Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutANEI Hydrogen Alaska; Legacy of Leadership 1991 ENE 176 Alaska Natural Energy Institute Hydrogen Alaska : Legacy of Leadership sponsored by: US Dept. of Energy Alaska Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development Alaska Office of International Trade Alaska Energy Authority Alaska Natural Energy Institute Board of Directors Al Geist, President Richard Seifert, Vice President Lisa Kijaich, Secretary /Treasurer Bob Woolf Clinton Elston Joe Fields ITI George Matz - Monte Lamer Director Gregory Spry Advisors Dr. John Sibert, Ex. Director, Alaska Science and Technology Foundation Dr. Paul Reichardt, Dean, School of Natural Sciences, UAF . Dr. Ron Johnson, Head, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, UAF _ . Dr. Steve Colt, Economist, Institute of Social and Economic Research, UAA Table of Contents Preface Introduction A useful analogy Energy technologies and energy currencies Dawn of the Hydrogen Age Using the past to help see the future Checklist to the Hydrogen Age The fossil connection The hydrogen bridge to a sustainable future When will the Hydrogen Age arrive? The transition Infrastructure Energy and environment The environmental issue and coal Military/security externalities Technologies to consider Hydrogen Alaska: pathways to higways Tomorrow is here today Conference on Hydrogen Opportunities for Alaska: Summary Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Preface The Conference on Hydrogen Opportunites and the following report would not be possible without the contributions and assistance and a great number of people. I would like to thank Dr. Russell Eaton, Director of Advanced Utilities Concepts at the Dept. of Energy for his assistance in securing DOE funding for the conference and report; likewise, special thanks go to Mr. Paul Fuhs, Business Director, Alaska Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development for his vision in understanding the economic opportunties surrounding hydrogen; to Dr. Glenn Olds for providing the title and emphasis of the report from his keynote address; Bonnie Jo Borchick-Savland, also in the D.C.E.D., for holding my hand through the grant phase; the staff of the Alaska Office of International Trade, especially Glenda Clark and Bennett Brooks in the Anchorage office, and Karoda-san and Greg Wolf in the Tokyo office; thanks to Gary Smith and Pat Woodell in the Alaska Energy Authority for — their work in involving the A.E.A. in the process; and to the speakers for taking their valuable time to share with us their expertise in the field. Mention should be made here about the work of Dr. David Scott, Director of the Institute of Integrated Energy Systems, University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. The federal report Hydrogen: National Mission for Canada, has, in addition to Dr. Scott's energy philosophy and gedanken experiments, formed the bones and much of the skin for this report, and it is strongly recommended that the reader familiarize themselves with this highly relevant work as it relates to Alaska. This report is in many ways simply a condensed version of Dr. Scott's own work. Special thanks goes to the Board of Directors of the Alaska Natural Energy Institute for their unflagging support of the aims of the conference; to Al Geist for his editorial expertise on the writing of the report; and an especially special thanks to Lisa Kljaich for her central role in the birthing of ANEI. The five star cooperation of both the federal and state players in support of the conference is a testament to the valuable role of public/private consortiums as Alaska begins a new phase of economic development. It is an exciting time for all Alaskans with the vision and wisdom to bring life to Alaska's state motto “North to the Future.” Gregory Spry Director Alaska Natural Energy Institutue Introduction This document has to do with industrial development, technological advancement and the creation of new wealth. It also has to do with the environment, the future of the Earth and energy systems as they relate to each. Mostly, this document deals with political will: the stuff that puts people on the moon, advances civil rights, or somehow elevates the human condition with actions of boldness and imagination. For it is political will - the making of decisions today that profoundly shape our tomorrow - which will foster or impede Alaska’s place in the hydrogen age, an age that has already begun and will continue to expand in the next Century and beyond. The report makes some very bold and explicit assertions about the terminal phase of _ humanity’s energy evolution by referencing “The Hydrogen Age” or “The Hydrogen Economy”, an energy system based upon water: the ultimate energy currency of the Earth. This is because it is difficult to imagine another scenario other than a hydrogen age. Hydrogen is efficient in use; it is clean; it can be produced and stored in volume; and it is non-toxic both before and after use. In other words, hydrogen is Earth-friendly, renewable, and even safe. Seen from space, it is a wonder why our planet is not named Water instead of Earth. Using water as the feedstock, hydrogen can be produced from any primary energy source: solar, nuclear, wind, geothermal, Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), or some other novel energy conversion process yet to be discovered. Initially using fossil sources as feedstocks, hydrogen can be produced from natural gas and coal, providing additional markets for Alaskan natural gas, and possibly the only long term market for Alaskan coal in the face of international protocols limiting greenhouse gases. As concerns mount worldwide over the deleterious effects of the use of fossil fuels, sustainable sources of energy will begin to supplant fossil sources for the production of hydrogen. Using sustainable energy sources, hydrogen begins with water and returns to water after use in a fashion coherent with nature’s own cycles. Hydrogen used as energy does not intrude, but complements nature. It is this characteristic of the hydrogen system, its complementarity with nature’s own cycles, that may be its greatest contribution to mankind. Energy technologies and energy currencies About 25% of our energy needs are satisfied by electricity, and the remaining 75% are satisfied by some sort of fuel. Technologies use one or both of these energy currencies to aquire the services we desire. Table 1 is an illustration of how these currencies are divided. Technology Currency Electricity Computer , Microwave Oven FAX Lighting Fuel Car House (heat, cooking, etc.) Airplane Locomotive Space shuttle From Table 1 it can be seen that selecting a particular technology (tool) for a particular service (need) also requires a particular energy currency (i.e. propane to cook, oil to heat, kerosene to fly, etc). A computer may be powered by burning coal and making electricity, but an airplane cannot fly on either. One can produce electricity with coal, but electricity is unable to produce coal. It is a one-way process, one which contains rigidity and redundancy in infrastructure. This is always an expensive proposition whether on a household or societal level. Hydrogen can be either electricity or fuel. It can be made from any primary energy source. The complementary nature of hydrogen and electricity help each other share tasks, as one can be easily converted into the other. Thus: ¢ Hydrogen can be stored in volume; electricity cannot. ¢ Electricity can transmit energy without moving material; hydrogen cannnot. ¢ Hydrogen can be a chemical or material feedstock; electricity cannot. ¢ Hydrogen can be employed as a gaseous or liquid fuel; electricity cannot. ¢ Electricity can process information; hydrogen cannot. When analyzing the various services required of an energy system, it is difficult to imagine a service (need, task) for which an electricity / hydrogen infrastructure cannot provide. A useful analogy It is important to understand the concept of energy currencies when discussing energy systems, just as it important to understand fiscal currencies when describing economic systems. Yen, Deutsche marks, dollars, or guilders are simply fiscal currencies used to aquire a given service.. Examples are driving to the local market, or buying a second home on the lake. We care little what the currency is as long as we get what we want. Energy currencies such as electricity and gasoline are similar, in that they serve to fullfill our needs. We don't want money or energy - we want the things they buy. And of course analogies are useful only to a point. Financial and energy currencies also share one other important similarity in that every transaction we make financially involves a transaction energetically. Energy inputs build the wealth that make the things which money buys. Both systems are so fundamental to everything we do it is difficult to imagine modern civilization without either. Services, currencies, technologies, and sources, in that order, comprise the energy system, yet it is customary for energy analysts to. regard energy systems the other way around, that is, as sources, currencies, technologies, and services: drill for oil, make oil into gasoline, run the gasoline through an engine to buy bread at the local market. But this is the opposite of how things really work. Services dictate technologies. Prudhoe Bay was drilled because the world demands services, and today oil is the most common natural resource used to aquire those services. Before oil it was coal, and before coal it was wood. Oil did not replace coal and coal did not replace wood because they were more convenient, they replaced the previous system because technological advances made them better fuels. Light bulbs replaced oil lamps during the birth of the age of electricity even though only the wealthy could at first afford the expensive luxury of electric lighting. They replaced oil lamps because electric lighting was cleaner, more efficient, and more convenient. Gasoline really did not take off to a great extent until well after the introduction of the motor car (remember the Stanley Steamer?) Gasoline didn’t take off, literally, until the Wright _ Brothers flew at Kitty Hawk. An airplane cannot fly on coal. The technology dictated. petroleum. More importantly: TECHNOLOGIES DICTATE CURRENCIES. Civilization is based largely upon the technologies which provide us with our well being. Wealthy nations are those with the technological ability to convert natural and human . resources into wealth, or in the case of nations such as Japan, on their ability to secure these sources for transformation. The technologies themselves are blind to the energy source. Energy systems are technology driven, not the opposite. Today, advanced technologies are under development which take advantage of hydrogen's unique attributes, technologies which are much more efficient and far cleaner than technologies in use today. Together, they will usher in a revolution in the way we use energy, and that energy will be hydrogen. Dawn of the Hydrogen Age Just as it is not possible to fly an airplane on coal, it is not possible to fly to the moon, or send space shuttles or satellites into orbit using kerosene. Hydrogen is the fuel of choice. While space shuttles might appear to be out of our day to day experience, two points should be observed. First, during the dawn of aviation, an airplane drew people for miles just to look at ‘one. Within ten years they would be a primary means of transportation. Second, in about ten years if projections hold, the National Aerospace Plane will begin to travel from New York to Tokyo in two hours time, the so-called Orient Express, a technology allowing average people to travel in space around the globe. Just as we saw the dawn of the age of electricity and of aviation in years past, today we are poised at the dawn of the hydrogen age. Using the past to help see the future It would be foolhardy to pretend to see into the future unless one had access to a very well connected and corrupt uncle on Wall Street. However, one very useful tool to help us understand the future are historical trends, specifically regarding energy systems. The replacement of wood with coal was fundamentally in place within about a fifty year period. Coal fueled the Industrial Revolution because it could be made to burn very hot and was relatively plentiful. Unfortunately, it was also very dirty. Oil, a relatively cleaner fuel, dominated coal by the 1930’s and in spite of several concerted attempts to turn the tide, coal - never regained its preeminence as the premier fuel of choice. Again the fifty year time span applies. Oil as an industry is beginning to enter a sunset phase of its life in the United States. The U.S. has been a net importer of oil since 1948 (with the exception of a small blip of net export in 1951). U.S. oil production peaked in 1970. While the U.S. still holds substantial reserves and even greater resources given technological advances and price increases, the easily extractable light crudes are becoming depleted. Worldwide, oil production will decline sometime in the early 21st Century, and additionally, concerns over the destructive environmental effects of oil are increasing. However, oil will indeed be a major source of energy for several decades. Natural gas will eventually supplant oil as.the primary fuel used on the earth. Experience using a gaseous fuel will prepare us for hydrogen. As natural gas deposits become exhausted, prices will rise and hydrogen will begin replacing natural gas as the world’s primary fuel. Concerns over global climate change, acid rain, smog, pollution related illnesses, and energy security will accelerate the implementaion of hydrogen, as it is unable to cause pollution and is a secure source of fuel. Hydrogen’s ability to perform tasks which no. other fuel can perform will likewise serve as an impetus to its implementation. One particular trend should be observed throughout these historical transitions. This trend is the increase in the hydrogen to carbon ratio (H/C) over time from generically hydrogen deficient solid and liquid hydrocarbons to hydrogen rich fuels. The H/C ratio in wood is so low as to not even mention. Table 2 illustrates the trend toward hydrogen enriched fuels. Commodity Atomic H/C ratio Typical coals 0.7 - 0.9 Oil sands bitumin 1.4-1.6 ’ Crude oil : 1.8-1.9 Liquid fuels 2.1-2.3 Natural Gas 4 It should be noted that energy sources become cleaner, more efficient and with higher a hydrogen content through time. Checklist to the Hydrogen Age Several signposts point to:the transition to a hydrogen economy. * First, depletion of the high quality oil reserves worldwide, the relative inaccessability of remaining reserves, increasing costs associated with recovering these reserves and a need to upgrade the less desirable hydrogen deficient heavy crudes to a higher hydrogen /carbon ratio make the increase of hydrogen usage inevitable. ¢ Second, fossil resources represent the only significant sources of chemical feedstocks, the raw materials we use to make plastics, nylons, and a host of other durable products. Their use is central to the manufacture of this massive array of very useful products, and represent the highest value of these resources in a sustainable world. In the future the only way sustainable energy sources can make chemical feedstocks in sufficient