Where am I? > Home > Publications > Articles > Environment > A reliable source?
A reliable source?
The logistics industry is an essential part of the European economy, playing a pivotal role in domestic and international commerce.
The forklift truck remains at the heart of every logistics operation and the world’s leading forklift manufacturers are focused on finding new ways of delivering products that offer improved safety, productivity and, of course, environmental benefits.
A significant proportion of the global forklift industry’s combined R&D budget is - like the automotive sector - currently being channelled towards the development of more productive, energy efficient and environmentally friendly fuel sources.
As part of this work, a number of forklift manufacturers have been investigating the viability of hydrogen. Their efforts appear to have thrown up some very encouraging results and now hydrogen’s proponents contend that, as a forklift power source, it offers both productivity and ecological benefits.
However, closer analysis of the assumptions that support many of the claims currently being made for hydrogen raises questions marks over it’s suitability as a materials handling fleet power source and, indeed, over the long term benefits to the environment of forklift users switching en masse to hydrogen powered trucks.
Background
With continually rising oil prices and growing concern for the global environment, the hydrogen fuel cell is considered a potentially viable forklift power source.
Essentially, a hydrogen fuel cell is an energy conversion device that converts its fuel (hydrogen) into electrical energy to provide an electric motor with electricity. Research on hydrogen fuel cells has been ongoing for several years – decades, in fact.
Hydrogen is seen by many as the fuel of the future: it is odourless, non-toxic and safe to breathe, it packs a lot of energy per pound and, when used to power a fuel cell, the only product left over is water.
However, despite its apparently impeccable ‘green’ credentials, as things stand, hydrogen is not considered a perfect fuel. There are several reasons for this and one of them is environmentally-based: in simple terms, although it is the most abundant fuel on the planet, hydrogen has to be produced as a compressed gas or cooled to a liquid form to be usable. These processes involve the use of other sources of energy and, at the moment, the sources tend to be limited to a choice between traditional fossil fuels (coal, crude oil, natural gas etc), nuclear power and renewable sources such as wind, solar, tidal, geo-thermal and Bio-mass .
The use of fossil fuels in hydrogen production is clearly counter-productive to the benefits that are central to hydrogen’s attraction, while wind, solar and tidal-based schemes cannot provide anywhere near the kind of energy levels needed for mass production and the growing of crops to provide bio-fuels instead of foodstuffs is ethically questionable. The use of nuclear fuels is, arguably more attractive, but given the UK government reluctance to embrace the nuclear option, it is less suitable for British users.
It is widely accepted that hydrogen will only become truly attractive as a fuel once it can be produced in such a way that causes zero, or minimal, greenhouse gas emissions and, of course, at a cheaper price than traditional fuels. That scenario remains some years in the future.
Hydrogen distribution
Aside from the problems and doubts surrounding hydrogen production, one of the main reasons why it has not emerged as a serious alternative to established power sources is the lack of infrastructure to distribute it to the point of use.
In principal hydrogen could be supplied to filling stations via pipeline – although there is currently only around 1000km of hydrogen piping throughout the whole of Europe. As a result, hydrogen is largely transported by road using tankers that use up energy and are polluting.
This lack of distribution infrastructure has had a significant impact on the automotive industry’s enthusiasm for hydrogen. Simply, car manufacturers are unwilling to produce vehicles without an in-place fueling infrastructure and fuel producers are unwilling to build that infrastructure without some certainty that vehicles requiring those fuels will be in operation.
Hydrogen as a forklift fuel?
In addition to claims about its environmental advantages, devotees of the use of hydrogen as an alternative power source for forklift trucks contend that it offers a number of benefits over the traditional forklift power sources – electricity, gas and diesel – and, indeed, that it represents a more viable solution than many of the other new power sources - such as Methanol, Lithium-Ion and hybrid trucks - that are currently under investigation.
The most frequently used arguments in favour of hydrogen include:
• Increased productivity – Hydrogen fuel cells do not require battery changes and, it is often claimed, can be refueled in two to three minutes. Also, hydrogen powered trucks apparently do not, experience ‘voltage drop’ towards the end of a shift.
• Cost - Hydrogen-powered materials handling equipment is usually said to be cheaper to run than electricity, gas and diesel-driven alternatives.
• Tax incentives – There are numerous UK Government and EU funded tax initiatives to encourage companies to reduce their carbon output.
• Marketing benefits – A switch to a greener forklift power source would give any company a potentially valuable marketing tool.
• Political correctness – No company can afford not to be seen to be addressing the environmental issue and the use of hydrogen is cited as a great way to be perceived to be ‘doing the right thing.’
Well supported claims?
But are these claims based on robust and well supported calculations? Perhaps the most regularly recited productivity benefit claimed involves a reduction in battery change time. Hydrogen’s advocates state that refueling a hydrogen powered lift truck takes little more than three minutes. In frequently quoted comparisons between the charging times required to top-up an electric-powered truck and a hydrogen-driven alternative, electric trucks are usually said to take 20 minutes to charge. In Jungheinrich’s experience this is not a realistic comparison. Electric trucks in our range take little more than 10 minutes to charge and the use of AC power extends the time between charges significantly.
