| Literature DB >> 31248099 |
Etienne Rivard1, Michel Trudeau2, Karim Zaghib3.
Abstract
Numerous reviews on hydrogen storage have previously been published. However, most of these reviews deal either exclusively with storage materials or the global hydrogen economy. This paper presents a review of hydrogen storage systems that are relevant for mobility applications. The ideal storage medium should allow high volumetric and gravimetric energy densities, quick uptake and release of fuel, operation at room temperatures and atmospheric pressure, safe use, and balanced cost-effectiveness. All current hydrogen storage technologies have significant drawbacks, including complex thermal management systems, boil-off, poor efficiency, expensive catalysts, stability issues, slow response rates, high operating pressures, low energy densities, and risks of violent and uncontrolled spontaneous reactions. While not perfect, the current leading industry standard of compressed hydrogen offers a functional solution and demonstrates a storage option for mobility compared to other technologies.Entities:
Keywords: Kubas-type hydrogen storage; hydrogen economy; hydrogen mobility; hydrogen storage; storage systems assessment
Year: 2019 PMID: 31248099 PMCID: PMC6630991 DOI: 10.3390/ma12121973
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Basic physico-chemical properties of hydrogen and natural gas.
| Property | Hydrogen | Natural Gas |
|---|---|---|
| Lower heating value (LHV, MJ/kg) | 120 [ | 52 [ |
| Higher heating value (HHV, MJ/kg) | 142 [ | 47 [ |
| Density at 273 K (kg/m3) | 0.09 [ | 0.65 [ |
| Boiling point at atmospheric pressure(K) | 20.3 [ | 111.2 [ |
| Liquid density (kg/m3) | 70.8 [ | 450.0 [ |
| Flammability concentration limits in air (vol %) | 4–75 [ | 5–15 [ |
| Diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s) | 0.61 [ | 0.16 [ |
Projected performance and cost of compressed automotive hydrogen storage systems compared to 2020 and ultimate DOE targets.
| Storage System Targets | Gravimetric Density System (wt %) | Volumetric Density System (MJ/L) | Cost ($/kWh) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current status (700 bar compressed) | 4.2 | 2.9 | 15 |
| 2020 | 4.5 | 3.6 | 10 |
| Ultimate | 6.5 | 6.1 | 8 |
Pressure vessel materials according to their type.
| Type | Materials | Typical Pressure (bar) | Cost ($/kg) | Gravimetric Density (wt %) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | All-metal construction | 300 | 83 | 1.7 |
| II | Mostly metal, composite overwrap in the hoop direction | 200 | 86 | 2.1 |
| III | Metal liner, full composite overwrap | 700 | 700 [ | 4.2 [ |
| IV | All-composite construction | 700 | 633 [ | 5.7 (Toyota Mirai) |
Figure 1Type-IV composite overwrapped hydrogen pressure vessel (source: Process Modeling Group, Nuclear Engineering Division. Argonne National Lab (ANL)). Reprinted from Ref. [67]; Copyright DOE 2017.
Figure 2Design schematic of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Gen-3 cryo-compressed H2 storage tank system. Reprinted from Ref. [90] with permission; Copyright Argonne National Laboratory 2009.
Figure 3Crystal structure of MOF-5. Reprinted from Ref. [106]; Copyright Wikipedia 2018.
Figure 4Computer simulated representation of 10 dihydrogen molecules attached to the manganese hydride basic compound in their possible binding sites. Basic compound represented as tubes while H2 appears as balls and sticks. Reprinted from Ref. [156]; Copyright Royal Society of Chemistry 2019.
Figure 5N-ethylcarbazole hydrogen uptake and release. [164].
Figure 6Haber–Bosch process summary [218].
Storage methods overview.
| Method | Gravimetric Energy Density (wt %) | Volumetric Energy Density (MJ/L) | Temperature (K) | Pressure (barg) | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compressed | 5.7 | 4.9 | 293 | 700 | Current industry standard |
| Liquid | 7.5 | 6.4 | 20 | 0 | Boil-off constitues major disadvantage |
| Cold/cryo compressed | 5.4 | 4.0 | 40–80 | 300 | Boil-off constitues major disadvantage |
| MOF | 4.5 | 7.2 | 78 | 20–100 | Attractive densities only at very low temperatures. |
| Carbon nanostructures | 2.0 | 5.0 | 298 | 100 | Volumetric density based on powder density of 2.1 g/mL and 2.0 wt % storage capacity. |
| Metal hydrides | 7.6 | 13.2 | 260–425 | 20 | Requires thermal management system. |
| Metal borohydrides | 14.9–18.5 | 9.8–17.6 | 130 | 105 | Low temperature, high pressure thermal management required |
| Kubas-type | 10.5 | 23.6 | 293 | 120 | |
| LOHC | 8.5 | 7 | 293 | 0 | Highly endo/exothermal requires processing plant and catalyst. Not suitable for mobility |
| Chemical | 15.5 | 11.5 | 298 | 10 | Requires SOFC fuel cell. |