quantities worldwide is through the large scale splitting of water into its constituents hydrogen and oxygen. ¢ Finally, the combustion of fossil fuels is resulting in changes in the Earth’s atmosphere. The greeenhouse effect, or its more recent name, global climate change, may have profound implications for each and every human on the planet. Renewably produced hydrogen is the only fuel which, having no carbon, cannot form oxides of carbon (CO or CO2). Also, burning hydrogen does not create sulphur oxides (SOx), unburned hydrocarbons, toluenes, particulates, or aldehydes. Since nitrogen is a component of our atmosphere, some nitrous oxides (NOx) may form in manageable quantities during hydrogen combustion. However, combustion of hydtogen will not be a likely: pathway as this is a far less efficient utilization than through the fuel cell. Hydrogen Alaska Errata “A useful analogy”, paragraph three, should read: Services, technologies, currencies, sources, in that order, comprise the energy system, yet it is customary for energy analysts to regard energy systems the other way around, that is, as sources, currencies, technologies, and services: drill for oil, make cil into gasoline, run the gasoline through an engine to buy bread at the local market But this is the opposite of how things really work. Services dictate technologies. The fossil connection Currently, natural gas is the reference price for hydrogen produced from steam reformed methane. Coal is also a likely candidate for near- to mid-term hydrogen production. This will probably be the case for two to three decadés. As natural gas prices rise and sustainable energy technologies mature, renewable sources will overtake natural gas and coal as the primary source of hydrogen. For liquid hydrogen, high purity is required for liquifaction and the best fuel cells require high purity hydrogen to prevent poisoning of the catalysts. Fossil based hydrogen contains impurities which are deleterious to fuel cell catalysts. Research and development of hydrogen purification technologies would aid methane and coal-based ._ hydrogen in entering fuel cell basedtransport markets. Also, by blending hydrogen with natural gas, emissions are substantially reduced in an already clean fuel. These reductions are not just noticable, but phenomenal. Hydrogen serves as a combustion stimulant to the natural gas and improves its efficiency of use. Similar improvements are made when hydrogen is added to gasoline. Indeed, hydrogen does not compete with other sources of energy, it complements them. It provides additional markets for Alaska’s natural gas and coal. Hydrogen also assists in heavy oil and tar sands production. This aspect of the hydrogen link will become increasingly important as Alaska strives to maximize production of its oilfields as Alaska has substantial deposits of heavy oils and tar sands. In fact, Alaska's oils are slightly heavier than many of the premier light crudes found in Arabia and elsewhere. As the light Alaskan crudes are depleted, hydrogen can be added to upgrade these heavy oils, extending the revenue stream produced from Alaskan oilfields. Petroleum is a hydrocarbon, that is, itis a hydrogen-carbon. By adding hydrogen to carbon. based fuels, particularly to heavier components, these fuels are upgraded to form more useful products such as heating oil or jet fuel. With renewables limited by their often intermittant nature, hydrogen provides a much needed storage capability and satisfies the requirement of fuel. The use of hydrogen as an intermediary system, both for renewable and non-renewable energy systems, make it an n indispensable commodity both today a and increasingly in the future. ’ _ The hydrogen bridge to a sustainable future . The greatest increase in the use of hydrogen in the coming decades will be in upgrading hydrogen deficient crudes for making liquid hydrocarbon fuels. It is this ability of hydrogen to upgrade heavy oils and other hydrogen deficient hydrocarbons which will allow it to become a bridging element to various renewable energy sources. For Alaska, this bridging capability will become increasingly important as light crude surpluses become exhausted and heavy oils, oil sands, and bitumens require upgrading for the manufacture of various petroleum products and to make their use environmentally acceptable. The hydrogen age will come in two waves. The first wave will be through an integrated energy systems approach. An example of this will be village wind/diesel hybrid systems, using excess wind capacity to generate hydrogen which can then be injected into the diesel, decreasing emissions and fuel requirements, and increasing the efficiency of the diesel. Mostly though, this wave will be carried by fossil-derived hydrogen (FDH2) from natural gas or coal _with renewable hydrogen used primarily as an additive to upgrade or clean fossil fuels. Eventually, sustainably-derived hydrogen (SDH2) from hydraulic, tidal, wind, solar, or other sources will begin to exceed fossil contributions.. A second phase of the hydrogen age will begin through the use of “neat” hydrogen fueled products. This evolution will be stepwise, year-to-year, and market niche-to-market niche before an overall hydrogen economy is established. This bridging effect is supported not only through the integration of energy systems from heavy fossil to light fossil to sustainable sources, but also in hydrogen’s flexibility as an energy currency. Characteristically, increased use of hydrogen will result in the world becoming a cleaner place to live. The air will be crystal clear, and the seas will not be compromised by oil spills. Society will behave in ways more coherent with nature's own cycles. Energy will be utilized more efficiently, and externalities will be reduced as sustainable energy sources are employed. When will the Hydrogen Age arrive? The hydrogen age has already arrived. Massive amounts of hydrogen are used in the upgrade of hydrogen deficient hydrocarbons and this use will continue to grow. Even Saudia Arabia, sitting atop a sea of oil, has built a solar hydrogen facility in Riyadh in conjunction with German industry. The thrust of the Arabian plant is two fold: first, to upgrade heavier components of Arabian crudes and second, to position itself as an exporter of energy forever. ‘A fleet of space shuttles run exclusively on hydrogen.’ Deutsche Airbus is preparinga | hydrogen-fueled passenger liner with a 500 km operational range. The U.S. National Aerospace Plane will use hydrogen as fuel. City buses in Hamburg and Milan are being outfitted to use hydrogen as an answer to pollution problems in those cities. Sea tests of fuel cell driven submarines have far exceeded designers expectations for silence and range. Hydrogen fueled automobiles manufactured by Mazda are expected to be marketed within two years. Likewise, Daimler-Benz and BMW have experimented extensively with hydrogen- fueled passenger cars for production. By about the middle of the next century, about half of our energy will come from fossil sources and the other half from renewables. Probably a third of our energy will be electricity, a third liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons, and a third hydrogen. The sources of energy will develop each according to specific availability and regional resource advantages: solar in Arizona, hydroelectric in Alaska, OTEC in Hawaii. The currencies will be electricity, gasoline, and natural gas, and increasingly, hydrogen will become an important energy currency in the 21st Century, eventually dominating all carbon based currencies by about mid-century. At the end of this century significant amounts of sustainably derived energy will emerge, aerospace planes will begin flying on liquid or slush hydrogen, and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles will begin to ply the roads in certain corridors. As the hydrogen infrastructure develops, additional market penetration of hydrogen-fueled products will occur, including many products unimaginable today. The transition The exact rate of implementation toward a hydrogen age will depend on a number of factors, including government policy, unforseen technological breakthroughs, and increased international pressures calling for a “carbon tax” as an effort to limit greenhouse gases. Resource depletion will not be the limiting factor surrounding the use of fossil fuels, it will be worldwide resistance to the addition of carbon into the biosphere. The transition to hydrogen on a large scale will take many decades because of long lead times and the massive investment required. In the United States decisions both in the public and private sectors are generally based on five to ten year planning horizons. Japan and Germany typically plan strategically 25 to 30 years into the future. This practice and both Japan’s and Germany’s position in the global order are not unrelated. For this reason, Japan and Germany are leading the world in the development of hydrogen and energy related technologies. It is the game of owning technologies that Alaska must enter if it is to take its place alongside the other great “nations” and escape the ghetto of being a resource bearing colony. As a Pacific Rim “nation”, Alaska must divorce itself from the energy policies of the U.S. alone and choose a path which draws from the best energy strategies of our Pacific Rim trading partners. Infrastructure — Investing in systems based on synthethic fuels derived from fossil sources will be easier to implement in the established infrastructure, but this will only be a temporary solution. Yet another transition will be required at a later date. Because of the long-lived nature of energy infrastructure, decisions taken today will have a . profound effect on the physical and economic landscape of Alaska for many generations. The question of infrastructure is paramount in determining the shape of the land in the 21st Century. Alaskans must look into their collective compass and determine to what point on the far horizon they must aim and begin moving in that direction. Hydrogen offers a unique blend of industrial development options which simultaneously offers substantial environmental benefits. We may disagree on the exact path to reach that point on the horizon, but moving toward it will result in true economic prosperity for Alaskans and remove much of the social tension created by the current energy /environment interface. Energy and environment Environmental issues have only been touched upon briefly, but the growing appreciation of the interconnectedness of energy consumption and its environmental effects force planners to anticipate legislation surrounding environment /energy. Because energy, economy, and environment are so closely tied, especially in Alaska, economic planning may well be a subset of energy planning. Growing concern for the adverse effects of fossil energy use on the environment is accelerating, not only on a regional or national level, but on a global level. These concerns appear to be gaining momentum. Ten years ago, discussions of global climate change were limited to a small cadre of atmospheric scientists. Today, the effects of greenhouse legislation on corporate profits and investment strategies are discussed daily in boardrooms around the world. Governmentally, the Japanese Diet and the European Economic Community are seriously considering the implementation of a carbon tax, almost certain to affect fossil energy trade with Alaska. Considerations of energy externalities to include environmental, military/security, and health related costs are finally being weighed in the true cost of fossil energy. These developments, and the potential economic disruptions they may cause, must be given the greatest of consideration by economic and energy planners. Because Alaska is blessed with an abundance of energy options such as natural gas, coal, and renewables, the inclusion of international environmental protocols should be seen as opportunites for development of those resources, not liabilities or obstructions to their development. . The environmental issue and coal Many believe Alaska’s energy future is tied to our coal reserves, one half of the U.S. total. Should our enormous coal resources emerge as the fuel of the future, it will be because they are extracted and utilized in cleaner, more useful forms. Alaska may have world class reserves of coal, however, in ten years time the world may choose not to buy what we have to sell. It would be prudent to invest in promising technologies which protect coal related infrastructure and investment from the carbon limiting protocols already being discussed, protocols similar to the 1987 Montreal Accord on chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s). While it would be unwise to exclude coal as a potentially exploitable commodity in solid form, this particular hydrocarbon fuel does suffer from a very low hydrogen/carbon ratio. For the near term, this should not seriously impact coal’s contribution as a-primary energy source for stationary electrical generation. In the long term, however, coal’s future may not be as bright unless ways are found to avoid the carbon penalty. The production of gaseous fuels from coal is easier than the production of liquid fuels, and the production of hydrogen may well be less expensive than the production of synthetic natural gas. The cost of large scale gasification of coal to hydrogen is a hypothetical quantity as no plants as yet produce it. Two value added technologies which may improve the viability of coal over the longer term are (1) the addition of hydrogen to improve the hydrogen/¢carbon ratio, and (2) the gasification of coal to hydrogen by removing carbon dioxide, ash, sulphur, and moisture from the final product. U.S. Dept. of Energy Clean Coal Technology programs represent a clean, green,’ environmentally compatible source of economic development funds for Alaska. They should be used to develop techniques for extracting coal without incurring the carbon penalty. Because Alaska’s coal resources lie near tidewater, one method may be to extract hydrogen from the coal and inject the waste carbon dioxide into the deep sea. The oceans can absorb . much greater quantities of carbon dioxide than can the thin atmosphere and the process may prove to be a mid-term “solution” for sequestering carbon emissions. Alaska has a relative advantage to coals located in the Western or Appalachian states for this reason. This “solution”, however, may have its own set of environmental penalties, such as acidification of the sea. Acidification may affect the entire oceanic food chain if carbon dioxide dumping is regarded as a long-term technical fix to the problem of environmental carbon release. For the short- and mid-term, such an approach should be left open for consideration until renewable technologies mature. Pursuing technologies which, for example, extract usable hydrogen from coal resources and dispose of carbon effluents may protect Alaska from international carbon protocols. Military/security externalities Alaska is a price taker for its resources in the global scheme of things. By providing military arrangements to foreign governments, the true cost of America’s oil is hidden and appears downstream in the form of a tax burden. This is nothing less than a de facto subsidy provided to Middle Eastern producers and to the Japanese and German economies, direct competitors in the