What is your preferred form of Hydrogen? Gaseous or Liquid Hydrogen?

[Björn Lüssow]

Indeed, I think it relates to the use case plus the development and the systems on liquid hydrogen are only in the making.

[Brad Reams]

Bjorn, I agree. It will be easier and cheaper to move the hydrogen as a gas. Although, there are starting to be some positive results of boil off tests which will make the refueling transportation much easier.

[Ganapathy Iyer]

My preferred form of Hydrogen is “Available”

[Ganapathy Iyer]

A choice between Liquid Hydrogen and Gaseous Hydrogen is more of an infrastructure based choice than a OEM’s choice

I don’t think that majority of the world is ready for Liquid Hydrogen

[Brad Reams]

Ganapathy,

I agree with you, gaseous is much more ready to be utilized than liquid hydrogen. When there is a push for liquid hydrogen to be more available, the cost of liquifaction will reduce through new technological advances and efficiencies just as we have seen with other green technologies.

[Georg Woerner]

I´d extend the question by “chemical stored in feedstock” !?

I´ve learned that depends on the given application and infrastructure.

Mobile applications land based: cars and trucks gasified hydrogen on different pressure levels
Infrastructure is a grid and gas stations

Mobile applications non land based: vessels chemical stored in liquid feedstock ammonia or methanol
Infrastructure is a buffer tank system combined with a reformer

Stationary applications: gasified hydrogen for FC CHP systems
Infrastructure is a pipeline grid

Large scale hydrogen production and transport – disconnected from consumer application: liquified hydrogen e.g. wind power plants and solar power plants

[Brian Hudson]

Liquid Hydrogen. Low Pressure, High Purity, Compact

[Ace Fujiwara]

Compressed hydrogen is the most economic way to go. All of the technical infrastructure and standards are ready.

Liquid H2, chemical carriers all suffer from the same problem of very high energy expenditure in liquefaction or hydrogen discharge phase, making the transportation of the hydrogen product carbon intensive. (remember IMO rules on ship’s carbon intensity…)

Methanol and ammonia makes sense when the end destination use does not require cracking to extract hydrogen product – this incurs higher landed delivered prices, if hydrogen is to be utilized as a direct drop-in energy substitute.