Thursday, March 28, 2019

Hydrogen – Uses, Production, Prices, and News


Starting with this blog, I will be highlighting what I find on the Internet about the uses, production, prices, and news for several elements, including hydrogen, nitrogen, phosphorus, calcium, and others.  These blogs are a follow-on to the recent series of blogs “Chemical Elements’ Revenues – Part 1, 2, and 3” that I wrote.  I start with hydrogen.

Uses.   More than 80% of hydrogen is used in industrial applications such as ammonia and methanol production, petroleum refining, and metal and food processing.  The next largest use is as a fuel.   It is this second use where the greatest growth for hydrogen use is occurring.  One reason for this is the emergence of fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs).  Estimates are that in 2018 over 2,000 FCEVs were in use globally and that by 2030 an estimated two million will be in use.

Production.   Estimated hydrogen global production in 2018 is in the 60 million metric ton range.  In the United States, most hydrogen production is from methane (natural gas) using what is known as steam reforming.   Water electrolysis accounts for most of the rest of the hydrogen produced in the United States.  In the rest of the world, electrolysis accounts for a higher percentage of hydrogen produced than in the United States.

Prices.   2018 hydrogen prices in the United States are in the $3.50 per kilogram, and higher, range for small and medium size orders and less than $3.50 for large orders.  Based on a global 2018 production of approximately 60 million metric tons and using $2.50 per kilogram as a price, hydrogen produced in 2018 had a $150 billion value (would generate $150 billion of revenues).

News.   What follows are brief summaries of news alerts about hydrogen uses in 2018:

v    Alerts were issued on several countries’ (including Japan, Australia, South Korea, France, and the United Kingdom, as well as the state of California in the United States) new and ongoing efforts to use hydrogen as an energy source.  Some of the details are:

·         Japan is targeting the import of significant amounts of hydrogen;
·         South Korea plans to have around 300 hydrogen filling stations to service the expected number of FCEVs planned in South Korea;
·         California is building more hydrogen filling stations;
·         Australia is developing a hydrogen export industry, perhaps in response to Japan’s plans to import large amounts of hydrogen;
·         The London Police are adding FCEVs to its inventory; and
·         France is spending $100 million on a hydrogen development program and plans to have more than 5,000 FCEVs and 100 filling stations by 2023.

v    At lease three automobile companies, Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda, announced plans to ramp up the production of FCEVs in the coming years.  Hyundai is budgeting $6.7 billion to produce 500,000 FCEVs by 2030.

v    The French railroad technology company Alstom has produced trains powered by hydrogen fuel cells that are in operation in a section of Germany.

v    More than 100 FCEVs are being used in Paris by a taxi company.

v    The Austrian voestalpine steel manufacturer has initiated a project, with Siemens and others, to test the generation of large quantities of hydrogen by electrolysis for use in its steel making, instead of using hydrogen produced by steam forming of methane.

v    The companies Air Products and Air Liquide are building liquid hydrogen production facilities in California to supply the hydrogen filling stations that are being built there.

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Chemical Elements’ Revenues – Part 3


In an earlier blog (Chemical Elements’ Revenues – Part 1; click here to go to that blog), I provided estimated global revenues generated in 2018 by many of the chemical elements.  The revenues were obtained from market research reports and other sources found on the Internet.  Doing the research for this earlier blog, I discovered that the United States Geological Survey (USGS) provides data on many elements’ 2018 prices and global production quantities.  (For example, click here to go to a USGS site from which such data can obtained.)

