Multinational chemical company Linde has announced plans to build the world’s largest proton exchange membrane electrolyser, which will produce green hydrogen.
The 24-megawatt electrolyser will be housed at the Leuna Chemical Complex in Germany. Located on the western outskirts of Leipzig, Leuna is one of Germany’s largest chemical industrial sites and is co-owned by Linde along with companies such as Total and BASF.
Green sky thinking: the rise of hydrogen flight
From there, Linde will distribute liquefied green hydrogen to refuelling stations and other industrial customers across the region. According to the company, the amount of hydrogen produced by the PEM electrolyser will be enough to fuel around six hundred fuel cell buses, driving a combined 40 million kilometres per year and saving up to 40,000 tons of carbon dioxide tailpipe emissions.
“Clean hydrogen is a cornerstone of the German and EU strategies to address the challenge of climate change,” said Jens Waldeck, Region Europe West president at Linde.
“It is part of the solution to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions across many industries, including chemicals and refining. This project shows that electrolyser capacity continues to scale up and it is a stepping stone towards even larger plants.”
PEM electrolysis has an electrical efficiency of about 80 per cent in working application, in terms of hydrogen produced per unit of electricity used to drive the reaction. At times of high grid output, excess power from wind and solar farms can be used to separate hydrogen from water. This hydrogen essentially acts as a form of green energy storage, which can later be used by fuel cell vehicles with zero emissions at the tailpipe.
Set to begin production in the second half of 2022, the new electrolyser will be built by ITM Linde Electrolysis GmbH, a joint venture between Linde and ITM Power. According to Linde, the production unit will complement its already existing hydrogen assets, which include the world’s first high-purity hydrogen storage cavern, and an extensive pipeline network of approximately 1,000 kilometres to supply its customers. To date, the multinational has installed close to 200 hydrogen fueling stations and 80 hydrogen electrolysis plants worldwide.
Again I sense a danger of other countries going ahead compared to the UK. The use of any excess electricity to manufacture hydrogen is a must based on two points. The first is a means of storing electricity, therefore no need to stop generating when there is a low need. Secondly, there will be a need for hydrogen to power heavy transport, replacement of diesel trains and a good possibility to use this fuel in aircraft to make them more environmentally friendly, let alone there will be a use for automobiles. Battery power in many cases is not suitable and the infrastructure is expensive and unsafe with cables all over the place for home charging. Also, the public will require a system of fueling cars similar to that which exists with petrol.
Just how green is this? If it is using intermittent wind power then there are potential issues on constant production. Using thermal power must dilute the green credentials and claimed benefits. Why not use the electricity as the input for transport applications and avoid the cost and complication of H2 production, storage, distribution and dispensing. The infrastructure costs for H2 and other exotics being advocated tend to get overlooked.
A few years ago, it was revealed that worldwide sales of manuka honey exceeded world production by a factor of ~6x https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/riddle-of-how-1700-tons-of-manuka-honey-are-made-but-10000-are-sold/VZKV2O66WS65MQ4IOEKKCK7AKU/
How was this miracle achieved? Well quite simply, most of the honey was heavily adulterated or contained no manuka at all. Presumably someone signed a piece of paper to say it was the genuine article and everyone went along with it
I fear a similar situation will arise with green electricity. Everybody wants it to validate their green production process, electric vehicle charging point or environment-friendly home tariff; but unlike fake manuka honey, which could in principle be identified by careful chemical analysis, there is absolutely no way to distinguish between an electron produced by wind or by coal. There are always a few unscrupulous people willing to sign the all-important bits of paper – and the many more to connive with the deception, through ignorance or indifference
I think Alan Dutton’s comment accurately describes the benefits; when you can’t use the power, store it in a medium that can be moved to where it is needed for when it is needed.
BTW, there is already a gas distribution network in most countries, and in the UK, it has been adjusted at least once (to move from coal gas to natural gas), so another adjustment to transmit hydrogen is possible (and being tested), thus removing the need for immense electrical supply upgrades that would be necessary to replace the current natural gas supplies.
If you were working from first principles then electricity would be the way to go. So new house builds should have an electric heating solution built into them. However, for the millions of us that live in houses served by the Gas grid, changing a gas boiler for a fuel cell boiler that can work off Gas and eventually Hydrogen is the way to go. Replacing my gas combi boiler with a £2000-£3000 Fuel cell equivalent is cheaper than the £6000-£10000 to switch to pure electric.
I believe that Germany has a much greater capacity for storing natural gas, than the UK, which could be converted to storing hydrogen gas ( I am sure it is not stored as a liquid).
The storage is important so that when there is no surplus energy then demand can be satisfied.
I suspect that it would be possible to transport liquid hydrogen in suitable insulated tankers – but it would then need to be heated and pressurised for fuel tanks (of lorries and cars); alternatively gas pipelines might be modified (requiring higher working pressure and proofing against hydrogen embrittlement). Thus there are infrastructure requirements -at the very least storage that needs to be made or discovered.(old salt mines?) -these need to be sufficient (in the UK)
I was interested to see a comment about the need for stable power supply for electrolysers – as this could make sources of intermittent power irrelevant; but the question arises as to how steady and over what time period (daily?) power is required.
The article seems to focus on larger electric vehicles, for which I suspect, batteries would be to weighty or expensive – but there is also a potential for supplying domestic and industrial heat (as we are told that natural gas is going to be phased out).
So, at the very least there should be some scoping out of the size of possible hydrogen stores – both as a storage requirement as well as appropriate number of possible subterranean sites
I believe one of the largest uses for hydrogen in transport in the next few years could be in the rail industry, to replace the thousands of diesel locomotives seen all over the world. Borrowing on work done by Airbus into hydrogen-powered flight, I believe the average locomotive could store enough energy in the form of liquid hydrogen. Rolls-Royce have also developed a 2.5 MW generator thast can run on hydrogen. As Rolls-Royce own MTU, who supply a lot of diesel engines to the rail industry, I suspect they have the knowledge to integrate everything.
Hydrogen also has a big roll to play in the making of steel and cement.
I shan’t be selling my shares in ITM Power any time oon.
But then my first job was in ICI’s hydrogen factory at Runcorn
My thoughts exactly. We have the infrastructure, lets use it. Why not fill your fuel cell car from your gas main and then plug it into the house? Save a power station or two.