Scotia’s pilot may lay the groundwork for a more connected, cleaner transportation future.

 

Related News

 

 

View more

SEA To Convert 10,000 US School Buses To Electricity

SEA Electric school bus conversions bring EV electrification to Type A and Type C fleets, adding V2G, smart charging, battery packs, and zero-emissions performance while extending service life with cost-effective retrofits across US school districts.

 

Key Points

Retrofit EV drivetrains for Type A and C buses, adding V2G and smart charging to cut emissions and costs.

✅ Converts 10,000 Type A and C school buses over five years

✅ Adds V2G, smart charging, and fleet battery management

✅ Cuts diesel fumes, maintenance, and total cost of ownership

 

Converting a Porsche 356C to electric power is a challenge. There’s precious little room for batteries, converters, and such. But converting a school bus? That’s as easy as falling off a log, even if adoption challenges persist in the sector today. A bus has acres of space for batteries and the electronics need to power an electric motor.

One of the dumbest ideas human beings ever came up with was sealing school children inside a diesel powered bus for the trip to and from school. Check out our recent article on the impact of fossil fuel pollution on the human body. Among other things, fine particulates in the exhaust gases of an internal combustion engine have been shown to lower cognitive function. Whose bright idea was it to make school kids walk through a cloud of diesel fumes twice a day when those same fumes make it harder for them to learn?

Help may be on the way, as lessons from the largest e-bus fleet offer guidance for scaling. SEA Electric, a provider of electric commercial vehicles originally from Australia and now based in Los Angeles has stuck a deal with Midwest Transit Equipment to convert 10,000 existing school buses to electric vehicles over the next five years. Midwest will provide the buses to be converted to the SEA Drive propulsion system. SEA Electric will complete the conversions using its “extensive network of up-fitting partners,” Nick Casas, vice president of sales and marketing for SEA Electric, says in a press release.

After the conversions are completed, the electric buses will have vehicle to grid (V2G) capability that will allow them to help balance the local electrical grid, where state power grids face new demands, and “smart charge” when electricity prices are lowest. The school buses to be converted are of the US school bus class Type A  or Type C. Type A is the smallest US school bus with a length of 6 to 7.5 metres and is based on a van chassis. The traditional Type C school buses are built on truck architectures.

SEA Electric says that the conversion will extend the life of the buses by more than ten years, with early deployments like B.C. electric school buses demonstrating real-world performance, and that two to three converted buses can be had for the price of one new electric bus. Mike Menyhart, chief strategy officer at SEA Electric says, “The secondary use of school buses fitted with all-electric drivetrains makes a lot of sense. It keeps costs down, opens up considerable availability, creates green jobs right here in the US, all while making a difference in the environment and the health of the communities we serve.”

According to John McKinney, CEO of Midwest Transport Equipment, the partnership with SEA Electric will ensure that it can respond more quickly to customers’ needs as policies like California's 2035 school-bus mandate accelerate demand in key markets. “As the industry moves towards zero emissions we are positioned well with our SEA Electric partnership to be a leader of the electrification movement.”

According to Nick Casas, SEA Electric will plans to expand it operations to the UK soon, and intends to do business in six countries in Europe, including Germany, in the years to come. SEA says it will have delivered more than 500 electric commercial vehicles in 2021 and plans to put more than 15,000 electric vehicles on the road by the end of 2023. Just a few weeks ago, SEA Electric announced an order for 1,150 electric trucks based on the Toyota Hino cargo van for the GATR company of California, highlighting truck fleet power needs that utilities must plan for today.

Electric school buses make so much sense. No fumes to fog young brains, lower maintenance costs, and lower fuel costs are all pluses, especially as bus depot charging hubs scale across markets, adding resilience. Extending the service life of an existing bus by a decade will obviously pay big dividends for school bus fleet operators like MTE. It’s a win/win/win situation for all concerned, with the possible exception of diesel mechanics. But the upside there is they can be retrained in how to maintain electric vehicles, a skill that will be in increasing demand as the EV revolution picks up speed.

 

Related News

View more

Electricity or hydrogen - What is the future of vehicles?

Hydrogen vs Battery-Electric Vehicles compare FCEV and BEV tech for range, charging and refueling, zero-emissions, infrastructure in Canada, highlighting urban commuting, heavy-duty use, fast 5-minute fills, 30-minute fast charging, and renewable hydrogen from surplus wind.

 

Key Points

Hydrogen FCEVs suit long range and heavy-duty use; BEVs excel in urban commutes with overnight charging.

✅ FCEVs refuel in about 5 minutes; ideal for long range and heavy duty.

✅ BEVs fit urban commuting with home or night charging; fewer stops.

✅ Hydrogen enables energy storage from surplus wind and hydro power.

 

We’re constantly hearing that battery-electric cars are the future, as automakers pursue Canada-U.S. collaboration on EVs across the industry, so I was surprised to see that companies like Toyota, Honda and Hyundai are making hydrogen fuel-cell cars. Which technology is better? Could hydrogen still win? – Pete, Kingston

They’re both in their electric youth, relatively speaking, but the ultimate winner in the race between hydrogen and battery electric will likely be both.