production of oil and in the larger sense. Factoring military /security costs into the price of gasoline at the pump accounts for this tax, bringing the true cost of oil into clearer focus. Factoring military/security externalities to the U.S. oil price would stimulate exploration and production of domestic North Slope oil deposits, bring natural gas resources on-line at a faster rate, promote the development of renewable sources of Alaskan energy, accelerate the implementation of hydrogen based technologies, and provide real energy security. - _ Encouraging policies which include military/security costs in the price of oil can only benefit a resource rich producing state such as Alaska. Technologies to consider Eventually, any device that uses electricity or burns fuel will use hydrogen. Initially, however, there will be market niches where hydrogen fueled products will excel, owing to the specific attributes of hydrogen itself. It should be noted that in many cases, research and development of these technologies is either quite immature or on drawing boards only, presenting opportunities for their development. ¢ Aerospace.. Alaska is unlikely to develop a world class aerospace capability for such things as manned orbiters and the like. However, building on the experience gained at Poker Flat Rocket Range may provide opportunities for development of small sized hydrogen-fueled microsat boosters. The impetus for such a rocket is that solid rocket propellants, such as the widely used ammonium perchlorate (NH2C104), release chlorine into the upper atmosphere, destroying the ozone layer. NASA’s space shuttle has been implicated in the destruction of a substantial amount of the ozone layer through the action of its solid rocket boosters. Alaska’s microsat launches will not contribute to as great an ozone loss per launch, but the problem lies in the additive effect. Such considerations will in the future factor into space activities. The next generation of sub- and supersonic airliners will use hydrogen as fuel, as it is superior to kerosene in virtually every respect, including range, payload, and reduction in engine maintanence. ¢ Electrochemical devices: Rubbing-two sticks together to produce fire certainly works, but it is far from the most efficient or best way to go about it. During the Industrial Revolution, men began designing machines which converted the chemical energy found in coal and oil by creating heat, which in turn produced mechanical force. The steamship and the Otto cycle engine are examples of this approach. This process is inherently inefficient due to Carnot losses, which limit the efficiency of thermal processes. Plants and animals convert their chemical energy through highly efficient electrochemical means. Fuel cells are electrochemical devices that convert chemical energy directly into electrical energy, the way plants and people do. The efficiencies of fuel cells far exceed the those of heat engines, and fuel cells work best using hydrogen and the oxygen found in the atmosphere. Together they make electricity and emit pure water. Combustion technologies designed for liquid or solid fuels can only hope to “cope” with hydrogen. Technologies which are specifically designed to use hydrogen and which release pure water as their only “pollutant” are far more worthy of consideration for research and development. Because the fuel cell will likely be a central technology in the future, a survey of applications is in order: ¢ Locomotives. In Alaska, the conversion of locomotives from diesel to fuel cell represent an economic pathway for natural gas to penetrate the railway industry. It will alow the “electrification” of the Alaska Railroad without incurring the high cost of installing a catenary or third rail, and would avoid ice loading on related infrastructure. Such a locomotive would be silent and non-polluting, a bonus from a tourist industry viewpoint. Initially, such a locomotive would provide additional markets for natural gas, and eventually for sustainable sources of energy. ¢ Submarines. Fuel cell driven submersibles fill a gap in the performance envelopes of diesel and nuclear submarines. In the arctic, fuel cell driven submarines would obviate concerns over possible release of radioactivity due to accidents involving nuclear vessels. They also could provide infrastructure for transport of Alaskan goods under the polar ice to European markets through a tug-and-barge arrangement. Smaller vehicles would prove useful in seabed mineral exploration on Alaska’s vast continental shelf and for scientific research. ¢ Automobiles. Fuel cells convert chemical energy two to three times as efficiently as heat engines, thus, the-cost of the fiiel may be two to three times as expensive and still remain competitive. Advances in fuel cell design, increases in power densities, and resolution of on- board storage problems will only serve to advance the potential of fuel cells for automotive applications. While fuel cells are plagued by generally low power densities, batteries are plagued by low energy densities. Hybrid fuel cell/battery vehicles would overcome the liabilities of both systems, opening opportunites for Alaskan battery manufacturers and for future fuel cell firms. Because fuel cells contain no moving parts, they will be long lived, have low maintenence costs, and be very reliable. ¢ Stationary sources. Power plants, from the largest utility to the smallest remote cabin “furnace”, could utilize fuel cell technologies. Japanese firms are now constructing fuel cell units up to 11 MW in size for district power, and fuel cells can be constructed at essentially any size required. Schools, shopping centers, office buildings, etc., all could benefit from fuel cell technologies. ‘ Other technologies surrounding hydrogen include: ¢ Catalytic heaters. A ceramic or metal plate, when suffused with small amounts of noble metal catalysts such as platinum or palladium, produces heat when exposed to - hydrogen and the oxygen in the atmosphere. They become hot enough to cook with, and their only pollutant is water vapor. This water vapor might be objectionable in humid climates, but welcomed in others, and water vapor management is hardly an engineering dilemma. The water so produced is pure water and therefore potable, a useful attribute in arid regions of the world. ¢ Semiconductors. The principle ingredients used in the manufacture of semiconductors and thin film solar technologies are high purity silicon (sand), and high purity hydrogen. A hydrogen infrastructure would provide a basis for high-tech industries to locate in Alaska, particularly Japanese semiconductor manufacturers through the elimination of import tariffs to U.S. markets, the availability of relatively inexpensive land, a highly motivated and educated workforce, and inexpensive “backhaul” transportation infrastructure. Hydrogen Alaska: pathways to highways Building a highway to a hydrogen future first requires the establishment of smaller pathways, pathways which can be expanded, broadened, and deepened as markets increase and supporting infrastructure grows. The first, most basic requirement of any public “project” is public support in recognition of both need and potential benefit of that project. The need is clearly evident: to diversify the Alaskan economy and provide lasting and sustainable economic development for its citizenry. The potential benefit of renewable energy development should also be evident, one which hydrogen will play a crucial role. Exactly when public support of hydrogen related technologies will occur, and to what depth they will either be embraced or rejected relies upon the democratic process of debate and the vision or myopia of the body politic. As both factors are and will be in a steady state of flux through time, the following discussion assumes a cautious optimism toward hydrogen and further assumes a growing public recognition of the need to diversify the economy and the potential benefits resulting from that diversity. By assessing Alaska’s strengths and weaknesses, certain pathways and certain barriers may be uncovered. Assessing Alaska’s strengths ¢ Alaska is resource rich ¢ Strategic location from which to reach Pacific Rim and West Coast markets e Access to Pacific Rim investment’ , ¢ Citizenry well educated, motivated ¢ Underutilized human resource potential * Stable political environment Assessing Alaska’s weaknesses ¢ Most of Alaska’s resources are not Alaska’s resources Federal overinvolvement in Alaska’s affairs Lack of strategic planning, lack of well articulated long-term goals Lack of interagency linking mechanisms . Lukewarm commitment to public sector research Absence of well-developed private sector research Absence of electrolysis industry Underdeveloped entrepreneurial infrastructure Rudimentary entrepreneurial sector Private sector emphasis on services rather than products Exporter of resources rather than value added products’ Immature venture capital pathways Distance to markets Overreliance on government Outmigration of young Alaskan talent High wage expectations of workforce Indeed, a list of strengths and weaknesses can go on and on. What should be understood is the strengths are of less significance than the weaknesses, just as in any chain. Weaknesses, bottlenecks, contraints, undercapitalization: all can be aided to some extent by the strengths, while others cannot. The recognition of weaknesses is the first step in their elimination. Many weaknesses simply require due diligence, understanding, and resolve to overcome. Others will disappear as synergies develop, as strategic planning evolves and as momentum gathers. Still others will prove impossible to overcome, and must be accomodated within the warp and woof of the social fabric with specific strategies to minimize their effects. Specifically, some important roadblocks in the hydrogen pathway include: ¢ Lack of a strategic plan. The US space program was identified as a national mission in the early 1960’s. France has embarked upon a vigorous nuclear program to achieve energy self-sufficiency. The Soviet Union has resolved to undertake a fundamental restructuring toward a market economy. The above are national strategies, either in technological advancement, energy self-sufficiency, or economic transformation. In each case, these national goals are long term, difficult to achieve, and require massive investment. Likewise, Alaska needs to set forth in identifying a long term state goal, or set of goals, which promise to bring sustainable economic prosperity to its citizenry. Should this occur, it is likely that hydrogen will emerge as a stated goal. ¢ Lack of interagency linking mechanisms. Agencies abound in Alaska. Agency differences likewise abound. When more dogs pull on the same sled, the sled is easier to pull for all. Linking mechanisms and cooperative exchanges between agencies should be encouraged. Public/private initiatives and the activities of non-govermental organizations (NGO) should be cultivated and promoted. Consortiums must be developed between agencies, NGO’s, the university, private interprise, and community economic development organs to investigate the potential for technology and resource options. ¢ Lukewarm commitment to public sector research. Just at the moment when an historical imperative for an educational and technological renaissance emerges, university - funding declines. At best, this marks a decline in the quality of higher education in Alaska, at worst it reduces Alaska’s ability to compete upon the world stage through intellectual stagnation and technical dis-ability. Until private research initiatives can be attracted to Alaska, university facilities should be utilized to their fullest potential. Strategic goals should identify promising avenues of research for directed programs. Hydrogen specific programs include coal gasification, oilfield hydrogenation, purification of fossil derived hydrogen, more | efficient pathways to liquifaction, field testbeds, electrochemical studies, resource assessments, and technology transfer. ¢ Private sector emphasis on services rather than products. More emphasis must be placed upon technologies and their manufacture for Alaska to escape the resource export ghetto. In the hydrogen context, this is equally true. Attracting foreign investment and outside firms to base operations in Alaska will be a necessary first step. Political and investment stability provided by long term strategic goal identification, and a long standing commitment to those goals, is a must to attract promising technology based industries to Alaska. ¢ Absence of domestic electrolysis industry. Water splitting using renewable energy resources such as hydraulic and wind requires electrolysis. This electrolytic capability can either be developed within Alaska or imported. Clearly, a domestic electrolysis industry is preferable. As sustainably derived hydrogen increases, an electrolysis industry will be increasingly valuable to Alaska and fulfill a key component to both the technological and resource requirements of a hydrogen economy. Tomorrow is here today It has been stated that hydrogen is not a source of energy. Philosophically, this is not entirely correct. Hydrogen is the primary source of all elemental energy in the universe. It is star fuel. Solar energy is hydrogen energy. Oil is solar energy which is hydrogen energy. Therefore, oil is strictly speaking not a source of energy, it is only a means of energy storage and represents businesswise a capital asset. Renewable energy represents energy income. One cannot run out of renewable energy just as one cannot run out of wind, sun, or rain. This may strike many as an exceedingly academic intrusion, but as Prudhoe Bay begins its inexorable decline to exhaustion, the question of capital availability pinches us on all sides like winter cold coming into a room with a dwindling fire. Recessions, unemployment, and budget constraints, like cold fingers, become less academic and increasingly painful if long term, shrewd capital investments into Alaska’s future are not made. A transition to hydrogen will be permanent and will utilize fully Alaska’s bountiful mix of renewable and non-renewable energy resources. Because of the long term role hydrogen will play in Alaska, the overwhelming economic and environmental benefits provided though its use and probable public expenditures allocated for its development, taking aim at a hydrogen economy is rightfully a matter of public policy. ~ It will be the owners of hydrogen technologies which will truly prosper in the hydrogen age, not the suppliers of ny CLOBeN By buying technologies to develop our energy, Alaska will lose. By using our energy to develop and own the technologies, Alaska will win. By both owning the technologies and developing its energy resources, Alaska will prosper doubly. — | By taking aim at a hydrogen economy, given both historical energy trends evolving toward electricity / hydrogen and recognizing Alaska’s generous mix of primary energy resources, Alaska would be in a position of economic strength in the 21st Century. ‘It will be a legacy of leadership that takes us to that future. ALASKA NATURAL ENERGY INSTITUTE presents Hydrogen Opportunities for Alaska Conference on Industrial Applications and Export Potential June 25, 1991 Sponsored by: US Dept. of Energy Alaska Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development Alaska