Transition to a Hydrogenbased Energy System The Next Ten Years

1
Transition to a Hydrogen-based Energy SystemThe
Next Ten Years

• Engineering Public Policy
• Social Decision Science
• Heinz School Project Course
• Final Presentation
• December 2000

2
Presentation outline

• Introduction, Goals, Matrix Criteria Discussion
  (David)
• Revised Matrix and Application Choice (Brendan)
• Applications
• NECAR - (Zachary)
• Stationary Power Generation - (Jennifer)
• Consumer Electronics - (Tanya)
• Conclusions and Recommendations (Elisabeth)

3
Goals

• Identify hydrogen and fuel cell Technologies
  suitable for Department of Energy (DOE) support
  to 2010.
• This involved
• Developing an objective and systematic set of
  measures to evaluate hydrogen applications.
• Examining the introduction of various
  hydrogen-based and fuel cell applications over
  the next ten years.

4
Elements of a systematic evaluation criteria

• Environmental Impacts
• Performance
• Costs
• Fuel Delivery Requirements
• Development, Deployment Diffusion

5
Rating scale

• 3 Much Better
• 2 Better
• 1 Slightly Better
• 0 No Difference
• -1 Slightly Worse
• -2 Worse
• -3 Much Worse

Present day alternative
6
Initial criteria matrix
Evaluation Criteria
Private Automobiles
Transit Buses
Marine Freight
Power Generation
Consumer Electronics
Environmental Impact
1
2
3
1
2
Performance
0
1
0
2
3
Cost
-1
-2
0
-3
2
Fuel Delivery Requirements
-3
-2
-1
0
0
Development, Deployment, Diffusion
1
3
2
-3
1
7
New criteria matrix
Evaluation Criteria
Private Automobiles
Transit Buses
Marine Freight
Power Generation
Consumer Electronics
Environmental Impact
1
2
3
1
2
Performance
0
1
0
2
3
Cost
-1
-2
0
-3
2
Fuel Delivery Requirements
-3
-2
-1
0
0
Development, Deployment, Diffusion
1
3
2
-3
1
8
Changes in scores
Home
Evaluation Criteria
BMW
NECAR
Citaro
Marine Freight
Industrial
Consumer Electronics
Power Generation Industrial
Environmental Impact
1
1
2
3
1
1
Performance
-1
-2
0
0
-2
1
Cost
-2
-2
-2
0
-3
-3
Fuel Delivery Requirements
-2
-3
-2
-1
0
0
Development Deployment
2
1
3
1
2
2
Drivers Diffusion
2
1
0
-1
0
0
9
NECAR

• Automobiles have been the focus of much attention
  and exposure through PR by manufacturers.
• They have received much corporate and
  governmental support.
• Our findings show several drawbacks that need to
  be voiced and heard.

10
Commercial industrial power generation

• Received a high overall rating
• The only stationary application we considered
• The only large-scale application we considered

11
Consumer electronics

• Highest ranking in overall criteria scores
• One of the least researched currently
• Offers performance advantages in addition to
  environmental benefits

12
DaimlerChryslers NECAR IV

• First hydrogen fuel-cell powered commercial
  automobile
• Fourth Version of Mercedes-Benz electric A-Class
• Debuted in March of 1999
• Operating in Munich and California
• Compared to Toyota Corolla LE

The introduction of NECAR IV in March, 1999
(http//www.daimlerchrysler.com)
13
NECAR IV Summary of criteria scores
14
Environmental impact (1)Pollutants from
multiple hydrogen feed stocks

• Source of H2 affects pollution
• Some pollution already regulated

15
NECAR IV Technical performance (-1)

• Underpowered, overweight
• Low maximum speed
• Relies solely upon hydrogen

16
NECAR IV Development (1)

• Development and Deployment (1)
• Currently available for fleet use
• Car companies willing to assume costs
• Drivers and Diffusion (1)
• Large final market and upgrade-able
• Large spillover to other applications

A test team with a NECAR IV that will be used as
a transport for maintenance workers. (http//www.d
aimlerchrysler.com)
17
Recommendations

• NETL should not pursue this technology
• Los Alamos Labs should continue researching fuel
  cell catalysts
• Encourage private investment

18
International Fuel Cells PC25C fuel cell power
plant
5.5 m
PC25C at Yankee Gas Services Office in Meriden, CT
Source International Fuel Cells
19
PC25C Overview

• Three main components
• fuel processor, power section, power conditioner

• Maximum output is 200kW
• In use since 1991
• Only stationary commercial application
  currently available
• Compared to small scale combined heat and power
  (CHP) systems with natural gas reciprocating
  engines
• PC25 and CHP both provide heat and power, have
  similar power outputs, can replace grid power

Source International Fuel Cells
20
PC25C Summary of criteria scores
21
PC25C Environmental Impacts (1)
22
Residential Power Cost
23
Commercial power Cost
Payback, Operations and Averted Losses from
Outages PC25C 1,000,000 cost and 6 interest
24
PC25C Cost (-3)

• Capital cost of PC25C is 10 times more expensive
  than conventional alternatives.
• Average buildings do not have a high enough
  demand to utilize the capacity of PC25C.
• Outage losses for the average building need to be
  higher than 60k per year for this technology to
  be cost efficient.

