Hydrogen is emerging as one of the most promising energy carriers for a decarbonised global energy system. Transportation and storage of hydrogen are critical to its large-scale adoption and to these ends liquid hydrogen is being widely considered. The liquefaction and storage processes must, however, be both safe and efficient for liquid hydrogen to be viable as an energy carrier. Identifying the most promising liquefaction processes and associated transport and storage technologies is therefore crucial; these need to be considered in terms of a range of interconnected parameters ranging from energy consumption and appropriate materials usage to considerations of unique liquid-hydrogen physics (in the form of ortho–para hydrogen conversion) and boil-off gas handling. This study presents the current state of liquid hydrogen technology across the entire value chain whilst detailing both the relevant underpinning science (e.g. the quantum behaviour of hydrogen at cryogenic temperatures) and current liquefaction process routes including relevant unit operation design and efficiency. Cognisant of the challenges associated with a projected hydrogen liquefaction plant capacity scale-up from the current 32 tonnes per day to greater than 100 tonnes per day to meet projected hydrogen demand, this study also reflects on the next-generation of liquid-hydrogen technologies and the scientific research and development priorities needed to enable them.

A model has been developed and implemented in the software package BoilFAST that allows for reliable calculations of the self-pressurization and boil-off losses for liquid hydrogen in different tank geometries and thermal insulation systems. The model accounts for the heat transfer from the vapor to the liquid phase, incorporates realistic heat transfer mechanisms, and uses reference equations of state to calculate thermodynamic properties. The model is validated by testing against a variety of scenarios using multiple sets of industrially relevant data for liquid hydrogen (LH2), including self-pressurization and densification data obtained from an LH₂ storage tank at NASA’s Kennedy Space Centre. The model exhibits excellent agreement with experimental and industrial data across a range of simulated conditions, including zero boil-off in microgravity environments, self-pressurization of a stored mass of LH₂, and boil-off from a previously pressurized tank as it is being relieved of vapor.

In this work we report phase equilibrium measurements on the system (methane + carbon dioxide + water) carried out with a high-pressure quasi-static-analytical apparatus. The measurements have been made under conditions of two-phase vapor–liquid equilibrium, three-phase vapor–liquid–liquid equilibrium (VLLE), and four-phase vapor–liquid–liquid–hydrate equilibrium. The compositions of three coexisting fluid phases have been obtained along eight isotherms at temperatures from (285.15 to 303.5) K and at pressures up to either the upper critical end point (UCEP) or up to the hydrate formation locus. Compositions of coexisting vapor and liquid phases have been obtained along three isotherms at temperatures from (323.15 to 423.15) K and pressures up to 20 MPa. The quadruple curve, along which hydrates coexist with the three fluid phases, was also measured along its entire length. The VLLE data obtained for this mixture have been compared with the predictions of the statistical associating fluid theory for potentials of variable range (SAFT-VR), implemented with the square-well potential and using parameters fitted to pure-component and binary-mixture data. Specifically, we used the SAFT-VR parameters reported by Mı́guez and co-workers [Mı́guez, J. M.; dos Ramos, M. C.; Piñeiro, M. M.; Blas, F. J. J. Phys. Chem. B 2011, 115, 9604]. The pressure along the quadruple curve was compared with the predictions of two different thermodynamic models. Furthermore, a detailed study of the ternary mixtures was carried out based on comparison with available ternary data of the type (CO₂ + n-alkane + water) and available data for the constituent binary subsystems. In this way, we analyzed the observed effects on the solubility when the n-alkane component was changed or a third component was added.

Vibrating tube densimeters are well-established tools for measuring fluid densities precisely at elevated temperatures and pressures. However, the conventional method of calibrating them utilises a model in which the apparatus parameters are represented as polynomials of temperature and pressure that contain a variable number of terms. Here a robust, physically-based model is presented and demonstrated for six different instruments at temperatures from (273 to 473) K, pressures from (0 to 140) MPa, and densities from (0 to 1050) kg m−3. The model's physical basis ensures that only seven apparatus parameters are required to relate the measured resonant period to fluid mass density with an average r.m.s. deviation of ±0.23 kg m‑3 across all six densimeters. Estimates for each of the apparatus parameters were made based on the geometry and material properties of the vibrating tubes, and these estimates were consistent with the parameter values determined by calibration with reference fluids. Three of the apparatus parameters describe the temperature dependence of the resonant period: for the six vibrating tubes tested, the relative standard deviations of these parameters were all within the range of values estimated from the thermoelastic properties of the Hastelloy tubes. Two distinct parameters are required to describe the pressure dependence of the vibrating tube's volume and effective spring constant, both of which are estimable from equations describing the elastic deformation of thick-walled tubes. The extensive calibrations conducted demonstrate that, for these densimeters, the variations with pressure of the tube's spring constant and its volume have a ratio that is neither 0 nor 1, as has been assumed previously. The model's physical basis allows vibrating tube densimeters to be calibrated accurately using fewer reference fluid measurements than required by the conventional method. Furthermore, use of the physically-based model reduces the uncertainty of measurements made at densities, temperatures, or pressures beyond the range of the calibration.