Office of International Trade Alaska Energy Authority Conference Summary Proceedings of the Conference on Hydrogen Opportunities for Alaska, June 25, 1991, Sheraton Hotel, Anchorage, Alaska Introduction and opening remarks by Gregory Spry, Director, Alaska Natural Energy Institute. Spry welcomed participants to the conference, and as time was short, immediately introduced Mr. Paul Fuhs. Mr. Fuhs is the Business Development Director of the Alaska Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development. Prior to that, Mr. Fuhs served as mayor of Dutch Harbor/Unalaska. Fuhs spoke of the need to diversify the Alaskan economy and hoped hydrogen could help liberate additional oil from Alaskan oilfields, as a source of revenue from renewable energy sources, and as a potential fuel to help aid in the cleaning of Alaskan airsheds around its major cities. He noted the possibility of hydrogen fuel cell driven submarines as a means to deliver Alaskan products to European markets under the polar ice. - Fuhs then introduced Dr. Glenn Olds, who delivered the keynote address. Dr. Glenn Olds is Commissioner of the Alaska Dept. of Commerce and Economic Development. His accomplishments almost defy a comprehensive listing, but which include serving under four American Presidents; Executive Director of one of the largest philanthropic Foundations in the US; serving as Ambassador to the UN Economic and Social Council; and as President of several American universities. Dr. Olds apologized for a schedule conflict which precluded his remaining throughout the conference, but promised to be brief with his comments. Olds noted that under normal circumstances we might have time to do what needs to be done vis-a-vis the problems with energy and environment, but we are running out of time. He then set his remarks through four points he wished to make, using two or three prophetic propositions, persepectives on energy development, the refinement and renewal of energy, and critical breakthroughs in science, delivery systems, and policy, and the opportunity Alaska provides for that purpose. ' Olds led the American Seminar to the USSR on the eve of Sputnik. In an editorial he wrote for the Saturday Review, Olds stated that the key to Soviet science was not science, and that the key to economics was not economics. Olds observed in 1957 that the driving force behind the Soviet space effort was not scientific, but political will, imagination, and , determination. Economic development, Olds noted, rarely roots in the possibility or option of economics but it tends to root in the courageous and clear minded sense with which moral will and intellectual courage is mobilized to that purpose. During a conversation with then Senator Jack Kennedy at that time, Olds noted that somebody must arrest the imagination of the American people to the new frontier of space. Later, Kennedy announced the US would place a man on the moon. As the Ambassador to the UN Economic and Social Council, Olds later watched a man dance on the moon. This development, Olds felt, provided a quantum leap into a new dimension of thinking about ourselves and our world. This opening provided the setting for Olds further remarks, to the taking of scientific knowledge for the orchestration and mobilization of a quantum leap in our thinking about energy and the needs of the world. Olds mentioned that the principle ingredient in the economic development in the 21st Century will not be either labor or capital, but is lodged in persons, information, adapted technology, and the will to change. Thse factors have created an incomparable opportunity for the world in moving beyond the lockstep of coldwar into a new world of opportunity. To that end, in Old’s view Alaska provides a remarkable laboratory to the Russian republics for illustration of moving into a larger, more open market economy characteristic of the collaboration of the private and public sector. Olds then added the final clue to this transformation is represented by the moral will of leadership. Under the current administration, Olds assured the audience, Alaska is a place where things are about to happen, and gave as an example the Poker Flat space station under development. From the point of view of setting, Olds believes that this is the place, and now is the time. Moving to energy, Olds quoted statistics which indicated that in 1850, 52% of the work of the world was human power, 38% animal power, and only 10% was machine power. In 1990, .8 of 1% of work in the US is human power, 3% animal power, and 96.2% is machine power. This, Olds suggested, is the reason why energy has become such a central feature of our world. In the 1973 embargo, a radical shift in the international monetary system of the world occurred. It had been up until then sustained by a variety of asset correlates: gold, sterling, etc., but for the first time the world’s monetary system was anchored by energy. This fact provides one of the keys to both the crises and opportunities of our time. ' For Alaska, these opportunities are rooted in the fact that Alaska provides 26% of the domestic oil used in the national economy, an astounding figure when one considers the population is about that of Akron, Ohio. Alaska has 60% of the coal reserves of North America. The capabilities of the transformation of those resources is one of the concerns which. the Dept. of Commerce is currently engaged. Tidal power awaits tapping and testing, the second highest in North America. The new flutter design for wind power augments the production of elecricity by a factor of six, and this same design holds even greater promise using water. A test of this design will be attempted in Cook Inlet. Natural gas exists in enormous abundance, and with 9.5 million acres of geothermal lands, a $40 million project is to begin in Unalaska. Olds mentioned the invention of two Alaskans which refracts light from any angle on the horizon to harness solar power. This technology is currently under deviopment by the Fetzer Fundation in Michigan, of which Dr. Olds was most recently Executive Director. Olds came to his third point: that of energy refinement and renewal. The concentration of energy is a focus of energy technologies today. Superconductivity promises to reduce losses in electrical transmission, which may allow the linking of the world’s energy grids to maximize the utilization of the world’s energy by over 30%. Transmission of energy is another concern of the Department, one focus using laser technology to beam energy from one site to another, eventually from Alaska to Tokyo or Copenhagen. Olds turned his discussion to hydrogen and the breakthrough possibilities in that field. The scientific and: technical insight available to us in Alaska through hydrogen creates possibilities not only in the current usage in the space program, but in terrestrial applications. Technical problems surrounding the liberation of the energy locked up in hydrogen, the problem of its coordination in combustion and control, and monitoring and adaptation are small technical problems in comparison to the larger option of its actual utilization. How to render this transformation cost effective in both use and unit is part of the ingenuity of every sequence of scientific invention. Olds spoke of “cosmic accounting”, a concept of the late Buckminster Fuller, who said that if cosmic accounting were done with respect to the cost of oil, it would be about a million - dollars a gallon, when one considers the time taken to form the oil. It is just beginning to be evaluated in the economic considerations this “cosmic accounting”, factors such.as the environmental damage caused by fossil fuels. One of the propelling considerations of hydrogen is that is is non-polluting and low risk, and the Dept. believes in the forecasts that cosmic acounting will begin to make it a centerpiece of the future. Olds concluded his speech by apologizing for his crowded schedule which precluded his staying for the conference, and left the audience with a Yupik benediction, “May the wind be soft upon your cheek, and may your mukluks make happy noises in the snow”. Spry then introduced Mr. Bill Hoagland to the audience. Mr. Hoagland-is the Program Manager for Hydrogen of the Department of Energy, and which is housed in the Solar Energy Research Institute at Golden, Colorado. Hoagland provided an historical perspective to the USDOE hydrogen program by noting that the DOE reports that it spends about $33 million on hydrogen research. Only 10% of that money is allocated to fuels. The other 90% goes to weapons research, fossil research, etc. Hoagland focused upon the smaller figure, the $3 million which goes directly to hydrogen research for its application as a fuel. Statistically, the total US production of hydrogen for 1981 was approximately one quad of energy, or about 2% of the energy consumed in the US. 96% of that comes from steam reformed methane, the most competitive source today. The price of hydrogen today varies from $3 to $10 per MBTU. This is hydrogen derived form fossil sources. However, production of hydrogn from fossil sources is not of interest to SERI. In the US there are three major centers for hydrogen research: the research program in Conservation and Renewable Energy, a basic program in photochemistry the Office of Energy Research, Basic Energy Sciences, and a large Program in Fossil Energy. Hoagland noted that the DOE has been trying to develop a rationale for the role of ‘hydrogen in the total energy picture in the US and a number of issues emerge. Historically, after the 1973 oil embargo, hydrogen was seen as a means of storing nuclear power, as the shortages which developed during the embargo were the lack of liquid fuels, not electricity. For solar and wind, hydrogen was later seen as a storage mechanism for intermittant sources of renewable energy. Presently, the emphasis on hydrogen comes from neither of those reasons, rather, the impetus for the development of hydrogen is the deleterious environmental effects of fossil fuels. . The present difficulty hydrogen faces is in assessing its merits in relation to other renewble energy options. Because of its inherent high cost, hydrogen needs all of the benefits it can get. In looking at the rationale for hydrogen, it complements renewables as a means of storage, and it can upgrade carbon based fuels. Using biomass, hydrogen can make biofuels. Expanding on the biomass issue, Hoagland focused on the hydrogen to carbon ratio is about half that of methanol and the only way to adjust that ratio is by rejecting CO, or by adding supplemental hydrogen and doubling the yield of methanol from biomass. One of the shortcomings of biomass, Hoagland noted, was the land use issue, as biomass requires vast _ ’ areas of productive lands, whereas solar production of energy requires less land, and land which is both unproductive and economically useful for no other purpose. Next, Hoagland addressed energy security and the real cost of imported energy supplies, especially in the context of the recent Gulf War. The focus has centered on a defensible source of energy, whether domestically produced or imported, and renewables provide that security. Hoagland spoke to the environmental aspect of hydrogen use. It is clean, efficient, and has an advantage over some of the other forms of renewable fuels in that the product gases are environmentally benign. While biomass does remove carbon from the atmosphere as they grow, they do not solve the air pollution problems in conjested urban areas. This is one area, Hoagland felt, where hydrogen needed to be given more emphasis. Turning again to land use, Hoagland focused on’a report by Ogden and Williams (Solar Hydrogen: Moving Beyond Fossil Fuels) which indicated the production of hydrogen from solar to be much more efficient from a land-use perspective. Solar required only about 1.8% of the landmass of the US to displace all of the fuel requirements of the country. Biomass is limited by photosynthesis which has a low efficiency, and requires irrigation and energy inputs for harvesting, fertilizer, etc. Hoagland estimated that the most optimistic projections for biofuels required better than an order of magnitude difference in land,use requirements between solar and biofuels, favoring solar energy production of energy. Using hydrogen as a fuel and solar as the primary energy source, it is possible to concentrate the production of energy in the arid, low value lands of the desert southwest. This decouples the production from the consumption centers, but in this regard hydrogen is favored for long distance transportation of energy. Transporting hydrogen through pipeline is more economical than transporting electricity over high tension lines after about 1000 to 1400 kilometers distance. Using a slide, Hoagland identified some options for the use of solar hydrogen, as a gaseous fuel, to upgrade biomass for biofuels, and for the upgrade of coal for the production of liquid fuels. . Ina transition scenario, hydrogen will be increasingly important, but consensus has not been arrive at within the DOE about the inevitability of hydrogen. Hoagland noted that methanol needed to cost .57 per gallon to compete with gasoline at $1 per gallon. By doubling the yield of biomass through the addition of supplemental hydrogen and not increasing the cost of the methanol, hydrogen could be added at a cost of $10 per MBTU. Because of that, the early cost goal of the DOE research programs were aimed at bringing renewable hydrogen to that cost. The DOE approach to the hydrogen program has been to conduct technology assessment, for production, storage, etc. to discover pathways that make the most sense with a very limited budget. The assimilation of renewables into the existing infrastructure has been looked into, as well as the non-technical aspects of energy use such as the environmental impacts of existing fossil sources, safety issues, and socal aspects. Hoagland then moved to technology assessment work which attempts to identify promising technologies and develop them through R & D. Because of limited funds, the program attempts to identify specific technologies and put them on a critical path to development using those limited funds. Using another slide, Hoagland identified the present program, broken down into Component Research and Integrated Systems Research. Because of a lack of funding, only some of the programs have been pursued. Research into advanced electrolysis has not been pursued recently as it is a fairly mature technology, and the DOE felt larger gains could be made in areas such as direct photoconversion by microorganisms and blue green algaes. Overall, the program focus has been in renewable hydrogen and storage. Renewable hydrogen, Hoagland explained, was any renewable energy process which served to split water. Speaking to storage, mobile storage for transport has been the focus of the DOE program. Hoagland gave four examples of renewable electrolysis processes: photovoltaic solar, thermochemical, photoconversion, and chemical and biomass processes. Using PV electrolysis as a long term option appears a good pathway as the trends point in the right direction for hydrogen production from PV. Hoagland expects similar gains will be made in the field of photoconversion as have been achieved in the field of PV. The advantage of photoconversion is the higher theoretical efficiencies which can be had relative