Cents per kWh
25
PC25C Technical performance (-2)
For Caterpillars GenSet 3408 with 255 kW
26
PC25C Drivers and diffusion (0)

• Effect of drivers is very positive but the
  technology has poor potential for diffusion
• Drivers include government subsidies, lack of
  permitting requirements, need for reliable power
• Diffusion limited by
• cost and lack of spillover
• to other applications

PC25C at data center in First National Bank of
Omaha in Omaha, NE
27
PC25C Recommendations

• The DOE should not fund stationary applications
  that use phosphoric-acid fuel cells.
• Support for this product will not improve
  prospects for other fuel-cell technologies.
• Funding should be leveraged into technologies
  with high potential for spillover to other
  applications.

28
Consumer electronics

• Small-scale fuel-cell technology is applicable to
  many hand-held electronic devices.
• Private corporations and academic institutions
  are researching fuel-cell technology, focusing on
  the Direct Methanol Fuel Cell (DMFC).
• The technology is still in its infancy, but is
  already promising compared to alternatives.

29
Consumer electronics Summary of criteria scores
30
Consumer electronics Evaluation

• Methanol as a fuel source
• Is delivered to the cell via cartridges (like
  fountain-pen ink cartridges) and used directly in
  the fuel cell
• Can be derived from biomass
• Is hazardous (like windshield washer liquids),
  but risks can be minimized with proper packaging
  and management
• Can damage the device if there is leakage

31
Consumer electronics Environment (2)

• Federal Universal Waste Rule (EPA, 1995) defines
  some batteries as hazardous waste.
• Health and environmental risks are associated
  with improper battery disposal.
• 3 Billion batteries were sold in the US in 1998,
  and demand continues to grow.

32
Consumer electronics Performance (3)
33
Consumer electronics Performance

• Cell phone 900 mA, 3.6 V
• Standby requirement 0.012 W
• Talk requirement 0.65 W
• Energy Supplies Compared
• Lithium-ion battery
• DMFC 1 uses the same space utilization as
  lithium-ion battery (49).
• DMFC 2 uses a greater percentage of the battery
  casing to store more fuel (71).

34
Consumer electronics
Cost (2)

• Expected success in the private market should
  push the cost of the DMFC for cell phones below
  that of lithium-ion batteries.

Fuel delivery (0)

• Methanol is widely produced today.
• No new infrastructure development necessary
• Need to develop packaging for methanol-water
  cartridges
• Safety concerns similar to those for windshield
  washing fluid transportation

35
Consumer electronics
Development deployment (-1)

• Technology needs further development.
• Polyfuel and Manhattan Scientifics claim they
  will release DMFC for a cell phone in 2001.
• Motorola and Samsung hope to introduce their
  version 3-5 years.

Drivers diffusion (3)

• Consumers may be concerned with safety of
  methanol-powered appliances.
• Success with DMFC in cell phones is likely to
  spill over to other electronic devices (e.g.,
  laptops, personal data assistants).
• DMFC developers goal is to completely replace
  conventional batteries.

36
Consumer electronics Recommendations

• Conduct further research on miniature fuel cells.
• Use DMFCs in consumer electronics to build up
  confidence in fuel-cell technology and drive down
  costs.
• Use this opportunity to gain experience with
  packaging and risk-management of methanol as an
  energy vector.

37
Conclusions from our research

• Developing and completing the criteria matrix was
  a challenging but worthwhile endeavor.
• Hydrogen is not a solution to pollution, but
  affects the ease with which it can be managed.
• Hydrogen fuel cells are not likely to be ready
  for widespread adoption within the ten year
  timeframe Methanol fuel cells will.

38
Criteria matrix and its use
Home
Evaluation Criteria
BMW
NECAR
Citaro
Marine Freight
Consumer Electronics
Power Generation Commercial
39
Recommendations from areas of focus

• NECAR - poor performance, high cost, huge
  infrastructure challenge.
• PC25C - high cost, and no significant advantages.
  
• Consumer electronics - huge performance
  advantage, reasonable cost, high potential for
  spillover, and quick rate of diffusion.

40
Short-term recommendations

• Consider a wider range of applications.
• Use a systematic criteria matrix (like ours) to
  evaluate these applications.
• Invest in applications that have a high potential
  for spillover.

41
Long-term recommendations

• Focus on economic green hydrogen production.
• Research storage technologies so that hydrogen
  can be used in a wider range of applications.
• Focus on developing cheaper fuel-cell catalysts.

42
(No Transcript)
43
Environmental impacts

• Change in emissions of criterion pollutants (SOX,
  NOX, CO, VOC, )
• CO2 Emissions
• Other Pollutions (Land/Water)
• Ease of Pollution Management

Back to Matrix
44
Technical performance

• Power
• Size
• Weight
• Life-Expectancy
• Operating Constraints

• Reliability
• Ease of use
• Safety
• Noise
• Maintenance

Back to Matrix
45
Costs

• Initial cost
• Operating cost
• Maintenance cost
• Disposal cost

Back to Matrix
46
Fuel delivery requirements

• Ability to utilize current delivery options
• Size, capacity, number, distribution, location of
  delivery points
• Cost
• Safety
• Personnel Requirements
• Energy Needed

Back to Matrix
47
Development deployment

• Product maturity
• Product Availability
• RD Cost
• Size of initial niche market once it reaches
  maturity
• Can it be retrofitted to existing stock of
  equipment

Back to Matrix
48
Drivers diffusion

• Turnover
• Likelihood of adverse public reaction? (-3 is
  strong negative)
• Final Market Size
• Can the proposed technology be upgraded as
  innovations roll in?
• Spillover of this application to other
  applications
• Is there an agency problem?

Back to Matrix