More Hydrogen Maritime Trials Surface From Sargasso Sea – CleanTechnica

Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!

---

Recently I published a roundup of quite awful hydrogen maritime trial efforts, and ended with a request that if others knew of more, they should share. A few additional ones bubbled up and there were a couple of minor corrections and delightful additions. I encourage those who haven’t read the previous article to do so via the link above and then read this article.

Let’s return to the subject of much of the analysis in the recent article, the MF Hydra. As a reminder, it gets its hydrogen from 1,300 kilometers away in Germany. It’s actually a slightly longer trip than Google Maps suggested, as you can’t drive liquid hydrogen trucks through most tunnels in Europe because of the hazards, so it has to detour around Hamburg. The combination of the four truckloads driving at least two days in each direction — ferries have strict requirements and restrictions around liquid hydrogen trucks, so it’s quite possible that they will face delays there as well — the higher carbon electricity used to make the hydrogen in Germany, and the leakage of high global warming potential hydrogen through the value chain means that the ferry is emitting twice as much greenhouse gas well to wake as the diesel ferry it replaces, and at roughly ten times the cost of energy as the roughly 80 battery electric ferries that are crossing Norway’s fjords already.

But a commenter pointed out another amusing point, which is that the fuel cells can’t deliver as much power as the batteries on an electric ferry which operates on exactly the same triangular route between three small ports in western Norway. As a result, it does the same trip but slower. Ten times the cost, about 40 times the emissions, and it can’t even do the same job. Par for the course for hydrogen based on my assessment of fleets globally. They sell it as being exactly the same as fossil fuels with no operational changes required and having superior characteristics to batteries, and that’s just not true.

But the Hydra wasn’t Norway’s first foray into bedragssløsing (a Norwegian compound word I had ChatGPT make up for me combining deception and waste). The Beffen hydrogen ferry project in Bergen, Norway — a town a couple of hundred kilometers, six ferry rides, and 37 hours travel north of the Hydra’s failures, launched in 2009. It was an attempt to integrate hydrogen fuel cell technology into one of the city’s historic passenger ferries. The project faced the usual significant challenges, including limited refueling infrastructure, storage and safety concerns, and fuel cell durability. These obstacles, combined with high operational costs and technological limitations that continue to face hydrogen transportation attempts today because they are systemic and impossible to overcome, led to the project being abandoned in 2016. Despite its failure, Norway wasted more money on the MF Hydra, which is going to be abandoned for the same reasons in the not to distant future.

Then there is the 30-meter, solar-panel, wind-turbine, kite-sail, and electrolyzer-toting Energy Observer catamaran. It completed a seven-year journey around the world recently. Launched in 2017 and retrofitted from a former racing catamaran, the vessel traveled across 50 countries and 101 ports. It produced some hydrogen from seawater through onboard electrolysis. Now back in its home port of Saint-Malo, France, the vessel continues to serve as an educational platform — i.e., it’s moored, not going anywhere, and kids get school trips to it.

You might notice I used the modifier “some” before hydrogen there. The big claim they make is that over the seven years they produced 1.3 tons of hydrogen on board from seawater. That’s half a kilogram a day on average. Under perfectly calm conditions and ideal conditions with no hull fouling and good propellers, that might be able to provide five kilometers of range. That’s not exactly a big contributor. More likely it was used for onboard systems like the radio and induction stove. Of course, it had batteries too, 112 kWh of lithium-ion batteries. That half kilogram of hydrogen could have been stored as electricity without any of the absurd losses with 95 kWh to spare.

If they’d ripped out the electrolyzer, compressors, hydrogen storage tanks, and fuel cells, which weighed 1.5 tons and occupied 5 cubic meters, they could have put another 300 kWh of storage in there for the mass and had 4.4 extra cubic meters to play with, which would have been much more useful. Assuming they could have filled the batteries, they could have traveled about 180 kilometers on the 300 kWh. Despite this really obvious mass, volume, energy, and balance distance, people do keep pointing at the Energy Observer as being hydrogen powered, when in actual fact it just wasted a lot of generated electricity making hydrogen and not getting much for it.

