Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells

1
Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells

• Dolf Gielen
• Giorgio Simbolotti
• IEW, Kyoto, 5-7 July 2005

2
Key points

• Hydrogen may play a significant role by 2050
• This will require RD successes and cost
  reduction
• FCV cost constitute a key issue for a hydrogen
  transition
• The environmental supply security benefits
  could be substantial, but require policies and
  technology advance
• Competing options may also play a key role

3
Presentation Overview

• Technology input data
• Baseline scenarios
• Sensitivity analysis
• Observations

4
Part 1 Technology input data
5
Technology types

• Production
• Centralized
• Decentralized
• Distribution
• Refueling stations
• Vehicles
• Fuel cell
• On-board storage

6
Production cost
35
30
25
20
H2 production cost USD/GJ
15
10
5
0
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
Centralized
Decentralized
Decentralized
Natural gas
Electrolysis
Natural gas
Natural gas
Coal
Nuclear
Solar
Biomass
No CCS
CO2-free
No CCS
CCS
CCS
S/I cycle
S/I cycle
Gasification
electricity
7
H2 production

• Comparison on GJ-basis is deceptive, as FCV
  efficiency is 2.5 times current ICE efficiency
• H2 can be supplied at 15-20 USD/GJ (2020-2030)
• Fuel cost (ex tax)/km about the same as current
  gasoline vehicles

8
Distribution and refueling cost

• Distribution (pipeline/LH2) adds 2 USD/GJ
  delivered
• Liquefaction 7-10 USD/GJ H2 delivered
• Refuelling station cost 3-6 USD/GJ H2 delivered
  (incl. pressurization, excl. decentralized
  production cost)

9
Hydrogen vehicles

• Engines
• Hydrogen hybrids
• Hydrogen FCVs
• On-board storage
• Gaseous 700 bar
• Gaseous 350 bar
• Liquid
• Metal hydrides
• Other

10
Fuel cells

• Present cost 2000 USD/kW
• lt50 USD/kW needed
• Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells (PEMFC)
• Current technology Nafion membrane, Pt/C
  catalyst
• Significant cost reduction possible (mass
  production), but less than 100 USD/kW seems not
  likely with current materials
• New catalyst alloys needed, or HT-membranes
• New materials may offer cost reduction potential

11
Future Cost Structure (2020)50 higher power
density, 10 times cheaper membranes, more than
50,000 cars/y (engines)
Cost Cost Cost Share
USD/m2 USD/m2 USD/kW
Membrane Membrane 50 50 17 16
Electrode Electrode 150 150 50 49
Bipolar plates Bipolar plates 91 91 30 29
Platinum catalyst Platinum catalyst Platinum catalyst 8 3 3
Peripherals 4 4 4 1 1
Assembly 2 2
Total 103 100
This is still too costly !!!
12
H2 onboard storage

• Gaseous 700 Bar seems the technology of choice
  for cars (350 bar for buses vans)
• 4-5 kg storage needed/car (450-500 km)
• Present cost 3300 USD/kg
• Present mass production 400-500 USD/kg
• Assumed 150 USD/kg by 2025
• Pressurization (1-800 bar) takes 14 energy
  content (GJe/GJ H2) (assumed 10, higher starting
  pressure)
• Other storage systems may succeed, but they are
  still far away from commercialization

13
Hydrogen model structure
14
Part 2 Baseline scenarios
15
Structure of the analysis, so far

• Based on IEA Energy Technology Perspectives
  (MARKAL) model
• BASE scenario no CO2 policies
• GLO50 scenario CO2 policies plus reasonable
  assumptions for H2/FC
• Sensitivity analysis individual parameter
  variations for GLO50

16
Assumptions GLO50 (range)

• 50 USD/t CO2 incentive (0-100 USD/t)
• Fuel cell system 65 USD/kW (65-105)
• Same kW for ICE and FCV (80-100)
• Oil price 2030 29 USD/bbl, slowly rising (29-35
  USD/bbl) (WEO 2004)
• Biomass potential rising to 200 EJ/yr by 2050
  (100-200 EJ)
• No transition issues (infrastructure transition
  considered yes/no)
• Discount rates transport 3-12 (3-18)
• Alternative fuel taxes rise to 75 of gasoline
  tax (75-100)

17
CO2 price A gradual rise to 50 USD/t
18
CO2 emissions 50 USD/t CO2 Emissions
Stabilization
19
Transport fuels
20
Key insights

• No CO2 policy more than a doubling in fuel use
  2/3 oil products 1/3 alternative fuels
• CO2 policy 1/3 oil products, 1/3 biofuels, 1/10
  H2 30 efficiency gains
• 1/10 hydrogen replaces 2 times as much oil
  products (27 H2 FCV by 2050)

21
Transport CO2 emissions(WTW) -50 in 2050 but
still rising
20
15
Gt CO2/yr
10
5
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
22
Key emission reductions

• Globally 32 Gt CO2 reduction in 2050
• Transport (WTW) 8.5 Gt CO2 reduction in 2050
• Biofuels 1.5 Gt
• CCS 2 Gt (alternative fuels production) (1.9 Gt
  H2 production)
• Substitution effect H2 use 1 Gt due to H2 use
• Efficiency 4 Gt (including 1 Gt due to H2 use)
• Total 2 Gt due to H2 use

23
Part 4 Sensitivity analysis
24
Hydrogen sensitivity analysis
2050 GLO50 15.7 EJ
Parameter Perturbation Change
CO2 incentives 0 -77
25 USD/t CO2 -15
100 USD/t CO2 80
CO2 policy scope IEA only -77
Market structure High hurdle rate -31
Nuclear No constraints on nuclear -19
Biomass 100 EJ biomass potential 9
CCS No CCS -52
FCV cost FCV system cost 105 USD/kW -80
FC life span 2 cells during vehicle life span -17
FC power 25 less than ICE 6
Cost path FCV cost reduction delay -26
Delivery vans FCV considered 50
Transition H2 supply transition considered -42
25
H2 Production with w/o transitionThe
technology path is a key issue
26
Prospects for electrolysis

• Electricity becomes virtually CO2-free at
  relatively low CO2 price levels
• A trade-off between diurnal electricity prices
  and H2 storage cost
• So far diurnal H2 storage not considered
• May reduce production cost by 3 USD/GJ H2
• So far no reliable data for efficiency cost of
  advanced electrolysis

27
Part 5 Observations
28

• Need for secure, alternative transportation fuels
  beyond 2030 (supply argument)
• CO2 policies (reduction/stabilization) also imply
  oil substitution (environmental argument)
• Non-conventional oil, FT-synfuels, CNG have
  limited transition problems, but no substantial
  CO2 benefits
• Efficiency, biofuels have limited transition
  problems, offer substantial CO2 benefits but
  limited potential
• The H2 option requires RD breakthroughs and cost
  reduction, transition will take decades but
  holds potential for substantial benefits
• The main challenge is the affordable FCV
• Buses, delivery vans, H2 hybrids as a transition
  strategy
• Overall benefits of having H2/FC 4 lower GHG
  emissions, 7 less oil use