Hard cell masking reality?
September 15th 2009 The materials handling sector is seen by the hydrogen power industry as a key future market for its technology. However, Jungheinrich's Bill Goodwin, isn't convinced...
Hydrogen is seen by many as the fuel of the future, but as things stand, it is not a perfect fuel. There are several reasons for this and one of them is environmentallybased: although 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, nuclear power and renewable sources such as wind, solar, tidal, geo-thermal and bio-mass.
The use of fossil fuels in production is counter-productive to the benefits that are central to hydrogen's attraction.Wind, solar and tidal-based schemes cannot provide the kind of energy levels needed for mass production. Using crops to provide bio-fuels instead of foodstuffs is ethically questionable. The use of nuclear fuels is, arguably, more attractive, but given UK government inaction, it may not be an option for British users.
 At present, any firm switching to hydrogen forklifts won't see a return for at least 10 years... 
Hydrogen therefore only becomes truly attractive once it can be produced with zero, or minimal, greenhouse gas emissions and at a cheaper price than traditional fuels.
Chicken and egg
Another major issue is distribution infrastructure. In principal hydrogen could be supplied to filling stations via pipeline. But currently only around 1,000km of hydrogen piping exists throughout the whole of Europe. As a result, hydrogen is largely transported by road using tankers, adding to its carbon footprint.
This lack of infrastructure has curbed the automotive industry's enthusiasm for hydrogen: Manufacturers are unwilling to produce vehicles without fueling infrastructure and fuel producers are unwilling to build infrastructure without certainty that vehicles requiring those fuels will be in operation.
Hydrogen as a forklift fuel?
Proponents of hydrogen as a power source for forklift trucks contend that it offers a number of benefits over the traditional forklift power sources and that it represents a more viable solution than other 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 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 and political correctness – A switch to a greener forklift power source provides firms with a potentially valuable marketing tool by being perceived to be 'doing the right thing' environmentally.
Well supported claims?
But are these claims based on robust and well supported calculations? Advocates reckon 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 said to take 20 minutes to charge. This is not a realistic comparison. Electric trucks in Jungheinrich's range take little more than 10 minutes to charge and AC power extends the time between charges significantly.
Another claim 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 – the space, it is suggested, can be converted for additional storage. But 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, neither do modern AC-powered machines.
The cost benefits claimed also require further analysis: Jungheinrich's research indicates that to install the necessary fuel cell, charging and storage facilities to operate a fleet of 200 hydrogen trucks would require a capital investment at least 50 per cent higher than traditional fuels. Also, in many prohydrogen cost comparisons currently doing the rounds, the published payback figures are based on a forklift fleet requiring three batteries per truck – a wholly inaccurate assumption.
It is Jungheinrich's belief that many of the payback claims made for hydrogen are based on hypothesis.Without substantial, accurate, research, they are unacceptable. Typically, a payback period of two and a half years is quoted for the installation of a hydrogen powered forklift fleet. Jungheinrich 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, hydrogen's advocates models quote hydrogen 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? While the government has introduced schemes to encourage uptake of energy efficient equipment, fuel cells do not currently qualify for tax relief. However, 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 much of the published prohydrogen research is based on US business models.
Is the technology readily available?
Quite simply, no. Extensive and vigorous research is required if key issues such as energy and cost efficient mass hydrogen production, site supply problems and health and safety concerns about the refueling process are to be properly addressed.
Questions also surround 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 spare parts supply chain – doubts remain over their capabilities.
Alternatives: methanol and lithium
Jungheinrich's engineers are working on numerous power sources, one of which, is methanol. A liquid alcohol fuel primarily produced from natural gas, methanol can use conventional storage, distribution and transport infrastructures with minimal modification, while motors running on methanol can achieve high thermal efficiencies and performance levels.
The technology required to run engines on methanol is not new – its been used by motor racing community in the US for some years – and Jungheinrich is currently testing a range of tow tractors that run on the fuel. Results are encouraging and a prototype methanol-powered forklift is not far away.
We believe the methanol solution represents one of the best options and is particularly suited for use with small trucks such as low level order pickers and powered pallet trucks – which make up the bulk of fleets in the retail and logistics sectors.
Another alternative is Lithium. Compared to conventional lead-acid batteries, lithium-ion (Li-Ion) power appears to offer a number of beneficial characteristics, plus environmental and operational advantages.
With the environment in mind, for instance, it produces zero emissions and no harmful materials are used in the battery. Li- Ion technology does not use restricted pollutants such as cadmium, lead, mercury or sulphuric acid.
The Li-Ion battery has twice the life and can store three times the energy of a lead acid battery. Furthermore, Li-Ion batteries are far more energy efficient when charging and releasing power when compared to traditional lead-acid batteries.
There are also operational benefits with Lithium. Charging a Li-Ion battery is quick and enables longer operational hours which makes operations more flexible and reduces the need for additional batteries. The batteries require virtually no maintenance at all, have a long life – which reduces the need to replace them – and provide significantly more power and energy than current alternatives, resulting in better performance and higher uptimes.
The size of Li-Ion batteries can be reduced dramatically, enabling flexible forklift design. During charging and discharging energy loss is reduced and less energy is needed to fully charge the Li-Ion battery. Extended working time also results from larger recovering energy from regenerative braking.
Jungheinrich's research indicates that for most truck users who run a five to six day shift, Li-Ion batteries represent a very efficient power source, both environmentally and operationally.
We are actively working on the development of this technology – it featured in the concept truck that formed the centre piece of our stand at the 2008 materials handling exhibition in Hannover.
Hydrogen: what needs to be done
Much of the research into hydrogen as a forklift fuel has been undertaken in the USA and performance comparisons are against DC-powered forklifts. The use of modern, AC-powered machines in the same tests would, at a stroke, devalue the productivity gains claimed for hydrogen. For a greater understanding of the viability of hydrogen as a power source for the European materials handling equipment market, factory based tests where a truck operates for 3,000 hours in three months have to be undertaken. Field trials should then be set up with five units in operation for three months with a temporary supply of hydrogen within Europe.
Ultimately, these two trials should be followed by an operational trial in Europe where, say, 200 hydrogen powered units operate at a single site for a period of years. Only once such a process has been undertaken and the results analysed will anyone be able to claim that hydrogen-powered forklifts are truly market ready.
Conclusion
Various stakeholders 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 MHE have yet to be undertaken.
So, the lead acid battery currently remains the industry standard forklift power source. Going forward, in the short term, Li-Ion batteries will be available with the benefits of rapid charging, long running times and compact dimensions. In the medium term – 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 ten years, and possibly longer still. More articles from Jungheinrich UK Ltd: | 