to PV, followed by electrolysis. The efficiencies of biological processes are between .1 of 1% and 2.2%. Some photosynthetic bacteria in the laboratory produce hydrogen at about 5%, but only half of the hydrogen comes from the bacteria, the other half from the substrate, providing both pluses and minuses using this approach. Photochemical processes do at the molecular level what photoelectric does at the microscopic level. This is the synthesis of new molecules that use light energy to achieve charge separation long enough to split water. The efficiencies are so low at this point, noted Hoagland, that they are not worth measuring yet, but for long term research a large payoff is possible. Hoagland then put up a series of slides illustrating promising photochemical and photoelectrical experiments currently being conducted at SERI. Problems surrounding photoelectrolysis are: high cost, low efficiencies, and corrosion, all of which are being investigated by SERI through DOE grants. Additionally, life cycle costs must be brought down. In addition to photosynthetic bacteria, blue green algae are being experimented with. The oceans are being sampled for particularly promising species. While efficiencies are currently low, it is expected through genetic engineering and other approaches to increase the efficiencies of these species. Hoagland projected costs of hydrogen for transport. Taking the DOE goal of $10 per MBTU as a cost goal, and adding $3 per MBTU for storage and distribution costs to the production costs for a total of $13 per MBTU, while much higher than other fuels on an energy basis, utilizing a fuel cell which uses hydrogen at 60% efficiency, the efficiency of use is similar to a gasoline vehicle at 30 mpg. Using the DOE target price of $10 per MBTU, this is equivalent, utilizing a fuel cell with its higher use efficiency, to gasoline at .95 cents per gallon wholesale. When looking at the cost of hydrogen relative to its efficiency of use, without taking any environmental factors into consideration, hydrogen is very close to economic competitiveness. If these cost goals are achieved, hydrogen will provide an alternative to gasoline at a cost no more than we pay today. Natural gas has been identified as a transitional fuel, noted Hoagland. To this end . Hoagland quoted from Frank Lynch at Hydrogen Consultants of Denver, CO , who has found that blending hydrogen at 15% by volume reduces natual gas pollution by 50%, to where it makes sense to divert some of the ‘natural gas stream for the production of hydrogen and return it to the fuel for use in emissions reductions. Hoagland addressed SERI storage research, including liquid storage, and hydride storage devices. Also, he touched upon activated carbon storage systems. (Note: Much of this portion is unintelligable as he distanced himself from the recording microphone). Hoagland then touched upon the subject of hydrogen-powered vehicles, noting increasing awareness in Washington D.C. and also in various publications from Newsweek, to BusinessWeek, to Popular Science. Hoagland suggested a hydrogen-powered vehicles demonstration in the Los Angeles area might be a good project. Hoagland then invited questions from the audience. Mr. Spry took the podium and thanked Mr. Hoagland for his presentation, and introduced Dr. David Scott, Director of the Institute for Integrated Energy Systems at the University of Victoria, B.C., Canada. Dr. Scott was formerly Chairman of the Advisory Group on Hydrogen Opportunities for _ Canada, which authored the federal report Hydrogen: National Mission for Canada (1987). Dr. Scott began by referring back to the words of Dr. Olds when Olds mentioned that economics is not the key to economic development. Scott took Old's words to mean that to gain economic advantage in a field-which is relatively new, one must look beyond the traditional tools used by managers, that is to say, that in the initial phases, those tools do not work well. This does not imply that one should be foolish, and that just will alone will work. But building upon the words of Olds, Scott felt that looking at trends could provide some clues to help in the analysing of hydrogen opportunities. Succesful ventures understand patterns, and patterns aid us in understanding developments in business as well as developments in science. Scott titled his talk “A White Knuckle Look at a Brighter 21st Century.” Why he chose this title is because he would say things that would cause many the audience discomfort, and because it would be unconventional. / Using slides, Scott started looking at patterns, first by looking at the total energy balance to the Earth. Energy input equals energy loss, with the exception the ordering response of living systems. By increasing energy form the sun, decreasing losses, or the opposite, balances change. Scott noted that the sun has increased its production of energy since the formation of the Earth by about 30%. How life forms on Earth protected themselves from this increase may be explained by the Gaia concept, but the CO2 levels of planet Earth have been dropping largely to sustain life on the planet within some limits. Recently, however, CO2 levels have been sharply i increasing. The controlling mechanism to this balance in the gases of the Earth are the lifeforms. Scott left this train of thought to return to it later. Scott turned to the role of words and perceptions in actions and why governments make decisions, which Scott felt was the crux of this conference. After the Yom Kippur War, the oil embargo of 1973 was proclaimed an “energy crisis” by the government and media. In response, Ontario Hydro, which services Toronto with electrical energy, called upon the citizenry to turn out the lights, which they did. Because Toronto gets most of its electricity from hydro and nuclear and coal, turning out the © lights caused the buildings to cool faster in winter, causing oil fired boilers to be lit, and resulting in a multi-billion dollar increase in imported oil into Ontario. Scott explained his notion of energy currencies, similar to fiscal currencies, and opposed to energy sources. The nature of the currency dictates the nature of the transaction. As an example of this Scott noted that is difficult to fly an airplane on electricity; likewise, it is difficult to fly a computer of Jet A. One of the things that is beautiful to Scott is that any source one can dream up one can manufacture electricity; similarly, one can also manufacture hydrogen from any source. The importance of this, Scott stressed, is that society needs fuels, and plastics, and that this role is filled by hydrogen in a sustainable future. Scott went on to suggest the inevitability of a hydrogen age by challenging the audience to provide a logical scenario other than one which was dominated by electricity and hydrogen. The inevitability issue was uncomfortable to Scott, a man in his post-fifties, as by that age wisdom shows that little is inevitable, but hydrogen Scott felt was inevitable. Scott then turned to an energy system flowchart which went from energy sources, to currencies, to technologies, and then to services, noting that it is customary for energy analysts to regard energy systems in this way; but in fact things in the real world run the other way around. Services dictate technologies, technologies dictate currencies, and currencies dictate sources. Once one selects a service, one is locked into a currency. Scott noted that civilization in the late 20th Century is shaped by technologies that use electricity, even to political systems with its emphasis on the sound bite that media provides. These technologies are blind to the energy source they use, be it falling water, coal, or nuclear. The question is which technologies are likely to evolve, and it is in technologies where the money is. The energy sources will evolve according to regional specificity, but provide far less economic benefit than the technologies. Scott mentioned the parable of the locomotive, where diesel and steam locomotives competed, a competition between technologies, not fuels. Scott felt that looking back through history, one can see generally that this has been the case in all transitions of energy sources, that the energy sources rode the coattails of a leading technology. In the production of massive quantities of hydrogen, Scott suggested that its cost would be comparable to that of fossil fuels today, albeit slightly more expensive. For massive production of hydrogen, noted Scott, Alaska does have an opportunity to sell hydrogen internationally and should, but Alaska will remain in the cellar of colonialism and at the whim of commodities pricing if it does not focus on the advanced technologies surrounding hydrogen. Next, Scott focused on the environment and environmentalists, by suggesting that he had not met anyone who wanted oil soaked beaches and filthy air and asked who among us was not an environmentalist. The environmental movement has provided an invaluable service to humanity, but Scott warned of a tendency in any group, and often in the environmental movement of dogmatism. The issues and the way the planet works, Scott felt, are extremely complex, and sometimes environmentalists bring in a religious aspect to their argument instead of logic to arrive at conclusions. Scott split the environmental issue into three categories, the first of which was environmental risk. By way of example Scott brought up the risk of CO2 loading in the environment which would result in major climatic disruptions. Second was environmental . damage, such as an oil spill in an arctic ocean. Third, Scott mentioned environmental change, as small as a beaver pond to large change, and that not all change results in environmental damage or entails enviromental risk. Speaking to the issue of environmental risk, Scott felt that the risk of climatic instability was a juggernaut coming over the time horizon. Using a slide, Scott indicated the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere, and that the measure of risk to an environmental system is the amount of change which results over what is agreed upon to be background level. Another measure is the scale of the change, whether citywide, nationwide, or globally. In the case of the greenhouse gas question, this is a global ' issue. In Scott’s view, this is playing dice with the planet. Understanding radiation / characteristics, background levels, etc. help us understand how the dice are loaded. That mankind is playing dice is well established in Scott’s mind. The difference of this problem is that it may well be irreversible, and after a point the nonlinearlity of the climate may promote a runaway phenomenon and extreme climatic dislocations may result. Scott made the point that during the oil embrgo of 1973 some industrialists lost billions of dollars betting on the depletion of fossil resources, a myth of the words “energy crisis”. In _ fact, fossil resources are limited not by scar¢ity, but by the environments ability to absorb their wastes. The point of this discussion, mentioned Scott, was not to engage in hand wringing, but to ask what all of this meant to the political myths, when Bangladesh is punished by more forceful typhoons, when midwestern farmers receive less and less rainfall resulting in more and more crop failures. More importantly, Scott hypothesized, what will be the result of these myths on the Alaskan economy? What if legislation was passed that limited CO2 on the processing of oil, not to mention the export of coal? What are the business interruption strategies, and what insurance policies should Alaska pursue to avoid economic disruption caused by such legislation? As Scott noted, it is of less importance that we do not agree the barn may burn down asit is to agree that the barn should be insured. Scott reckoned that the surprise of interntional greenhouse gas limiting protocols will be here for sure in twenty years, and most likely in ten. Scott focused upon another trend by referring to the Marchetti curves based on the work by Cesare Marchetti in 1973. The curves show the patterns of world energy use by market share. As the industrial era has evolved, wood use declined and coal use rose, then coal use declined as oil use increased. The curves suggest the rates at which infrastructure can change and at what rate society can accept change. Generally, these transitions occur over a fifty year period on average. For Alaska, Scott believed he would bet on natural gas and cast a jaundiced eye on coal judging from the loss of market share of coal. Next Scott looked at the trend through history which favored energy sources which have a higher hydrogen/carbon ratio. The question, Scott asked, is what drives the world? In his view, the competition between finding still more oil and developing more efficient technologies:is always. won by the technologies. Scott returned to hydrogen to argue the case for its inevitablity. Scott argued that the | world must leave carbon based currencies, and must pursue sustainable energy sources for the manufacture of hydrogen. Natural gas, in Scott’s view, had a brilliant future in Alaska, as well as renewable energy sources. Recognizing that these nonfossil sources must come on line and that somehow the market for fuels must be satisfied, hydrogen is the only nondepletable and environmentally benign fuel available. In a deeper future, the currencies will be electricity and hydrogen. Scott mentioned in this regard the fuel cell, which promised to be a primary technology in the hydrogen age. The sources of energy are less predictable. The path to the hydrogen will be first through integrated energy systems, using multiple energy sources for multiple outputs, Scott felt. Characteristically, there is a better use of resources through this approach, resiliency thorugh shifting from electricity to hydrogen for fuel, and a clear benefit to the environment. This path is already up and running for heavy oil upgrade and ammonia production. Later, fossil sources will provide a smaller share of the primary inputs, and a second wave of pure hydrogen from renewable sources will evolve. In the transition, specific aircraft will use hydrogen, bus fleets in heavily polluted airsheds will: use hydrogen, and for automobiles in certain regions of the world where hydro gen infrastructure is made available. At this point, Scott found he disagreed with Dr. Olds who stated that “Necessity is the Mother of Invention.” Indeed, Scott countered, invention is the mother of necessity for the late 20th century, the inventions being developed, and markets following the technology. Projecting into the future, fuel cell driven vehicles will dominate, and they will be long lived, and initially expensive, but less expensive using life cycle analysis. This trend, Scott noted, has been occurring anyway, from the days of the new car every year to today when autos are both expensive and relatively long lived. This conserver society began based on raw poverty, evolved into a throwaway society, and is now tending again toward a conserver society. The reason for this, Scott advanced, are new values of social responsibility, but also due to the long lived nature of modern technology. The fully developed hydrogen society will occur in about a hundred years, Scott estimated. Because we are at the dawn of the hydrogen age, similar to the dawn of the age of electricity a hundred years ago, the next