Hydrogen vs. Electric: A Tactical Dilemma for the military [OPINION]

Opinion piece by Founder and CEO, Andrew Wilson

While I aim to present a balanced perspective, I can certainly underscore some of the most frequently cited drawbacks of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles (HFCVs) compared to Electric Vehicles (EVs). I'll also take into account potential implications for military organisations like the US Military and Australian Defence Force (ADF), along with a consideration of the adaptability of existing liquid fuel infrastructure through the use of range extenders in EVs.

Energy Efficiency

HFCVs face considerable inefficiencies related to energy conversion. The process of generating hydrogen through electrolysis, storing and transporting it, and then converting it back into electricity in a fuel cell, all involve significant energy losses. Conversely, in EVs, electricity is used directly, offering greater overall efficiency.

Infrastructure

Infrastructure for hydrogen refuelling is not only limited but also expensive to establish.

On the other hand, electric charging infrastructure is more widespread and can be extended at a lower cost. For an organisation like the US Military or ADF, which operates across extensive and remote regions, the establishment of new infrastructure could be exceptionally challenging. Additionally, many EVs can take advantage of existing liquid fuel infrastructure using range extenders, presenting a hybrid solution with increased flexibility and coverage.

Such a transition would necessitate not only replacing the existing vehicle fleet but also a complete overhaul of their fuel infrastructure. This would entail building hydrogen production facilities, storage, and refueling stations.

Cost Considerations

The production of green hydrogen from renewable sources is currently more costly than using renewable energy directly to charge EV batteries. Although the price of hydrogen fuel cells has decreased, it's still not economically competitive with EV technology.

ADF bases and operations, this could potentially cost tens of billions of dollars, if not more. For the US Military, this overall would easily go into the 100s of billions of dollars.

Storage and Transportation

The storage and transportation of hydrogen, requiring either compression or liquefaction, come with their own challenges. Due to its small molecular size, hydrogen is prone to leakage, while its wide flammable range can pose safety concerns.

Rapid Progress in EVs

The field of battery technology is progressing at an impressive pace, with continuous improvements in energy density, charging speed, and battery life, alongside a steady decrease in costs. These advancements are making EVs increasingly feasible and affordable for a wide range of applications.

Environmental Considerations

Although hydrogen burns cleanly, its environmentally friendly production methods are complex. A large portion of today's hydrogen is derived from natural gas, a process that emits carbon dioxide. 'Green' hydrogen, produced through electrolysis powered by renewable energy, is an alternative, but it's more expensive and less efficient than using renewable energy directly.

Strategic Factors for military organisations

If the US Military or ADF were to commit to HFCVs, it would necessitate the development of an entirely new logistical chain for hydrogen production, storage, and distribution. In contrast, the infrastructure for electricity production and distribution is well established. Moreover, the variety of EVs available on the market allows for greater strategic flexibility, catering to a range of requirements from light vehicles for reconnaissance to heavier ones for logistics and troop transport.

Regarding financial expenditure, we can look at some historical data. For instance, the U.S. Department of Energy invested over $1.2 billion in hydrogen and fuel cell technologies research between 2000 and 2010. https://www.governing.com/next/is-this-the-beginning-of-a-hydrogen-economy-in-the-u-s.

Despite such substantial investments, the tangible applications and benefits remain limited, particularly when compared to EVs. This highlights the strategic and economic challenges faced by HFCVs.

The global investment in hydrogen energy and fuel cell technologies amounted to around $200-250 billion. This figure includes investments not just in vehicles, but also in infrastructure, industrial processes, and power generation. https://hydrogencouncil.com/en/new-hydrogen-projects-achieve-record-numbers-globally-with-even-greater-urgency-for-final-investment-decisions-to-attain-net-zero/#:~:text=Developed%20in%20collaboration%20with%20global,50%25%20since%20November%202021%20alone.

Why do they keep on investing?

There are several reasons why stakeholders continue to back hydrogen technology despite its limited return on investment:

• Potential Future Growth: Some believe that despite its present limitations, the technology holds promise for future expansion, especially in sectors like heavy transport and industry, where EVs fall short.
• Political Support: In certain countries, hydrogen technology has garnered political backing as a pathway to achieving carbon neutrality, leading to governmental subsidies and incentives.
• Diversification: Some organisations may invest in hydrogen as a diversification strategy, hedging against potential future shifts in the energy landscape.
• Technological Breakthroughs: Ongoing research might hope lead to advancements that could overcome some of the current hurdles with hydrogen technology, making it a more viable option in the future. For example, recent breakthroughs were made with hydrogen storage, mostly thanks to Australian ingenuity by the CSIRO https://research.csiro.au/hyresource/ammonia-to-hydrogen-metal-membrane-separation-technology/

On the flip side, critics contend that the continued investment in hydrogen technology could be seen as a form of "scam." They argue that some companies may be exploiting government subsidies and incentives without delivering proportional benefits to society or the environment.

What are the vehicle specific drawbacks of HFCVs compared ICE and EVs?

Another critical factor when considering Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles (HFCVs) in comparison to both Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles and Electric Vehicles (EVs).

• Maintenance and Reliability: HFCVs require more frequent maintenance compared to EVs and possibly even more than ICE vehicles in some cases. This is due to several reasons:
• Complexity: HFCVs contain more complex systems than EVs, including not just the fuel cell but also high-pressure hydrogen tanks and a sophisticated system for managing and distributing the hydrogen. All of these components must be inspected and maintained regularly to ensure safe and efficient operation.
• Durability: Fuel cells involve electrochemical reactions that can be affected by contaminants. Over time, the performance of the fuel cell can degrade, requiring more frequent checks and replacements compared to an EV’s battery system.
• Hydrogen Storage: The storage systems for hydrogen require frequent inspection to prevent leaks, given hydrogen's small molecule size and high diffusivity.

Increased maintenance requirements could significantly increase the total cost of ownership for HFCVs and could also result in more frequent vehicle downtime, both of which would be particularly problematic for a military organisation like the US Military or ADF that relies heavily on the readiness and reliability of its vehicle fleet.

On the other hand, EVs have fewer moving parts than both ICE vehicles and HFCVs, which typically results in lower maintenance costs and fewer maintenance intervals. Battery electric vehicles don't require oil changes, have simpler cooling systems, and don't have exhaust systems, all of which are maintenance points on ICE vehicles and, to some extent, on HFCVs.

Conclusion

Concerning the potential costs for the military organisations such as the US Military and ADF to fully transition to hydrogen fuel cell technology, these would be substantial. Such a transition would necessitate not only replacing the existing vehicle fleet but also a complete overhaul of their fuel infrastructure. This would entail building hydrogen production facilities, storage, and refueling stations. Considering the vast size and remote locations of many ADF bases and operations, this could potentially cost tens of billions of dollars, if not more. For the US Military, this overall would easily go into the 100s of billions of dollars. However, this is an extremely rough estimate. The actual costs would be influenced by numerous variables, such as the specifics of the military organisation's current infrastructure and equipment, the pace of implementation, the cost of hydrogen technology at the time of transition, and possible changes in policy or regulations affecting costs.

Despite the potential benefits of hydrogen fuel cell technology in specific contexts, the above limitations and challenges are why Advent Atum believe that for most applications and users, including for the US Military and ADF, EVs are currently a more capable, practical, economical, and environmentally friendly option.