“It’s not really a competition – they’ll both co-exist and there will also be plug-in hydrogen hybrids,” said Walter Merida, director of the Clean Energy Research Centre at the University of British Columbia. “Battery-electric vehicles [BEVs] are better for an urban environment where you have time to recharge and fuel-cell electric vehicles [FCEVs] are better-suited for long range and heavy duty.”

Last year, there were 9,840 BEVs sold in Canada, up from 5,130 the year before. If you include plug-in hybrids, the number sold in 2017 grows to 18,560, though many buyers now face EV shortages and wait times amid high gasoline prices.

And how many hydrogen vehicles were sold in Canada last year?

#google#

None – although Hyundai leased out about a half-dozen hydrogen Tucsons in British Columbia for $599 a month, which included fuel from Powertech labs in Surrey.

In January, Toyota announced it will be selling the Mirai in Quebec later this year. And Hyundai said it will offer about 25 Nexos for sale.

“It’s chicken or egg,” said Michael Fowler, a professor of chemical engineering at the University of Waterloo. “Car manufacturers won’t release cars into the market unless there’s a refuelling station and companies won’t build a refuelling station unless there are cars to fuel.”

Right now, there are no retail hydrogen refuelling stations in Canada. While there are plans under way to add stations in B.C., Ontario and Quebec, we’re still behind Japan, Europe and California, though experts outline how Canada can capitalize on the U.S. EV pivot to accelerate progress.

“In 2007, Ontario had a hydrogen strategy and they were starting to develop hydrogen vehicles and they dropped that in favour of the Green Energy Act and it was a complete disaster,” Fowler said. “The reality is the government of the day listened to the wrong people.”

It’s tough to pinpoint a single reason why governments focused on building charging stations instead of hydrogen stations, Merida said.

“It’s ironic, you know – the fuel cell was invented in Vancouver. Geoffrey Ballard was one of the pioneers of this technology,” Merida said. “And for a while, Canada was a global leader, but eventually government programs were discontinued and that was very disruptive to the sector.”

 

HYDROGEN FOR THE MASSES?

While we tend to think of BEVs when we think of electric cars, fuel-cell vehicles are electric, too; the hydrogen passes through a fuel cell stack, where it mixes with oxygen from the atmosphere to produce an electric current.

That current powers electric motors to drive the wheels and extra energy goes to a battery pack that’s used to boost acceleration (it’s also charged by regenerative braking).

Except for water that drips out of the hydrogen car, they’re both zero-emission on the road.

But a big advantage for hydrogen is that, if you can find a station, you can pull up to a pump and fill up in five minutes or less – the same way we do now at nearly 12,000 gas stations.

Compare that with fast-charging stations that can charge a battery to 80 per cent in 30 minutes – each station only handles one car at a time. What if you get there and it’s busy – or broken? And right now, there are only 139 of them in Canada.

And at slower, Level 2 stations, cars have to be plugged in for hours to recharge.

In a 2018 KPMG survey of auto executives, 55 per cent said that moves to switch entirely to pure battery-electric vehicles will fail because there won’t be enough charging stations, and some critics argue the 2035 EV mandate is delusional given infrastructure constraints.

“Ontario just invested $20-million in public charging stations and that’s going to service 100 or 200 cars a day,” Fowler said. “If you were to invest that in hydrogen stations, you’d be able to service thousands of cars a day.”

And when you do charge at a station, you might not be using clean power, as 18% of Canada’s 2019 electricity came from fossil fuels according to national data, Fowler said.

“At least in Ontario, in order to charge at a public station during the day, you have to rev up a natural-gas plant somewhere,” Fowler said. “So the only way you’re getting zero emissions is when you can charge at night using excess nuclear, hydro or wind that’s not being used.”

But hydrogen can be made when surplus green energy is stored, Fowler said.

“In Ontario, we have lots of wind in the spring and the fall, when we don’t need the electricity,” he said.

And eventually, you’ll be able to connect your fuel-cell vehicle to the grid and sell the power it produces, Merida said.

“The amount of power generation you have in these moving platforms is quite significant,” Merida said.

There are other strikes against battery-electric, including reduced range by 30 per cent or more in the winter and the need to upgrade infrastructure such as electrical transformers so they can handle more than just a handful of cars on each street charging at night, Fowler said.

In that KPMG survey, executives predicted a nearly equal split between BEVs, FCEVs, hybrids and gasoline engines by 2040.

“Battery-electric vehicles will serve a certain niche – they’ll be small commuter vehicles in certain cities,” Fowler said. “But for the way we use cars today – the family car, the suburban car, buses and probably trucks – it will be the fuel cell.”

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Live Online & In-person Group Training

Advantages To Instructor-Led Training – Instructor-Led Course, Customized Training, Multiple Locations, Economical, CEU Credits, Course Discounts.

Request For Quotation

Whether you would prefer Live Online or In-Person instruction, our electrical training courses can be tailored to meet your company's specific requirements and delivered to your employees in one location or at various locations.