several decades will prove to be exciting ones as we witness these development in Scott’s view. The uncertainty is who will lead and exact timelines. Germany and Canada are pursuing this future. Alberta is very interested in pursuing the upgrade of fossil fuels with hydrogen, and this was passed on for its application in Alaska. A British Columbian Agency for Hydrogen Systems has been formed and has been allocated $7 million (Can) just for the running the agency for 5 years, and the province wide target rests at $100 million (Can) with an additional target of $200 million (Can) from private sources. For a province of 4 million people, Scott ventured, $20 million (Can) per year is exciting. Turning to Alaska, Scott felt Alaska was a composite of British Columbia and Alberta, with both fossil sources and hydraulic sources of energy for neat hydrogen. Additionally, the Alaskan Bush provided classic opportunities for the demonstration and evaluation of technologies which use hydrogen furnished by sustainable energy sources and provide local self-sufficiency. The question, Scott mused, was whether Alaskans were ready to think, and were they prepared to act? Scott quoted from a book he was reading, “The will to engage oneself in history is the essence of human purpose,” and Alaska has a particular opportunity and Scott hoped that Alaska seized the opportunity which hydrogen provided. Dr. T. Nejat Veziroglu was next introduced by Mr. Spry. Dr. Veziroglu is the Director of the Clean Energy Research Institute at the University of Miami, and the President of the International Association for Hydrogen Energy, which publishes the scientific Journal of Hydrogen Energy. Dr. Veziroglu is widely acknowledged to be one of the most knowledgable persons in the world on the subject of hydrogen, and recently his institute has been engaged in work through grants from the DOE to assess the externalities resulting from the use of fossil fuels. Dr. Veziroglu presented some of his findings to the audience. . Veziroglu thanked the state of Alaska for providing him the opportunity to speak about hydrogen and set the framework for hydrogen: that fossil fuels are depletable, and that they cause harm to the environment. Then Veziroglu mentioned that he would compare hydrogen energy systems to fossil systems, and finaly make recommendations for Alaska. Veziroglu used a slide to illustrate the projected production curves of fossil curves. Oil will decline in the early 21st Century, and if liquid fuels are manufactured from coal, production will increase until about 2025, and then will decrease. Veziroglu listed the "misdeeds of fossil fuels" which included oil spills, acid rain, deleterious effects on human health, global climate disruption, and damage to buildings and monuments. In large cities, concentrations of air pollution can kill insects and small birds and is a poison. In East Germany, citizens wear coal dust on their faces as though they were miners simply from living in such a filthy environment, and babies must wear respirator face masks to go outside and breath the air. In Japan, when the pollution is bad outside, oxygen is sold in deptartment stores. He then showed a slide of deaths cause from diseases of the respiratory organs over several decades. Where other deaths have declined, the deaths from respiratory deaths have increased in proportion to the use of fossil fuels. Another slide showed the effects of acid rain on utterly denuded European forests. In . Norway, and Germany, about half of the forests are damaged by acid rain. In Austria it is nearly two-thirds of the forests, and in Great Britain and Czechoslovakia about one-third of the forests have been damaged. Another slide showed a cathedral in‘Kern damaged by acid rain. The city spends $2 " million per year to repair the cathedral side by side; however, by the time the workers finish the last side, they must begin again all over. Another slide indicated the amount of Florida which would be lost to global warming, from about.a third to three quarters of the penninsula lost to the sea. The Maldives, a country consisting of a series of islands, has already applied to the United Nations asking for a country to which they can immigrate, because all of the Maldives will be under underwater in the next century. Today, the oceans are rising about half an inch per year, and this rise is accelerating. It is expected in the next 70 years oceans will rise by one meter. For this reason, Veziroglu explained, oil companies are building offshore platforms one meter higher because the platforms have a lifetime of 70 years. In the Netherlands, they are raising the height of the dikes by five feet, and they are doubling their width at a cost of billions of dollars. For ocean pollution, Veziroglu noted that the Exxon Valdez spilled 35,000 tons of oil, quite small by world standards, whereas off of Tobago in 1979, 350,000 tons of oil were spilled. Only one tenth of the pollution from oil comes from accidents. About 60% comes from the routine flushing of the tanks with sea water. In Brooklyn, under the street there are 14 million gallons of oil atop the water table as a result from leaks from gas stations and other sources over time. Veziroglu has collected this damage data from various sources, and pro rated it to the three types of fossil fuels: coal, oil, and natural gas. Apportioned to particular fuels and divided by a pollution factor assumes the damage is proportional to the carbon dioxide produced per gigajoule of the fuel utilized. Therefore, it is lowest for natural gas and highest for coal. The results are $9.82/GJ for coal, $8.47/GJ for oil, and $5.60/GJ for natural gas. He noted that the Earth is the only planet where we know life to exist, and even were other planets capable of sustaining life, we cannot reach them as they are so many millions or billions of light years away. We should take care of our home the Earth, Vezirloglu pressed. Although fossil fuels are damaging, they are very convenient to use, have a high energy content, and this is why we use them, noted Veziroglu. The newer fuels being researched have problems such as an intermittant nature, often far from consumption centers, and in the case of nuclear, it is best that they are located far from human habitation. Therfore, it is necessary to have an intermediate system to make up for the stortcomings of the new energy sources and to complement them. It should be portable, storable, pollution free, economical to produce, and independent from the primary energy sources. This intermediary is hydrogen. Referring again to the Marchetti curves, Veziroglu noted that the world changes its fuel source every forty to fifty years. With each change, all the devices must be changed to fit the fuel. A permanant fuel would remove this dislocation. As energy sources move from fuels with low hydrogen content to fuels with higher hydrogen content, they become cleaner and more efficient to use. Hydrogen is the most efficient fuel to use, and it is the cleanest fuel, © noted Veziroglu. The hydrogen energy system will be permanent. It can be produced from any primary energy source, converted to electricity, to mechanical power, or to thermal power with higher efficiencies than fossil fuels. It is unable to produce acid rains and global warming. : / Another slide illustratedthe hydrogen energy system, first proposed by Jules Verne in his book Mysterious Island. Veziroglu noted that Verne made over 900 predictions, 600 of them already having come to pass, and his French colleagues are confident that hydrogen will also come to pass. . Hydrogen can be produced from any source, even from coal. Veziroglu proposed that it would be better to produce hydrogen from Alaskan coal at the mine mouth, and transport the hydrogen only, and not tons and tons of ash, moisture, and carbon. Another slide showed the National Aerospace plane which is to be fueled by hydrogen, and yet another slide showed a hydrogen steam turbine. He noted the high efficiencies of fuel cells, and illustrated the 4.5 MW fuel cell used by Tokyo Electric (TEPCO). They are very happy with the performance of - this fuel cell, according to Veziroglu, and they have a new 11 MW fuel cell that will be coming on line this year. Hydrogen can be burned catalytically in homes using a ceramic plate suffused with small amounts of platimum or palladium, and Veziroglu provided a slide of this technology. In addition to eliminating environmental pollution, hydrogen offers to eliminate visual pollution of overhead electrical wires as each home, business, or factory can produce its own hydrogen for domestic use through the fuel cell. The waste product of the fuel cell and catalytic heater is pure potable water. Veziroglu then compared the present fossil fuel system, to a synthetic fuel system, to a hydrogen system. When comparing, Veziroglu reminded the audience, the environmental costs must be included, as well as the military costs of keeping sealanes open, or war, as in the case of the Gulf War. For this discussion, military figures were not included as they are not available as yet. He used slides during the comparison, but noted that the cheapest hydrogen next to natural gas was from coal, so that Alaska could export clean energy for many decades. The carbon problem needed to be addressed with coal-based hydrogen, however. The final conclusion indicated solar hydrogen would be the cheapest system after the year 2000 when additional infrastructure was established. For Alaska, Veziroglu noted that Alaska had large renewable resources and could be an exporter of fuel forever in the form of hydrogen, hydro being the largest, tidal next, and wind third. This hydrogen, Veziroglu suggested, could be exported to Japan and the West Coast of the US. Oil and natural gas revenues will decline over the next thirty years, but hydrogen exports could supplant this revenue stream. Veziroglu recommended Alaska should develop its renewable energy resources for the production of hydrogen. In the interim, Alaska should pursue technologies which allow it to develop its coal resources cleanly by producing hydrogen for export. These resources can be developed using existing technology. Lastly Dr. Veziroglu suggested Alaska could be an exporter of energy forever. (Dr. Veziroglu’s recommendations are included in Appendix 1). Spry then introduced Dr. Patrick Takahashi, Director of the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute. Dr. Takahashi also serves as Vice President for Development with the Pacific International Center for High Technology Research, which concerns itself with the commercialization of promising research and development initiatives in Hawaii and the Pacific. Dr. Takahashi thanked the audience and began by directing his observations specifically to Hawaii, in the belief that Alaska and Hawaii actually had many similarities and that Alaska might be able to learn from Hawaii’s successes and mistakes as it pursued energy related avenues of thought and development. Also, Takahashi had every reason to believe that Alaska and Hawaii could work together due to the similarities. Hawaii imports 90% of the energy it uses, essentially petroleum, and mostly from OPEC nations. A small portion of Hawaii’s energy is met from sugar cane biomass production. Hawaii imports oil from Alaska as well. The current trend for Hawaii is for coal to replace oil as an energy source. Coal troubled Takahashi in some ways, and he didn’t know if this was good or bad, but he felt that if it was necessary, it was good enough as a mid-term replacement until renewables matured. 60% of energy in Hawaii goes to transportation, and two-thirds of that went to aviation, so Takahashi felt Hawaii represented island economies. Hawaii has no fossil sources of energy, but has abundant sunlight, and temperature differentials in the ocean. Takahashi digressed for a moment to say that he would be speaking largely about ocean resources in addition to renewable energy because, like in Hawaii, he felt there might be some potential in the ocean we might not want to overlook. Takahashi’s institute spends about half of its resources on ocean systems. In addition to sunlight, Hawaii has good wind regimes and biomass, although with high land costs, biomass was somewhat limited. The intriguing thing to Takahashi was that the ocean surrounding Hawaii could be used for biomass production and for hydrogen production as well. Hawaii has geothermal potential as well. Hawaii has a state plan to attain energy self-sufficiency by 2020. Electricity production did not appear to be a problem to Takahaski in this regard, but fuels for transportation was. And the biggest problem of all would be avaition replacements. For the past six years, HNEI has created a parallel track of renewable transportation fuels, both for the nearer term ground transportation and the longer term aviation uses. Takahashi felt they were learning that methanol would be a mid-term supplement to gasoline if not a complete replacement. In the long term, HNEI has focused on hydrogen by combining sunlight and seawater with genetically engineered organisms and designer molecules. In the process of doing this R & D, in their desperation to find replacement fuels, HNEI has found itself an international field laboratory for renewable energy research and has served as a catalyst for interest in hydrogen. In the future, Hawaii believes they will become an exporter of energy if the ocean processes develop as they expect, and to a good degree other Pacific Rim islands have that potential, including Japan, felt Takahashi. Why the Hawaiian model has worked so far, Takahashi stressed, is because they have formed a true partnership. Industry is working with government, with academia, the utilities, etc. This consortium is critical, in Takahashi’s view, if anything is to be accomplished. Universities cannot exist or work in isolation, utilities cannot fight universities for research money, and in the case of Hawaii, Takahashi felt it was working well. Demonstration projects for all of the renewables exists somewhere in the state, whether it is the largest wind machine in the world on Oahu, or genetic engineering for hydrogen production in the laboratory. The university is important because they develop these systems and provide the education and training. For scale-up and testing the Pacific International Center for High Technology Research was created to carry this information and carry it to the doorstep of industry. Takahashi noted - that enormous amounts of research are done in the US, but that very little of it makes it to commercialization, so PICHTR was created. It is a truly an international organization which just happens to be centered in Hawaii, and is composed of business people, bankers and chairmen of large corporations interested in commercialization of promising research. The State handles most energy efficiency and regulatory policies and the university helps in technology transfer to aid in smooth application of technology. HNEI was created 15 years ago, and most of the initial work was in electrical production, but a few years ago they came to a realization that the DOE and HNEI were not doing enough for transportation alternatives in reneweable biofuels, and more resources were applied to this aspect. Recalling the speeches of Scott and Hoagland, Takahashi reaffirmed that energy cannot be separated from the total package, and the way