The Energy Observer isn’t the only attempt to do this. The Race for Water is a 35-meter-long hydrogen-powered catamaran retrofitted from the PlanetSolar, transforming it into a hybrid renewable energy vessel combining solar panels, a hydrogen fuel cell system, and a kite sail for wind propulsion. It faced the usual challenges, such as limited hydrogen infrastructure, storage constraints, and complex maintenance requirements which hindered its efficiency during a couple of global expeditions. The Race for Water Foundation is sensibly transitioning to the MODX 70, a zero-emission vessel powered by advanced hydrogeneration and wind propulsion systems, entirely abandoning hydrogen in favor of a more streamlined and sustainable energy design. Lots of batteries, no hydrogen, par for the course for people who try it.

Then there’s the MARANDA project, funded with $3.1 million from the EU’s Horizon 2020 program, which aimed to demonstrate the viability of hydrogen fuel cell systems in maritime applications. Installed aboard the research vessel Aranda, the system provided 165 kW of  power for auxiliary systems and dynamic positioning, replacing conventional diesel generators. The project faced the usual significant challenges, including limited refueling infrastructure, the durability of proton exchange membrane fuel cells in harsh marine environments, and the high cost of hydrogen production and storage. The MARANDA project stopped in 2022, having proven yet again that hydrogen is really bad for this use case, but claiming success.

Next up is the Viking Neptune cruise ship, delivered in November 2022. It has a small 100 kW fuel cell designed to power a portion of auxiliary systems, such as lighting and ventilation. It’s explicitly experimental, because once again they haven’t looked at all of the experiments already done that find that batteries are vastly superior in pretty much every way.

Then there are the in-progress efforts by people who refuse to learn from history. There’s the With Orca, which is a bulk carrier developed through a collaboration between HeidelbergCement and Felleskjøpet Agri. The 88-meter bulk carrier will have compressed hydrogen stored onboard and features two rotor sails for wind-assisted propulsion. Apparently, they’ve at least learned that fuel cells and ocean air don’t mix, so they instead are going to be using even less efficient internal combustion engines. It was supposed to enter service early this year, but naturally there’s no way to refuel the thing, so governments have ponied up $9.3 million to build infrastructure that will end up being abandoned as costs escalate and the reality of hydrogen’s leakage rates and high greenhouse gas status become apparent. They’ll undoubtedly claim success regardless.

Back to Norway and ferries. Norway is investing $550 million to build and operate two hydrogen-powered ferries on the 100 kilometer, open seas, Vestfjorden route for 15 years, with construction costs estimated at ~$276 million USD per vessel—up to four times higher than the $60–100 million USD typical for diesel or LNG ferries. By contrast, battery electric ferries typically cost 30% to 40% more than fossil fuel powered equivalents. The ferries will be supplied with 5–6 tons of green hydrogen daily from GreenH AS under a 15-year agreement, with the hydrogen produced via electrolysis powered by renewable energy. Certainly given the location in the far northwest of Norway, the hydrogen would have to be shipped in at extraordinary expense. Substantial government subsidies, including Enova SF’s $68.3 million for hydrogen infrastructure, aim to offset the higher costs of hydrogen vessels and their refueling systems. Basically they are going to be throwing away two-thirds of the electricity that they could have been putting into much more reliable batteries, all in the name of providing more reliable shipping. I don’t think this will end well. Expect stories about missed sailings, high expenses, failed refueling and high hydrogen greenhouse gas emissions.

In the weird annals of hydrogen on the high seas, it’s time for a dictator’s yacht. The Hydrogen Viking is a reported project to transform a 28-meter Sunseeker Predator 95 yacht, formerly owned by Muammar Gaddafi and named Che Guevara, into a hydrogen-powered vessel. After being grounded in Malta and left deteriorating, the yacht was acquired by Norwegian shipbuilder Green Yacht. Three years after the announcement, it’s apparently still deteriorating somewhere. I’m not waiting with bated breath for it.

The Finnøy Hydrogen Ferry Project is — or maybe was — an initiative by Norwegian operator Norled to replace biodiesel with hydrogen fuel on a ferry serving the Finnøy route, northeast of Stavanger. The project is part of the EU-funded FLAGSHIPS initiative — more money wasted by the EU trying to make hydrogen fit for purpose for transportation —, which aims to deploy two hydrogen-powered vessels: one in Stavanger, Norway, and another in Lyon, France. Naturally, it can’t get hydrogen. In January 2020, Enova, a Norwegian government enterprise, allocated $1.3 million to support this conversion and an additional $2.2 million for the development of a hydrogen production and bunkering facility at Fiskå. This facility is planned to produce approximately one ton of hydrogen per day, with half designated for the ferry’s operations. As of December 2024, the ferry operates on biodiesel, with the hydrogen conversion pending further technical and economic evaluations, meaning it’s unlikely to ever happen given the reality of costs.

