No Hydrogen, No H2/FC VEZ !
1. The Zero Emission feature of VEZ, whether H2/FC or electric can be claimed only if the hydrogen or the electric energy supplied in the two respective cases derives from renewable primary sources or from recovery / by-product of industrial processes.
2. Hydrogen storage and utilization on board a M/b is feasible but implies a large effort to implement safe solutions, probably not completely accounted for in the costs estimates made for the H2/FC VEZ; this means that financial risks shall be accounted for in the eventual implementation of a prototype.
3. Another effort that shall be taken into account consists in convincing end users that, even the safest solutions implemented do not imply hidden costs or risks to them, compared to the traditional or the other zero emission alternative (electric VEZ), often perceived to be safer, even if not completely justified, considering the safety aspects inherent also to DC systems.
4. If hydrogen would not be available as recovery/by-product from industrial processes (i.e. should it be produced by electrolysis or other energy consuming methods, even from renewable sources), the H2/FC would have neither environmental nor economic justification against electrical storage. In this case the electrical VEZ would be the only sustainable solution.
5. Given the above, since extensive infrastructures of hydrogen distribution (upon the above conditions anyway) will be available not earlier than ten-fifteen years, an entrepreneur cannot afford by him/herself the challenge to develop such a product, even relying on partial financial support for the prototype development, test and promotional activity.
6. Instead, providing that the zero emission need / sensitivity is translated into national/local regulations pushing or helping the higher investment and equivalent operating costs of the electric VEZ type M/b, the business perspective on this latter could be sustainable and worth of further investigation and search for joint or partially supported financing.
7. Should then a Phase 2 be conceived, following this feasibility study, the conclusion is that it should focus on the development of an advanced totally electric VEZ solution, to be tailored to the geographical areas identified, where zero emission is given as much value as at least the extra price to purchase the electrical VEZ.
8. Should instead the zero emission be considered, by the market or the policy, not worth enough as to pay for the electric VEZ extra price, low emission/fuel saving engine based propulsion and, where stop/go patterns require very variable power demand, the diesel/battery hybrid system would have a higher potential.