energy projects will become cost effective at any reasonable point in the future is to integrate co-products. HNEI has found that the research into the co-products is beginning to bear fruit. In fact, Takahashi noted, the energy components are not as attractive as the co-products themselves today and probably for the next ten years, but eventually the entire package will come together. Takahashi then moved to a discussion on the Center for Ocean Resources Technology (CORT). Hawaii has an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), the so-called 200 mile limit. Many initiatives HNEI through ocean resources will eventually lead to hydrogen produced within the Hawaiian EEZ. One of the facilities HNEI operates is the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii, located near the airport on the Big Island. Several big pipes go very deep into the sea which is brought to the surface. This cold water allows Maine lobsters, abalone, and strawberries to be grown in Hawaii, and the fluid is pathogen free. Pearl oysters are also being cultivated, and Takahashi suggested that laboratories such as these will provide all pearl oysters in the future because the environments can be controlled. The main thing which may be useful for mankind in the future from this fluid, Takahashi felt, is that it is very rich in nutrients, 200 times higher in nitrates and 40 times higher in phosphates than surface water, almost like fertilizer. Besides aquacultural and agricultural applications, it may be possible to stimulate production of ocean biomass and remediate the greeenhouse effect to a certain extent. , The Puna Research Center operates a geothermal facility, which has been closed down recently due to cultural and environmental concerns, but again, the non-energy components aré proving to be of more value than the energy. The slurry that comes from the ground is rich in silica that can be used for industry for sol gel for ceramic engines, or pressurized to form opals. Again, it was the co-products which Takahashi stressed. These co-products are what bring the economic value in the local communities. The Kahua WEST Facility is a large wind farm on the Big Island with about 200 wind machines and a number of energy storage options such as pumped storage, hydrogen, etc. in the research stage. Energy storage for much of the outlying areas is an important feature for much of Alaska (bush) in Takahashi’s view. Energy self-sufficiency i is planned for Hawaii by 2020, an ambitious goal indeed. In 1980 geothermal was demonstrated, and by the end of summer several hundred megawatts of energy are to be on line, if things work out for HNEI. Hawaii has become the world center for Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), Takahshi noted, and were selected last year as a national center for biofuels research. Takahashi expressed some reservation toward wind machines noting that they just break down a little more than he would like, and one of the key points that Alaskans must understand is never to place a wind - machine someplace and expect it to work without maintenance. Trained windsmiths must go with the machine and the local community must want the machine and have someone trained to take care of it. Wind machines are close, in Takahashi’s view, but perhaps not quite there today. By the year 2000 Hawaii expects to have a geothermal cable between Big Island and Oahu, $3.5 billion dollar project, which will provide 50% of that island’s electricity. Fuels remain a problem. By 2005 some of the transportation alternatives will begin to come on line. The vehicle testing program is well established and HNEI has a fleet of variously fueled vehicles, including electric, methanol, and hydrogen fueled vehicles. By 2010 Takahashi expects to begin to bring in hydrogen as a vehicle fuel. Eventually, HNEI expects to get into hydrogen-powered jet liners and hydrogen space shots by 2020. The first hydrogen bill was introduced into Congress and was drafted largely by Takahashi working in Washington under the late Spark Matsunaga (D-HI), and has finally been signed by Bush which authorizes a path for hydrogen for the nation. HINEI was awarded a $50,000 grant from the state Legislature to investigate the role of hydrogen i in the future of the state. Takahashi felt this was one of the best chunks of money he has had the opportunity to use. Ultimately, HNEI made a bid to hold a World Hydrogen Energy Conference which was held in Honolulu last July. Also, HNEI worked with the Florida Solar Energy Center to develop a research priority for the nation specifically targeting renewable energy and hydrogen. Into the 1990’s, HNEI has shifted from assessments to basic research, projects which will "not come to commercialization for several decades. As far as the future of hydrogen in Hawaii is concerned, a $100,000 grant was awarded to discover the connection between hydrogen and OTEC. A cynic on the project, who initailly thought OTEC and hydrogen was a dumb idea now has apparently done a turnaround and the economics appear to be quite reasonable, according to Takahashi. A paper will be issued next year and will be available. He also made mention of geo-OTEC which uses the hot of geothermal and combines it with cool water. Takahashi felt this may be of interest to Alaska. (Takahashi then made recommendations which are included in Appendix 2). Spry then introduced Mr. Takuji Hanada, Industrial Gases Manager of Teisan, Ltd. of Tokyo, a Division of L'Air Liquide France. (Mr. Hanada gave his entire speech away from the podium and it was regretfully not recorded. The visuals used by Mr. Hanada are reproduced and included as Appendix 4. A brief summary of his speech is provided below). Mr. Hanada spoke about Japanese hydrogen requirements, using an overhead projector to provide visuals. From his data, it appears that Japanese hydrogen requirements are declining, but this may be a somewhat misleading trend as much of the hydrogen is used in ammonia synthesis for fertilizers which are now being imported from Korea. Hanada indicated that industrial gas uses will increase in Japan by about 7-8% per year, while liquid hydrogen requirements will decrease substantially as testing on the large H-2 booster will be completed. Hanada provided a pie chart showing distribution of hydrogen to various sectors, and principle feedstocks used to produce hydrogen domestically. Hanada also provided color slides of various installations operated by Teisan on the various islands of Japan. Teisan’s primary competitor in the hydrogen field is Iwatani, which provides liquid hydrogen to the Japanese space effort, and a small amount of LH2 for the Musashi Nissan LH2-fueled 300ZX. Hanada then provided tables which arrived at estimates of the costs of imported hydrogen. The tables assumed electricity costs of ¥3/kwh and ¥5/kwh respectively for the production of the hydrogen, a factor which makes itself felt primarily in the liquifaction phase of LH2 production. Hanada described various scales for the movement of LH2 both within and into Japan, beginning with ISO 40 foot containers, to special LH2 barges, to LH2 tanker similar in configuration to LNG vessels, and finally to what was termed a techno-super liner. The specific details of this liner were provided. The previous day, Hanada surprised the delegates by informing them that Teisan presently receives its hydrogen from Becancour, Quebec. The liquid hydrogen is surrounded by liquid helium which eliminated boiloff. The LH2 was transported by rail across Canada to San Fransisco where additional helium was provided for the trip to Yokohama. Hanada suggested that costs could be reduced by 25% should this hydrogen be provided by Alaska or the West Coast of Canada. Transportation costs presently were 10 times the cost of the hydrogen itself. (Hanada’s overheads are provided in Appendix 3. Additionally, the recommendations of Dr. Yoshimi Ishihara, Professor at Kagoshima University and Japanese. energy economist, are provided in Appendix 4). Appendix 1 Recommendations of Dr. T. Nejat Veziroglu RECOMMENDATIONS HYDROGEN PRODUCTION FROM RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES IN ALASKA T. Nejat Veziroglu Clean Energy Research Institute University of Miami Coral Gables, FL 33143, USA Current oil production: 750 million of barrels per year . (4.6 EJ/yr) Current gas production (Gross): 1,800 billion cubic feet per year (2.0 EJ/yr) Current gas production (Net): 360 billion cubic feet per year (0.4 EJ/yr) Estimated oil and gas reserves: Oil reserves: 7,000 million of barrels (43 EJ) Gas reserves: 31,660 billion cubic feet (34 EJ) Estimated available renewable resources: Hydro power potential: 167 GW, (731,000 GWh,/yr) Tidal power potential: 50 GW, (131,000 GWh,/yr) - Wind power potential : 60 GW, (158,000 GWh,/yr) Total electrical energy that can be produced if all the potential is utilized: 1,020,000 GWh,/yr (3.7 EJ,/yr) Electrical energy can be used to produce gaseous and liquid hydrogen: Gaseous hydrogen production: 1.4 EJ/yr (450,000 GWh/yr of electricity used) Liquid hydrogen production: 1.4 EJ/yr (570,000 GWh/yr of electricity used) Estimated capital investment: $400 billion (over 30-40 years) Cost of hydrogen: $12.0/GJ gaseous $16.5/GJ liquid Cost of gasoline: $ 8.0/GI (1990) $13.0/GI (2000) ? (2010) 1 Even if hydrogen is somewhat more expensive than gasoline it still can be competitive because of its higher utilization efficiency. Gaseous hydrogen can be transported to California via pipeline, and substitute gasoline used for surface transportation (California uses approximately 1.5 EJ of gasoline per year). Liquid hydrogen can be shipped to Japan via tankers, and substitute gasoline used for surface transportation (Japan uses approximately 1.5 EJ of gasoline per year). Oil production in Alaska has already started declining. oil reserves are huge, but still limited. Revenue from oil sales should be used to build the hydrogen infrastructure, and to start manufacturing and selling hydrogen, which can be utilized in Japan and California. Alaska could then. be energy exporter forever. Development and commercialization of renewable energy sources and hydrogen production could boost the Alaskan economy, open new jobs and make up for decreasing oil production and export. ~ Hydrogen is environmentally harmless fuel. Its production and transportation will not cause any environmental problems which are unavoidable in the case of oil extraction, processing and _ transportation. Hydrogen is also a clean fuel in end use. Its combustion produces only water vapor (and controlable amounts of ~ nitrogen oxides if hydrogen is burned with air). Hydrogen is therefore the only solution to detrimental environmental effects caused by fossil fuels, and will help in keeping our environment clean and will provide a basis for sustainable development. For these reasons the following recommendations are drawn for Alaska: 1. Alaska should pursue development and commercialization of its vast renewable energy sources, such as hydro potential, tidal energy and wind energy. 2. These forms of energy could be efficiently converted to hydrogen even with existing technologies. Hydrogen, in gaseous and/or liquid form, could be exported to Japan and California (the closest and the biggest markets for transportation fuel). ‘ : 3. Hydrogen should gradually replace oil export, which is going to decline anyway because of depletion of reserves and- because of environmental problems. Exporting hydrogen from renewable energy sources, Alaska could be energy exporter forever. . . ALASKA’S RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES | SOURCES IN ALASKA AVAILABLE POTENTIAL OF RENEWABLE | ENERGY Cae CLL CLL _- r- ~~ ~- _- (Md) leHualod a|gelleay ENERGY SCURCES IN ALASKA | “ HYDROGEN PRODUCTION FROM ne \ | \ Wind (15.5%) Tidal (12.8%) | Total potential: 3.2 EJ/yr of gaseous hydrogen : \ | (or 1.4 EJd/yr of gaseous and 1.4 EJ/yr of liquid hydrogen) ) / a . _ ESTIMATED OIL AND GAS RESERVES IN ALASKA — Le 50 | > SSS Cy SS ; g SSS SSS ! 307 SSS 5 7,000 million == n SSSSS—S====S==—a55 2 of barrels SS 2 204 SS = cubic feet | £ | Da | nd Uy assess i 10+ | 0+ ———— 7 Oil N. Gas EJ/yr PROJECTIONS OF OIL, NATURALGAS AND HYDROGEN PRODUCTION IN ALASKA OIL & NATURAL GAS HYDROGEN 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 years billion $/yr 15 40- 35+ TOTAL . 30 25 20 / \ HYDROGEN OIL & NATURAL GAS + 10 0 5 10 15 20 years 25 30 35 40 billion $/yr 30 254 CAPITAL INVESTMENT ~\ 20+ PROJECTIONS OF INVESTMENT IN ALASKAN HYDROGEN PRODUCTION FACILITIES — oO } 10+ 5 10 15 20 2 30 35 40 HYDROGEN EXPORTS FROM ALASKA | To Japan via tankers To West Coast \ via pipeline — HYDROGEN PRODUCTION FROM RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES IN ALASKA ADVANTAGES Hydrogen can replace oil exports. Hydrogen is the cleanest fuel. Hydrogen production, storage and transportation will not effect Alaskan environment. Hydrogen could be produced forever. Resources for hydrogen production are renewable (water, hydro potential, tidal potential, wind). HYDROGEN PRODUCTION FROM RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES IN ALASKA RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Alaska should pursue development and commercialization of its vast renewable energy sources (hydro, tidal and wind). 2. These forms of energy could be efficiently converted to hydrogen, even with existing technologies. 