Havila Voyages operates four hybrid cruise ships—Havila Capella, Havila Castor, Havila Polaris, and Havila Pollux—that combine LNG engines with large battery packs, enabling up to four hours of zero-emission operation in sensitive fjords. The ships are designed for future conversion to hydrogen fuel as part of the FreeCo2ast project, funded by Norwegian organizations, including Enova and the Research Council. Havila aims to transition to renewable biogas by 2028 and hydrogen by 2030 to comply with Norway’s 2026 ban on fossil-fuel-powered vessels in protected fjords. What’s really going to happen is that they might transition to biogas, but they’ll definitely put in much bigger batteries. Hydrogen? Not likely. Of course, luxury cruise ships have much higher margin than most maritime use cases, so maybe they’ll waste the money.

Ulstein, a Norwegian shipbuilding company that’s an innovator in hull design with its X-Bow, has developed the ULSTEIN SX190 Zero Emission design, a theoretical 99-meter-long offshore construction support vessel powered by hydrogen fuel cells. As of December 2024, the vessel remains in the design phase, with no reports indicating that construction has commenced. Ulstein had projected that sea trials could begin as early as 2022. That clearly didn’t happen and is unlikely to ever happen. As a reminder, hydrogen isn’t zero emission as it leaks everywhere along the value chain and has a high global warming potential.

To be fair to Ulstein, a firm I admire a great deal for the X-Bow, the leakage rates were hypothetical from first principles until recently when peer-reviewed studies started measuring it, and the high global warming potential is also relatively new news, with the Nature paper finding 13 to 37 times the potency of carbon dioxide over 100 and 20 year time frames only coming out in 2023. With luck and a little careful effort by rational energy actors, these papers and their implications will get in front of funding agencies so that hydrogen can be put back where it belongs, in industrial facilities as a carefully controlled feedstock.

The Østensjø Rederi Offshore Wind Service Vessel (OWSP) is another reported Norwegian hydrogen-powered ship intended to support offshore wind farm operations. As of now, specific details regarding the vessel’s construction status, operational timeline, and technical specifications have not been publicly disclosed. The development of hydrogen infrastructure and technology will play a crucial role in the project’s progression, meaning it’s unlikely to ever hit water either. The shipping industry is just like every other green hydrogen for energy market, full of announcements which never pass final investment decision. People pushing hydrogen fill their decks with announcements, but never mention that they don’t and likely won’t exist.

Samskip, a European logistics firm, is pushing ahead with two hydrogen-powered shipping projects despite uncertainty caused by the financial troubles of its partner, TECO 2030. The SeaShuttle project involves constructing two 135-meter container ships with 3.2 MW hydrogen fuel cells, set to operate between Oslo and Rotterdam by late 2025. Separately, the HyEkoTank project plans to retrofit the multipurpose vessel Samskip Kvitnos with hydrogen fuel cells to meet EU and Norwegian “zero-emission” regulations. However, TECO 2030, responsible for providing the hydrogen technology, filed for bankruptcy in November 2024, raising concerns about project timelines.

Moss Maritime, a subsidiary of Saipem, has developed a liquefied hydrogen containment system inspired by its established spherical LNG tank design. The company has received Approval in Principle from DNV for its LH₂ containment system. However, no vessels using this technology have been constructed or entered operation to date. And none likely will, as everyone now realizes what was obvious to anyone who did the math with real numbers years ago knew, which is that energy that costs ten times what LNG costs isn’t affordable to any country’s economy.

In November 2020, DFDS announced plans to develop a hydrogen-powered ferry, Europa Seaways, for the Oslo–Frederikshavn–Copenhagen route. The vessel, designed to carry 1,800 passengers and up to 120 trucks or 380 cars, would feature a 23 MW hydrogen fuel cell system, with fuel sourced from a wind-powered electrolyzer in Copenhagen. Initially projected to enter service by 2027, there have been no significant updates on construction or funding progress as of December 2024, leaving the project’s status uncertain. Dead in the water, more likely, as cost realities reared their ugly heads.

The trend, by the way, is very clear, with a rather overwhelming majority of hydrogen shipping projects being in Norway. Odd how a fossil fuel major is trying to really hard to make molecules for energy remain a thing, especially when they have 80 electric ferries cheaply, efficiently and reliably plying their waters already.