In this blog, I present element 2018 price and global production data I found at USGS sites in the table below.  Also provided in the table are estimated 2018 global revenues generated for each element (2018 price times 2018 production quantity).  And I also present in the table the estimated revenues for each element that I found from market research reports, which are also presented in the earlier blog referenced in paragraph 1 above.


table
 2018 average price in usd per metric tons (mt) - using USGS website data
2018 global production quantity in mt from USGS website
2018 revenues based on USGS price and production quantity rounded to billions usd
2018 revenues from market reports and other sources on Internet rounded to billions usd
% difference between revenues based on USGS data and market reports, etc., data
Aluminum
 $              2,535
60,000,000
 $      152.12
 $   150.85
-1%
Gold
 $    44,606,619
3,260
 $      145.40
 $   128.00
-12%
Copper
 $              6,614
21,000,000
 $      138.90
 $   151.00
9%
Zinc
 $              3,109
13,000,000
 $        40.40
 $     52.10
29%
Nickel
 $            14,000
2,300,000
 $        32.20
 $     27.50
-15%
Potassium
 $                  740
42,000,000
 $        31.08
 $     28.00
-10%
Silicon
 $              2,293
6,700,000
 $        15.36
 $     13.70
-11%
Silver
 $          537,810
27,000
 $        14.50
 $     14.00
-3%
Chromium
 $                  280
40,000,000
 $        11.20
 $     14.50
29%
Lead
 $              2,535
4,400,000
 $        11.20
 $     10.90
-3%
Cobalt
 $            72,752
140,000
 $        10.20
 $        8.80
-14%
Molybdenum
 $            27,000
300,000
 $          8.10
 $        7.50
-7%
Titanium
 $                  624
11,840,000
 $          7.39
 $        9.60
30%
Palladium
 $    34,799,490
210
 $          7.31
 $        8.00
9%
Tin
 $            20,503
310,000
 $          6.36
 $        7.00
10%
Sulfur
 $                    70
80,000,000
 $          5.60
 $        6.20
11%
Vanadium
 $            72,752
73,000
 $          5.30
 $        9.70
83%
Platinum
 $    31,635,900
160
 $          5.10
 $        6.30
24%
Tungsten
 $            42,150
82,000
 $          3.50
 $        3.10
-11%
Zirconium
 $              1,500
1,500,000
 $          2.30
 $        5.24
128%
Scandium
 $ 132,000,000
15
 $          1.98
 $        1.84
-7%
Niobium
 $            21,000
78,000
 $          1.64
 $        2.90
77%
Lithium
 $            17,000
85,000
 $          1.45
 $        1.63
12%
Antimony
 $              8,598
140,000
 $          1.20
 $        2.00
67%
Iodine
 $            22,000
29,000
 $          0.64
 $        0.86
35%
Tantalum
 $          218,000
1,800
 $          0.39
 $        0.42
7%
Indium
 $          380,000
750
 $          0.29
 $        0.45
56%
Bismuth
 $            10,803
16,000
 $          0.17
 $        0.10
-40%
Germanium
 $      1,300,000
120
 $          0.16
 $        0.19
24%
Gallium
 $          350,000
410
 $          0.14
 $        0.16
14%
Manganese
 $                       7
18,000,000
 $          0.13
 $        0.06
-52%
Selenium
 $            44,092
2,800
 $          0.12
 $        0.08
-33%
Beryllium
 $          500,000
230
 $          0.12
 $        0.13
16%
Cadmium
 $              2,900
26,000
 $          0.08
 $        0.04
-47%
Rhenium
 $      1,500,000
49
 $          0.07
 $        0.09
16%
Tellurium
 $            79,000
440
 $          0.04
 $        0.02
-57%
Thallium
 $      4,000,000
8
 $          0.03
 $        0.07
103%
Arsenic
 $                  750
35,000
 $          0.03
 $        0.03
14%




 average
30%


Most of the estimated revenues from USGS data agree reasonably well with the revenue data based primarily on market research reports.   This agreement is shown in the last column of the table above where approximately three-fourths of the percentage differences between the two-revenue data sets are less than 25% and the average difference between the two sets of revenues for all elements is 30%.   (The market research reports could rely a lot on USGS data, but I have seen no indication that this is so.)

This series of blogs on chemical element revenues is met to investigate what reasonably reliable economic data (i.e., estimated generated revenues) can easily be found about chemical elements using the Internet as a research tool.  It seems to me that the revenue data presented in this series likely provides a good estimation of the approximate revenues generated by elements.   Considering what I perceive as the challenges of estimating element prices and production – consumption data, being able to find such data should be useful in decision making.