3. Hydrogen (in gaseous and/or liquid form) could be exported to Japan and California. CONCLUSION | Alaska could be energy ee forever. Appendix 2 Recommendations of Dr. Patrick Takahashi | RENEWABLE ENERGY AND OCEAN RESOURCE R&D IN HAWAII AND THE PACIFIC BASIN: A FOCUS ON HYDROGEN BY PATRICK TAKAHASHI HAWAII NATURAL ENERGY INSTITUTE AND PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR HIGH TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH HONOLULU, HAWAII FOR CONFERENCE ON THE INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS AND EXPORT POTENTIAL OF HYDROGEN - OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALASKA June 25, 1991 Anchorage, Alaska fie. & COMPARATIVE ANAYSIS BETWEEN ALASKA AND HAWAII * HAWAII HAS APPROXIMATELY TWICE THE POPULATION OF ALASKA * THE COMBINED LAND-SEA DOMAIN OF HAWAII IS EQUAL IN SIZE TO THE LAND AREA OF ALASKA + HAWAII HAS NO FOSSIL FUEL NOR NUCLEAR ENERGY SOURCES, WHEREAS ALASKA IS "BLESSED" -, THE VARIOUS SOLAR ENERGY ALTERNATIVES PROVIDE HAWAII WITH A PROMISING LONG TERM FUTURE, WHILE ALASKA HAS GOOD POTENTIAL TOO - BOTH ALASKA AND HAWAII HAVE EXCELLENT WINDPOWER AND GEOTHERMAL FUTURES + OTEC LOOKS GOOD FOR HAWAII, AND A COMBINATION OF GEOTHERMAL FLUIDS AND THE NATURAL COLD WATERS OF ALASKA COULD HAVE POTENTIAL + INSOLATION IN HAWAII IS HIGH, BUT LOW IN ALASKA * TIDAL POWER AND HYDROPOWER COULD WELL BECOME THE DOMINANT SOURCE OF POWER IN ALASKA * BOTH ALASKA AND HAWAII SHOW PROMISE FOR HAVING EXCESS RENEWABLE ENERGY DERIVED ELECTRICITY, WITH DEBATABLE FUTURES FOR LONG TERM TRANSPORTATION FUEL -- BOTH STATES, HOWEVER, CAN CONVERT ELECTRICITY INTO HY DROGEN-—-HAWAII HAS THE ADDED ADVANTAGE OF POSSIBLE — DIRECT CONVERSION THROUGH PHOTOPRODUCTION THUS ALASKA'S HYDROGEN FUTURE MIGHT WELL BE SIMILAR TO EPRI'S STRATEGIC PLAN FOR HYDROGEN WHY A CONSORTIUM OF INDUSTRY - GOVERNMENT - ACADEMIA - PUBLIC UTILITIES - PRIVATE SECTORS? + THE STATE OF SOLAR TECHNOLOGIES RANGE FROM RESEARCH PROJECTS THROUGH DEVELOPMENT INTO COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS + UNIVERSITY EXPERTISE IS NEEDED TO REFINE AND DEVELOP THESE SYSTEMS, AND PROVIDE TRAINING AND EDUCATION + MANY OF THE EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES NEED SCALE-UP AND PRE-COMMERCIAL TESTING + ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND REGULATORY INPUT IS NEEDED FOR DECISION-MAKING * TO EFFECTIVELY INTEGRATE THESE TECHNOLOGIES INTO AN APPLIED DEMONSTRATION WHICH IS RELIABLE AND COST EFFECTIVE THEREFORE, A CONSORTIUM OF INDUSTRY, ACADEMIA, GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC UTILITIES AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SECTORS IS NEEDED TO FULLY CARRY OUT THIS MISSION IN A TIMELY MANNER RECOMMENDATIONS: ENERGY FUTURE FOR ALASKA The following recommendations are being made on the assumption that economic, environmental and sociological factors make renewable energy a competitive option. . COMPREHENSIVELY DETERMINE THE AVAILABILITY AND TIMING OF RENEWABLE ENERGY OPTIONS INVEST IN SEED R&D ON RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS ESTABLISH TWO OR THREE FIELD LABORATORIES, WHICH CAN BECOME COMPARATIVE ENGINEERING TEST BEDS AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CENTERS; + TIDAL POWER + GEO-OTEC * COLD WEATHER MATERIALS TEST CENTER FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY INSTITUTE PIONEERING EXTERNALITIES POLICIES TO LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD FOR RENEWABLES . UNDERTAKE JOINT PROGRAMS AND SERI AND HNEI POSSIBLE AREAS OF COOPERATION BETWEEN ALASKA AND HAWAII + HYDROGEN FROM RENEWABLE ENERGY + PRODUCTION OF HYDROGEN FROM WINDPOWER AND OCEAN ENERGY + STORAGE AND UTILIZATION OF HYDROGEN + INTRODUCTION OF EXTERNALITIES INTO THE PRICE OF ENERGY--WE ARE BOTH INSULAR COMMUNITIES + MEANS OF COOPERATION + EXCHANGE OF FACULTY AND STUDENTS + HOME-AND-HOME FIELD TRIP EVALUATION WORKSHOPS TO PLAN FOR COOPERATIVE PROGRAM + JOINT MEETING OF CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION TO ARRIVE AT MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL LEGISLATION + COOPERATIVE PROPOSALS 1993 1994 1995 1997 1998 2000 FUTURE OF HYDROGEN IN HAWAII Production of hydrogen from OTEC electricity at the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Establishment of a hydrogen information network data base Production of hydrogen for use as feedstock for a bio-methanol plant on Maui to double the production of methanol from biomass derived synthesis gas Experimental production of hydrogen for Hawaii Spaceport Establishment of genetically stable strains of cynobacteria for photoproduction of hydrogen Achievement of stable, symbiotic systems utilizing algal and bacterial strains for hydrogen production Establishment of genetically stable strains of bacteria for sustained production of ammonia from waste and No Hawaii Hydrogen 2000: -* World Congress returns to Hawaii * First Hawaii spaceshot using renewable hydrogen * OTEC plant-ship within Hawaii's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) producing hydrogen for fuel and ammonia as fertilizer feedstock * National Aerospace Plane fueled in Hawaii with renewable hydrogen + PICHTR/Boeing/Mitsubishi plan for commercial hydrogen powered jetliner * UH scientists achieve efficient production of hydrogen from sunlight and seawater, reducing the potential cost of hydrogen by a factor of three. Appendix 3 Overhead visuals of Mr. Takuji Hanada == TEISAN A. AN AIR UQUIDE GROUP COMPANY TOTAL GASEOUS HYDROGEN USE IN JAPAN BILLION M*/year 1980 1992 (FORECAST) AMMONIA SYNTHESIS 8. 0 3. 4 PETRO. PURIFY 9. 6 5. 6 METHANOL 2. 5 1. 1 PETRO. CHEMICAL 2. 8 2. 8 OTHERS 1. 0 2. 2 | TOTAL 24. 9 15. 1 FROM MITI DATA 1991-6 4 TEISAN AN AW GOUIDE GROUP COMPANY MM°/YEAR 200 INDUSTRIAL MARKET OF j3ASEOUZ HYDROGEN 180 160 ——o 1404 120 100 —— ———— a ts tap ea taa OR ML/Yyear 10 6} °85 '86 ' ‘87 '88 89 ‘30 "91 ‘92 93° «94 ‘95 fap nay Sig ITTF ma TEISAN FEED-STOCK SOURCES OF HYDROGEN (SHARES ACCORDING TO NUMBER OF FACTORY) GAS HYDROGEN ELECTRORIDES ELECTRORIDE Cc. 0. G. OFF GAS METHANOL METHANOL ELECTRORIDES TEISAN YB ae caa GAS HYDROGEN CHEMICALS NN =. Sse — LIQUID HYDROGEN LABORATORY SHARES ACCORDING TO APPLICATION ELECTRI CHEMICA METAL GLASS OTHERS Cc LS SPACE LABORATOR:S ye an ean I 34 TEISAN | (1) 3 Few FOr (T) 5 3/kwa IMPORT LH, COST ESTIMATION LHeAT—28ll NG STEAM REFORMING ELECTROLYSIS iq 8 Ct (Lila) /SE) 72,160 | “| 72. 160 He THPORT VOLUME C9 (n)/48) | 1.016.730 1, 016. 730 (1) (Fk) 122.4 274.0 (A/ 2) 8. 69 19. 45 (F9/1000kcal) 3, 62 8. 10 Lilz | HYDROGEN (2) (F/ke) 379. 4 (AY £) 26. 93 a (F9/1000kca!) 11. 22 (1) (FL/ke) 297.8 297.8 A (AY 2) 21.14 21.14 (F9/1000kca!) 8.81 8.81 LIQUEFIED} ——-——___j—_ ———J a (II) (FA/ke) 320.5 320. 5 (AY £) 22.75 22.75 (F9/1000kca!) 9.48 9. 48 A (FA/ke) 52.4 52.4 STORAGE (AY 2) 3.72 3.72 b (FA/1000kca!) 1.55 1.55 (FA/ke) 112.7 112.7 -~ | TRANSPORT! (AY 2) 8.00 8.00 8 (F9/1000kcal) 3. 33 3. 33 ror it (1) (F/ke) 585.3 736. 3 xB (AY 2) 41.54 52. 30 a (F9/1000kca!) 17.31 21.79 “8 at - (I) (Ake) 608. 0 865. | (AY 2) 43.15 61.40 (FY/1000kcal) 17.98 25.58 GE) L Ha388hs (HHV) =33,800kcal/“ke (Lil) Heat Generation = 2, 400kcal “2 (Lil2) 1991-6 Raw Hydrogen and Hanufactured Hydrogen ‘Raw Hydrogen Processed Hydrogen TELA & KH VrA | TARR CHE) | A-Y AHH A ATHAZA ARI-W Ik Blectoivis mydrogeniCote Olen Gas | OF Gas | Hethanel | Feds 50~500 mmAg | 25~30 kg/cm? | 15~30 kg/cm? 9 ke/cn? Pressure 10~30 kg/cn? # Stress 4 AAU 99.7~99.99 % 50~60 % 50~97 & 75% ak Ne 200 ppm | Callan 35~45 & | 02 coz? 23S 02 50 co 1 Ne co 2 AH | Colln 0.1 Ne A~ 5 Calla 3~50% He20 0.1 Hi [Lmpuritie] CO 1 co Colle 0.1 | fee 1 | C02 ir Finished r au : HEL + Y P Ss A mg {Pe rf 150,200 kg/cn? 150,200 kg/cm? in TRAE | 99.9~99.99 & 99.99~99.9995 % Ne 50 ppmXT || #20 10 ppb JAF ak Ne- 200 ppm % 3 » aeccuing || Ne 1~S + 2 50 » cools, |}02 1~5 + HeO0 -60 ‘CAAF C02 1 2 4] Ar 2¢ Ed Colln 1 a co 1 4 l s+ Ce WeQ -70 “CAF Finished WBA . (f mm RF | Product | low temperature absorption EA 1~7 ke/cn® FPresmsec ea ARSE 99.9998 % Dib<- mere than, over 02 50 ppb SAF C02 10 pph AR A -719) 0.1 pm RA Ne 10» Calla 10 ” 5~0 pes/ft? WF Tmpuri nes co 10 =* He0 100 + HARBHSaR TEISAN | AM AIR UQUIDE GROUP COMPANY “Lapeer i$ cost _ Ye\3B) 7TNU> se i C ¢ 80 10 60 50 40 30 20 10 Tk HK SA MK IE mk OA iE C1) CI) (1)(0) 61.4 N $2.3 r— M N 43.2 Ls M S NIN eM | m L Lich K K KK M C1) H? preduction cost Hydrogen Iquifection cost :wAKABGIAS Lo: kRMRIEAAL Storage cost Transperta+ion : La RFI AE No: Lily WiRIZE Jen : 3 FL/kWh (1) : 5 A/kWh LH:BAIAbOT—AMRBMR (LH. 12 BKYIARL) TEISAN | ye AN AIR UQUIOE GROUP COMPANY VUtilizastton: Steam : conversion H> Ligui Faction 2F- Le ; Ll: oH ak FE ite tt Lily |o Lily > Li i CKD gY9 OZ 9v9 HR a aregen ve Cin: Tank Tank Natura \Gas aga tent “a “a ()4x* tm 2k 1567 WKS Eeetrelyovs Hydeoetectricity RAR DAFTL System Comparison BAS vA— 1 BICLSLH BLM Th 8 7 -2AA Wa = 1) 38605 91/1777} x 2485/8 =108 7 77BR (nt) 40, 000 (AFF GE) Both ~ $3 th Prince Rupert _ ~HR seen OP 3, 860 S)MMBISESE a (kn) 1.150 6)3508/SF x (1-0. 15) +228/@ ho BW Uoh) 17 BI YIAUWAAN—-A: 2% om oa ot 9)B. 0.6, : 0. 1436/8 " 10)40, 000n% x0, 0014 x 108 Hi MB (A) 10 ao. ae (a) 2” : 120@-@ Nt 7 HB (A) - : , 13)/<5 & b AROS FSLOATLM BE : l mea RK (A) 22 RA 22.5% FRB 35.09 |e mom we” (OR) 13.5" ae? ; . 15) i4d@D5D. 0.6. 10709. @X0.7 1)@-®© OMUATEFLIL Kd) 39, 200 0-0 iw aEATAGEFD.0.6. BCL) sco |” in 18)@x 13. SGI/SE : 36. 9901/E IBLE TOFU BE (kl) 38. 640 @<52 tule” «Kh 1.000 ra 20)@x 13. SIEI/SE : 36, 0801 /F On mm KD 37. 640 O52 baraGNSB. 0.6. B tat) 390 OMWAB LL cK) 610 ox w a” (KD) 38, 590 fF Mme a WwW #8 KD 520.970 '" au & (t) 36. 990 B a # (Kl) soa. 140°" Bou B (t) 36, 080 TEISAN | “import Cost Pretiminary Calculation LH.MAI2 RAR UAT — AR woe mkl)ak RAM HH Ct) 73. 980 R|RARAAAMEBR (Nat7sF) 440 10° RM | KRAANGMSR 9 (Ct 7B) 230 RA ARGUE (ePID 107 ale oR ” %) 25 Ee |e] Be oR” OPA) 26.7 x fe) GIA ATE (IAB) 61.6 J | I if ay it COPL/B) 88.3 KRARMWH RM CAR) 73, 980 mM ONG MOA x LO" CHIE) 3804.7 ak | AR RLTIMS RO Ct) 220 mt | ak RRR Y (er) 334 M foE R -R 3) 25 kK} (8 G8 oR U8PL/tE) 83. 6 LE wl} fm ase] C1)! (er) 14.1 gE CI)" (GRE 190.2 mia atl Cl) 8 Cer) 197.7 CD) (ERA) 273.8 ik (tok RMR (Lm) 86, 562 iE TM Awe BR CK) | BiTx 108 WILT Sv hRWSR ' Ct 7A) 260 ak | i (Ek RA ER arg) 783. HT mI CM 24 K yoo ot ePLtE) 190.4 itt | SE mage) C1)” Cer sey 24.5 te | E CI) ' (GHL/5E) 40.9 mis oak] C1) 1 (apg) 214.9 CI)" (Rn /sE) 231.3 ik | Lit, MUGS Om (nt) 45, 900 t| ¢ i @ ft (ni) 15, 300 xk\ m if & & (a) 3 R| ot i WR Cem) 189 i KE OHI (9) 20 fF 3 ROFL) 37.8 LH. ft Wat (nt ASB) 1,041, 940 ie ” (t AB) 93, 980 fe} Lo. 18 eit (nt/4E) | 1,016, 280 Ik ” Ct ASE) 72, 160 x fal Li, 9a (38) 2° x) Ro wm we (2A) 410 Reon bh CL eu) 8 LH, OcERERe |= (BIB) 81 Mi x 1)27-1-48H 7IY bh RHE : 3508 /SE 2) FA NUGT + 0. SOBN arf (NG) /Nrt (GIl2) tuft + SCHR) 3) #7-1-4 2800 ALT: STARZ) AT-NWI77I— 30.6 5) #17-1-78R 6) GGG : MAPA/Not. 1571/1000kcal Hit: SCAR2) T)GRALGZ : 4. SkMh/N nf (CH) 8) CARL) OU MRIS AR, MAE L TAXUTL AT-NITFIZI— 30.9 9) 4#7-1-7898 10) 7 0N C1) 3FA/Kh (I) 5 FA/kth 11) 27-1-4B 12) 57 FEAL TAN =0. GTRWh/ 2 (LHl2) =9. 44kWh/ke (LH) 13) 207-1-48 14) Usa + SCAK2) AT-WI7II— 30.8 15) #27-1-728898 16) T20@F x [ IT) RT-1-7£9 18) SELLA fal = A fi x 1. 025, 19) 7g SABRI it 20) I Ab (CAL): ELI SEM SAP ROE 15, 300nt & } xX 3a 20, 000 nt A TEISAN | pal AN AIR UOUIDE GROUP COMPANY Base Coat/ Basic Economic Comparisons ENO MARE Ii 8 x RR Si = fm vo — B” DASHME A : 199011 CED) us$—fy 130FL/US $ 2) : 1596 CA$—A I5A/US $ 3)48 + VAT AAT AE AR KW wD AR S)ELMARIBEB + 1096 Re Be fit 3508 /4E, 8400h/2F SMR : 5 96 LHi9 va 3508 /4E x0, 85° = 297 B/E (LH fax) HR Sh 1 Sl eH oR UL gy vA-Bit” 40, 000 nt Ul 9 vy — 2 Li BELL 73, 980t/SF Lah 72, 1601/4 7h He BUS A (i AL TKI RRL 2301/8 ak TR AR? 220t/B TRUCE” 2601/8 TEISAN | ue J (Ao AUR UQUIDE GROUP COMPANY Tankers SpreiReations <40,000n LH ii AO + Rik > 1. GENERAL: The vessel to be a single screw diesel driven 40,000 n3 Liquied Nydrogen (LHg) carrier of Hitsubishi-Hoss Rosenberg Verft spherical tank type, suitable for carrying Lz of minimum temperature of ~253°C and maximum specific gravity of 0.10 near atmospheric pressure. Boil-off gas to be burut at incinerators to maintain cargo tank pressure less than the design pressure during voyage. Attached Outline Arrangement to be referred to. 2. Principal dimensions: Length, o.a. +e. abt. 232.0 m Length, b.p. ses 222.0 m Breadth, mld. cee 32.2 m Depth, mld. cee 17.0 m Design draught, mld. eee 9.00 m 3. Capacities: Cargo capacity (excluding ++. abt. 40,000 n3 dome, at -253°C 100% full) Bunker capacity «+. abt. 2,200 m3 Ballast capacity (including ... abt. 20,000 m3 peak tanks) 4. Deadweight: at design draught “a. abt. 25,000 t (SG = 0.07) 5. Gross tonnage (International admeasurement)... abt. 43,000 6. Complement: +++ 30 persons 7. Machinery: a) Main Engine Hodel & No. of set «+. Mitsubishi-7UEC60LS «e- Ll set Maximum rating (BHP) ~-. 16,800 PS x 100 rpm Normal rating ++. 15,120 PS x 96.5 rpm b) Fuel consumption rate. wee abt. 43.7 metric tons/day at normal rating (H.F.O. - HCV = 10,280 Keal/kg) —_ TEISAN | AN Al UQUIDE GROUP COMPANY 8. 10. il. Electric generator: a) Diesel generator b) Emergency generator Speed & Endurance: Speed on design draught at normal rating of main engine with 152 sea margin Endurance Cargo tank: Number Type" Design condition Temperature Pressure Specific gravity Material Tank insulation Boil-off rate Cargo handling system a) Cargo pump b) High duty gas compressor c) Low duty gas compressor ° d) Heater e) Vaporizer £) Inert gas generator g) Incinerator 2 sets 1 set abt. 17.0 knots abt. 16,000 sea miles Six (6) tanks Mitsubishi-HMoss Rosenberg Verft spherical tank type -253°C 0.25 kg/cm? & L.o kg/cm? (for discharging) O.t Aluminium alloy 5083-0 Perlite with vacuum abt. 0.142%/day of cargo volume of 40,000 m3 Not to be provided. Pressure discharge system to be applied. 2 sets 2 sets 2 sets 2 sets 1 set 2 sets: These principal particulars may be altered after further investigation and by future rule requirements. Z TEISAN AN AIR UOUIDE GROUP COMPANY f NO.& \ 0 wos \ NOK No.3 a Na. f C.Tk C.T« C.Tr Cc. TK Cc. Te 4 Le A Ky A i th ae. -WesIr a LH eee hed m2 yo wh winsdy saunniv | (| aady ( bape ! "= IVY7byt— RAB IVT Lo t— ¥* WF % HB PYDVYVATA 1891-6 A mage TEISAN AN AIR UQUIDE GROUP COMPANY Ks.0084 STUN, FT? -*F IN, C 1.04 #10"! bool Jw he &) hab NNER SPHERE (ALUM. OR ST, STEEL $18 OUTER SPHENE {CsReOM STEEL) “\_ a Foutoation PRES : J Mnene NECZSEany) THICKHESS® 36 11. (1140—) t-—~ / PEAUTE DISULATION IN- V(b BS tfrty Py VECUUM LEVEL = ROR fo nee , 10 MICRONS ON LESS) \\ \A XQ TRU HAN—-S 4 }HEWRS YD AGE ERE Co.rss keel he ec ) Ke 93 BTU/HR=FT~*F/N. ne WHER TANK (ALUM. OF ST.STEELD QASE INSULATION (FORUGLASS; r—4ein AUER K+.0003 BTUsINEET2-PF/IN, To 0025 BTU/MR-FT2*F/IN (0.17 ~ 3.1 x16“ keefabee ) INNER SPHERE TI® (ALUM. OR ST. STEEL) OUTER SPHERE 78 (CARSON STEEL} THICKNESS *31N. (76.1 ==) SUPERINSULATION DR EASES (VACUUM LEVEL ASK 1X10"4 MICRONS +, OR LESS) 10°" Tere MF, es - /\ \CIWHERE HECESSARy] ! \\ \ \ rf \\ {WBS RSMAS YF W345 FOR MAAN PERLITE INSULATION (OR NYOROGEN CAU#0R hE REET) I— THICKNESS* 57M. (7448 en) (10 PREVEIT Ho con @) 90°F 6 60% RH} ab ak j= CUTER TANK (CANON STEEL) a 1 Tene ANCHOR . we o;o 0 ° fest Lon Es ! {WMINE NECESSANY I, BOLTS 3} I—— FOUNDATION (can Ge ELevaATeo) © 0. O-— HEATING \ COILS \ \ DOUDLE WALL FURGED PERLITE INSULATION TRF EAS VO GbR ERE RARS YF) ra TEISAN fiend AN Ait OLIDE CROUP COMPANY Liquified Uyaroqe, Tanker + Preduct lanker- Comparison, BALIKRY VA-ETOSYD bY VA-BBLE LH. TANKER Dimensions © ETE LENGTH WIDTH (m) DEPTII FULL DRAUGTII TOTAL WEIGHT ( ton) CARGO VOLUME (m?) CARGO WEIGHT ( ton) CARGO BALLAST FUEL eee need. 1991-€ PERSONAL LH2 IMPORT IDEA STEP | YEAR | VOLUME/Y| FEED STOCK TRANSPORT 1ST Oe GAS ISO 40’ CONTAINER puectronysts | VZTH LNG TANKER [ OND. ELECTROLYSIS LH2 SPECIAL BARGE | I DM acral. TO AN MEAS TS 3RD ELECTROLYSIS LH, TANKER I INI NIC NINN MRR RNA me mM 4TH ELECTROLYSIS |TECHNO-SUPER LINER ileal Wa | NVSISL 1991-6 Appendix 4 Recommendations of Dr. Yoshimi Ishihara Recommendations of Dr. Yoshimi Ishihara Should be decided the scale of the Hydrogen Project - for industrial use or for energy- For energy use, it is necessary to have as large a scale as the LNG projects undergoing today. As is a super big project, much more hydraulic power than exists today in Alaska is necessary. . ; For the cost to be imported into Japan - According to my estimation, the cost of LH2 will be decreased to 50-100% ‘expensive level than that of the same scale of LNG project via steam reformed natural gas. Hydrogen cost by electrolysis of H2O will be strongly dependent _ upon the cost of electric power. Benefit of oxygen byproduct - Byproduct oxygen may be used for combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. This process will be developed to be the cheapest CO2 ‘removing process from the combustion gases. Cheaper LH2 will enlarge its usage, especially industrial and transportation ways - Hydrogen has many beneficial characteristics such as the cleanest energy, popular reducing agent for chemical processes, easily obtainable deep freezing temperature, and the lightest fuel. Threfore, if the price of LH2 decreases to as low as energy use level, various usage areas will be developed. Final usage of LH2 - LH2 should be used for industrial and transportation at the final stage. Energy use for power generation is necessary to decrease the cost of LH2. For power generation, various energy sources should be used and LH2 should be one of them.