HTAP Holds its 18th Semiannual Meeting at Sunline Transit Agency

A talk by Sunline general manager Dick Cromwell and a facility tour conducted by Sunline employee Skip Haynes both clearly demonstrated the company’s commitment to hydrogen. Since 1994, Sunline has operated the first 100 percent CNG bus fleet and is now aggressively moving to hydrogen-fueled buses. The company presently operates two hythane buses, which it intends to convert to hydrogen fuel cell buses, and plans to operate ten hydrogen fuel cell buses by 2003 under the California Fuel Cell Partnership. Hydrogen is produced on site by both electrolysis and partial oxidation plants.

Three overarching themes dominated the meeting agenda: fuel choice, scenario planning, and coordination. The themes were first discussed in HTAP’s 1999 Report to Congress and are now being pursued by three HTAP committees. In addition, the Panel heard presentations by senior DOE managers Bob Dixon (Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of Power Technologies), Dick Bradshaw (Special Assistant for Policy to the Assistant Secretary of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy), and Sig Gronich (Team Leader for the DOE Hydrogen Program), as well as talks by Bob Mauro on NHA activities and Jean Simmonet of Hydrogen Burner Technologies on California Hydrogen Business Council activities.

Roberta Nichols, chair of the HTAP fuel choice committee, led the first theme session, which focused on the issue of onboard hydrogen versus other fuels for fuel cell vehicles. Carol Hammil of NREL updated the Panel on the results of a September workshop on the Blueprint for Hydrogen infrastructure, a DOE-industry project addressing key safety and infrastructure issues regarding hydrogen-fueled vehicles. Action items from the workshop included development of a web-based safety database, formation of an infrastructure working group, and planned DOE solicitations for hydrogen storage containers and a verification hydrogen fueling facility. Shannon Baxter of the California Air Resources Board updated the Panel on the California Fuel Cell Partnership, and Susan Leach of Hydrogen 2000 showed the new hydrogen video, “Hydrogen: The Matter of Safety.”

Discussion on fuel choice included comments from Bob Mauro that we lack a clearly defined roadmap of how to get from where we are today to widespread onboard hydrogen use, and from Sig Gronich who felt that a tenfold reduction in current fuel cell costs will drive the creation of the necessary refueling infrastructure. Sig Gronich also expressed his belief that the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle’s key advantage is that it allows automakers use of a single configuration worldwide, regardless of the starting fuel.

In his talk, Bob Dixon encouraged HTAP to continue its scenario planning effort, seeing scenario planning as crucial to avoiding past poor choices in renewable energy planning. The meeting’s scenario planning session was led by scenario planning committee co-chair Henry Wedaa. It included a presentation by Harold Chambers of the DOE National Energy Technology Lab on the Office of Fossil Energy’s Vision 21, plus a number of brief talks aimed at laying groundwork for the scenario planning workshop to follow the HTAP meeting. Under Vision 21, the decarbonization of the nation’s coal and natural gas reserves on a massive scale, followed by CO2 sequestration, could result in the production of enormous quantities of hydrogen. Sig Gronich commented that he envisions that hydrogen production will evolve in two phases: first, distributed hydrogen production from small plants, to be followed by centralized production, largely from coal, under Vision 21.

Jim Ohi of NREL described the game plan for the upcoming scenario planning workshop, following which a number of speakers briefly overviewed the following recent hydrogen meetings, whose results might provide clues for scenario planning: the Munich HYFORUM conference (overviewed by Dave Nahmias), the BP Amoco hydrogen infrastructure workshop, the Aspen Clean Energy Roundtable (both overviewed by Cathy Gregoire Padró of NREL), the Florida Hydrogen Summit meeting (by Dave Bruderly of Bruderly Engineering), and the Portland Fuel Cell Seminar (by John O’Sullivan of HTAP). For example, one HYFORUM conference speaker expressed the vision that, “We are moving from a world of fossil fuels to a world of electrons and protons.” Another said that, “In the future, hydrogen will become the only complement to electricity.”

The second day of the meeting was largely devoted to the third theme, coordination. This broad theme includes the coordination of hydrogen activities across the federal government, between federal and state governments, and between the U.S. and foreign governments. It also includes communicating about hydrogen to industry and government leaders and to the public. Moreover, it includes the reauthorization of the Hydrogen Future Act. HTAP coordination committee chair Helena Chum led the coordination session. As part of his hydrogen program report, Sig Gronich enumerated the program’s numerous ongoing coordination efforts with other federal organizations, including the DOE Office of Transportation Technologies, the National Energy Technology Lab, the Department of Transportation, and the DOE Bioenergy Initiative. Helena Chum reprised her HYFORUM conference paper on funding of hydrogen-related R&D; across the federal government, noting that FY 2000 funding amounted to about US$140 million, not including defense and space funding. She also noted that funding for hydrogen storage, infrastructure, and codes and standards R&D; appears to be inadequate. Via long distance speakerphone from Washington, D.C., Jasper Mohiudinn, staffer for Senator Daniel Akaka (D, Hawaii), reviewed progress on reauthorization of the Hydrogen Future Act. Senator Akaka recently introduced Senate bill S 3196 for the reauthorization.

The need to get the hydrogen message out to both government leaders and the public was a topic of much discussion. Bob Dixon urged HTAP to reach out and continue to tell the hydrogen clean energy story to a broader audience, and stated that we needed to integrate hydrogen thinking into the federal energy agenda in order to move hydrogen into the mainstream. Dick Bradshaw commented that hydrogen continues to be seen as playing off in a field of its own. Specifically, Bradshaw noted a lack of a hydrogen community voice in the emerging Natural Gas-Renewable Energy Alliance, and encouraged the community, including NHA, to get more involved. Bob Miller of Air Products, a member of the audience, commented that, since hydrogen is not an energy source, the hydrogen community must be proactive in working with the energy source groups—renewable energy, natural gas, and coal. Bob Mauro noted that there has been a decrease in emphasis in the DOE hydrogen program in the area of public awareness. It was agreed that the numerous validation projects in the program offer opportunities for promoting public and government awareness. But it was also agreed that public awareness is the responsibility of many entities, not just the hydrogen program. For example, in California the Fuel Cell Partnership and Sunline Transit are making significant contributions to enhancing awareness.

The meeting closed with agreement among the HTAP members to continue the work of the three committees—fuel choice, scenario planning, and coordination—and to consider further actions to address the awareness issue. The upcoming spring 2001 HTAP meeting is planned for 5-6 March, and will be in conjunction with the NHA annual meeting.

©2000. All Rights Reserved. A Publication of the National Hydrogen Association.
This material may not be reproduced in any form without permission.

Home Page • Return to NHA News Index