Hydrogen Safety
Safety of Hydrogen as a Transportation Fuel
A major issue facing hydrogen as a fuel is
public perception about its safety. While hydrogen has
many safety issues that need to be addressed, images of
the Hindenburg and the hydrogen bomb often cloud
meaningful discussion of hydrogen’s safety as a fuel.
The Hindenburg is perhaps the most spectacular disaster
where hydrogen was erroneously reported as the culprit.
While hydrogen did indeed burn in the disaster, a new
coating used on the zeppelin cover was highly flammable
and was the primary cause for the major fire engulfing
the frame. The misidentification of hydrogen
with nuclear power has caused similar consternation.
While there are some who believe hydrogen energy is
somehow inherently linked with the hydrogen bomb
or the deuterium and tritium components of nuclear
energy, this belief is simply rooted in a misconception
that can be allayed through education and outreach.
Hydrogen Material Safety Data Sheet (from BOC Gases)
In addition to the safety concerns regarding
hydrogen fueled vehicles, the design and building
of hydrogen fueling stations pose safety concerns
for consumers that must also be responsibly and
thoroughly addressed. The main issue is the risk caused
by hydrogen stored at high pressure in a tank and the
subsequent risk of leakage, especially in non-vented area
such as an enclosed garage. There are also concerns
about hydrogen accidents at refueling stations, either
while the vehicle is being refueled or as hydrogen is
being stored and in some cases produced on-site. Tank design
is crucial to reducing risks created by hydrogen to
a level at or below current risks posed by gasoline. The
U.S. Department of Transportation and the Society of
Automotive Engineers have recommended standards
that must be met for fuel tanks before they are approved
for use on the road. There are recommended safety
standards for the transfer of fuel from compressed
tanks to the uncompressed gas in the fuel cell and for
refueling connection devices to ensure that only proper
fuels at correct pressures are pumped into the fuel tank. Manufacturers are running hydrogen tanks through a
series of rigorous tests to ensure that under all extreme
operating conditions the tanks will hold up and limit the
risk for explosion and rupture to an acceptable level.
Some safety statistics for hydrogen and other fuels
| Characteristic |
Hydrogen |
Natural Gas |
Gasoline |
| Lower heating value kJ/g |
120 |
50 |
44.5 |
| self-ignition temperature (ºC) |
585 |
540 |
228-501 |
| Flame temperature (ºC) |
2,045 |
1,875 |
2,200 |
| Flammability limits in air (vol%) |
4 – 75 |
5.3 – 15 |
1.0 – 7.6 |
| Minimum ignition energy in air (uJ) |
20 |
290 |
240 |
| Detonability limits in air (vol%) |
18 – 59 |
6.3 – 13.5 |
1.1 – 3.3 |
| Theoretical explosive energy (kg TNT/m3 gas) |
2.02 |
7.03 |
44.22 |
| Diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s) |
.61 |
.16 |
.05 |
In addition to the safety concerns that consumers
have regarding hydrogen fuel, there are important
technical considerations to be addressed when working
with hydrogen fuel. The amount of energy needed
to ignite hydrogen is comparable to natural gas but
is one-tenth the energy needed to ignite gasoline. In
a number of areas, hydrogen has properties that are
more beneficial than gasoline. Hydrogen is nontoxic
and it is difficult to create a high enough concentration
of hydrogen to combust due to its light and buoyant
nature. Gasoline, when leaked, can puddle at the source
and emit fumes that can build and linger.

Hydrogen car to the left, Gasoline car to the right
A number of studies have examined hydrogen
and conclude that while hydrogen raises a different set
of safety concerns, experience has shown that they can
be addressed. The American Physical Society released a
report prepared for their Panel on Public Affairs (POPA)
describing many of these studies and their conclusions.
These included tests by Lockheed Martin, Arthur
D. Little, BMW and the University of Miami that all
conclude hydrogen is no more dangerous than gasoline.
BMW undertook a number of crash tests and found the
safety of the fuel to be sufficient. The University of
Miami, in its test, set fire to two cars, one with hydrogen
and the other gasoline. While both created fires when
ignited, the gasoline fire engulfed the entire car causing
total damage, whereas the hydrogen flame vented
vertically and failed to spread to the rest of the vehicle. (see above picture)
As early as 1994, the Sandia National Laboratories
performed a vehicle safety study and concluded, “there
is abundant evidence that hydrogen can be handled
safely, if its unique properties—sometimes better,
sometimes worse, and sometimes just different from
other fuels are respected.” Similarly in 1997, a
vehicle safety study by the automaker Ford concluded
hydrogen is potentially a better fuel source than gasoline
when proper controls are built into the vehicle.
Just as gasoline tanks in today’s cars are
manufactured and tested under a number of codes and
standards, hydrogen tanks too will need their own set
of standards to meet safety concerns arising from the
unique properties of hydrogen fuel. There has been a
significant amount of work already performed to achieve
this goal. The U.S. Department of Energy coordinates
its codes and standards efforts through the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory. The hydrogen industry
trade group, the National Hydrogen Association, also
has organized codes and standards working groups to
address safety needs. International codes and standards
work is coordinated through the International Energy
Agency and the International Standards Organization.
Other groups involved include the National Fire
Protection Agency and the Society for Automotive
Engineers. Fuel cell manufacturers, hydrogen tank
manufacturers and automakers are also developing best
practices for hydrogen use and safety.