Another productivity bonus claimed for hydrogen revolves around the chance to reduce the amount of space used within the warehouse or distribution centre for the charging process. This can be an attractive argument – after all, the space, it is suggested, can be converted for additional storage. However, in our experience, this point only really applies to new build sites. Existing charging bays are seldom suitable for racked storage – making their transition into an extension of the warehouse difficult to achieve. Furthermore, the removal of the traditional battery charging bay can only really be considered if all trucks and other equipment on site are Hydrogen powered.
The hydrogen community likes to point out that hydrogen powered trucks do not experience ‘voltage drop’ towards the end of a shift. In truth, modern AC-powered machines and trucks powered by today’s lead acid battery technology have no voltage drop problems.
The cost benefits claimed for hydrogen also require further analysis. To put in place the infrastructure to refuel forklift truck fleets using hydrogen requires considerable investment. Jungheinrich’s research indicates that to install the necessary fuel cell, charging and storage facilities necessary to operate a fleet of 200 forklift trucks on hydrogen, would require a capital investment at least 50 per cent higher than if traditional fuels are used.
It is also worth noting that in many pro-hydrogen cost comparisons currently ‘doing the rounds’, the published payback figures are based on a forklift fleet requiring three batteries per truck – which is clearly not a realistic or in any way accurate assumption.
It is Jungheinrich’s belief that, currently, many of the payback claims made for hydrogen are based on hypothesis that, without more substantial research to back them up, simply can not be accepted.
To achieve a more accurate indication of the likely payback of a switch to hydrogen it is essential to vary the assumptions of the ‘hydrogen community.’ Typically, a payback period of two and a half years is quoted for the installation of a hydrogen powered forklift fleet. Jungheinirch contends that at the present time, any company switching to hydrogen–powered forklift trucks will not see a return on investment for at least ten years if typical UK operational parameters are used.
Furthermore, within the payback model hydrogen’s advocates use, hydrogen is quoted at eight US dollars per kilogramme. At present prices it would require a user to agree a ten year contract with a supplier to achieve this kind of rate.
With the payback figures highly questionable, perhaps a move to hydrogen might bring tax advantages?
The UK Government has introduced a number of schemes to encourage businesses to invest in low carbon, energy-saving equipment but, at present, fuel cells are not classed as fuel saving equipment and therefore investment in them does not qualify for tax relief. Fuel cells might be considered for ‘compliance status’ and consequent tax benefits in 2012 when a carbon tax is set to be introduced.
Based on 200 trucks operating in a typical distribution centre Jungheinrich projects that the use of hydrogen fuel cells will result in a carbon tax saving of circa £20,000 a year from 2012.
There are more Government-backed incentives for switching to hydrogen in the United States and, it should be noted that much of the published pro-hydrogen research is based on US business models.
Is the technology readily available?
Quite simply the answer is no. There have been many false dawns in the Fuel Cell and hydrogen sector, perhaps due to the eagerness of researchers and politicians alike to find solutions to the very pressing challenges of energy security and climate change. At the current time, it is clear that extensive and vigorous research is still required if key issues such as energy and cost efficient mass hydrogen production, site supply problems and – with Hydrogen’s critics pointing out that it needs to be stored in a secure system, like petrol and gas – health and safety concerns about the refueling process, are to be properly addressed
But there are also question marks surrounding the after market support and service back up available through established hydrogen and hydrogen fuel cell suppliers. The ‘hydrogen community’s’ skills base must be developed and - given the lack of service network and absence of a spare parts supply chain - doubts remain over installation, servicing and repair capabilities.
Conclusion
Various stakeholders – including academia, institutions, technology start ups and a few large corporate players – have been investigating the use of hydrogen for some 20 years.
Progress has been slow. Indeed, the automotive sector, which at one point was an enthusiastic exponent of the possibilities of hydrogen, has moved away from the technology in recent years.
The automotive industry’s apparent lack of interest in hydrogen-power has forced the ‘hydrogen community’ to look at alternative adopters. The materials handling sector is seen by the hydrogen power industry as a key future market for its technology.
However, in Jungheinrich’s opinion, comprehensive and reliable evaluations of the benefits of hydrogen as a fuel source for materials handling equipment have yet to be undertaken.
So, the lead acid battery currently remains the industry standard forklift power source. Going forward, in the short term, Lithium-Ion batteries will be available with the beneffits of rapid charging, long running times and compact dimensions. In the medium term – say, over the next two to three years – Methanol fuel cells will be widely available as a forklift power source.
Hydrogen could well prove viable as a forklift power source, but because of the issues that still surround it, hydrogen-powered forklifts will not be seen in any significant numbers in Europe for at least and possibly even ten years.
Whilst, in theory, driving a mixture of EU and domestic hours work over a week and sequence of daily driving periods should present no problem if properly organised and recorded, it still often leads to confusion and misunderstanding
LOOKING FOR A 3PL?
Use our FREE service to find the logistics partner that's right for you [more]
UKWA FORUM
Looking for a partner? Need new staff? Want advice from other members? Or just need a good moan [more]
ARE YOU A 3PL LOOKING TO GROW YOUR BUSINESS?
UKWA membership could help you meet your business objectives [more]
