National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy
Canada
Contact Us
Help
Search
Canada Site

About Us

Media Room

Library

Home
Achieving a Balance
" " Energy &
Climate Change
" " Capital Markets
About
Documents
FAQs
Committee
Program Contact
   
" "Brownfields
Subscribe to NRTEE e-briefs
Email thisEmail this

 

© 2006

_
""
" "

Case Study on the Role of Fiscal Policy in Hydrogen Development

Lessons Learned

May 10, 2004

Pembina Institute and the Canadian Energy Research Institute

 

(1) Case Study on Hydrogen Technologies
Executive Summary
Lessons Learned
Economic Analysis
Baseline Report
Adobe PDF version

(2) Case Study on Energy Efficiency

(3) Case Study on Renewable Power


Previous

The time horizon for the hydrogen technologies included in this modelling exercise is considered long compared to the technologies considered in other NRTEE Ecological Fiscal Reform (EFR) case studies (i.e., case studies of energy-efficient and renewable-energy technologies). Given current technology parameters, even over a 30-year period, relatively little market penetration of hydrogen technologies occurred. Reduced costs and technological improvements would increase the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies.

1. Given the long time frame associated with hydrogen technologies, any reductions in GHG emissions that result will also necessarily occur over a long time period.

2. The successful market penetration of hydrogen technologies does not guarantee that significant reductions in GHG emissions will result. Consideration of source fuel and energy pathway is key if hydrogen is to be part of a plan to reduce GHG emissions. If the intention is to increase penetration of hydrogen technologies and reduce GHG emissions at the same time, then a focus on low-emission hydrogen sources is necessary (e.g., renewable energy, natural gas reformers and systems that capture carbon emissions).

3. Cost and technology barriers are still significant with some technologies and are expected to remain so for the next 10 to 20 years. 1

4. Given the current cost barriers associated with hydrogen technologies, any reductions in GHG emissions that are achieved come at a very high cost. If the main objective of fiscal policy is to reduce GHG emissions in the near future, focusing on other methods to reduce GHG emissions is likely more cost-effective than focusing on hydrogen technologies.

5. It may be most effective to focus fiscal policies intended to increase market penetration of hydrogen technologies on technological improvements (research and development, demonstration) and cost reductions. It should be noted that the application of fiscal policies to hydrogen technologies will not necessarily ensure reductions in GHG emissions unless the source fuel and energy pathway is taken into account in policy design.

6. In the transportation sector, it will be necessary to concentrate, not only on cost reductions and improvements in efficiency to increase the market penetration of hydrogen technologies, but also on the supply and availability of hydrogen fuel and hydrogen-related vehicles. There may be a role for fiscal policies targeted at manufacturers and retailers in that regard, although that is outside the scope of this analysis.

7. The development of hydrogen technologies in Canada is and will be largely influenced by trends in other countries, such as the United States, Japan and Germany. While such trends were not taken into account in this analysis, it is useful to keep this factor in mind in interpreting the results.

8. From a methodological point of view, the calibration of the Energy 2020 model to Canada’s Emissions Outlook: An Update (CEOU) (Natural Resources Canada, 1999), introduces an inherent level of uncertainty into the modelling results. We already know that the fuel prices contained in the CEOU are incorrect. The effect of this error on the model results is uncertain.

9. There are gaps in data when it comes to the technology parameters and predictions of market availability for hydrogen technologies. For any technologies that are not yet commercially available or even in real-world operation, assumptions made regarding both costs and performance are often based on best predictions by technology researchers and developers. Thus, there is high uncertainty with these parameters. The modelling results are also highly dependent on the assumptions made regarding when particular technologies will be available in the marketplace and access to supporting services such as refuelling infrastructure. There is a wide range of predictions and speculation on when these new technologies will become available.


Endnotes

1According to the U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Posture Plan, the introduction into the transportation market of personal vehicles that use hydrogen is not expected to occur until after 2020. Hydrogen use in commercial fleets and distributed Combined Heat and Power (CHP) are on the same time-line.

 

Previous