Summary of Results DDWG Hydrogen Fuel Cell Survey

1. Summary of Results DDWG Hydrogen Fuel Cell Survey September 9, 2009

2. Agenda Slide • Task Overview • Major Conclusions • Survey Results

3. Task Overview • LMI created and administered a survey to determine knowledge and opinions about hydrogen and fuel cells among employees at the Defense Distribution Depot Warner Robins (DDWG) • Survey precedes the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) awareness training package • Survey conducted June 1 – July 2, 2009 • 77% completed response rate (234/305 total participants) • Responses represent both GS (38%) and WG (62%) employees • Materials provided include • Annotated survey • Statistical analysis of results • Survey comments

4. Task Overview: Background Differences • Chi-square criteria used to determine statistical significance • p-values ≤ 0.05 • Standardized residuals ≥ ║2║for individual categories and groups • Difference of at least 10% between groups/categories (practical significance) • Tables reporting differences compare group to the mean of all responses • Guttman scales used for knowledge-type questions that contain either binary data (e.g., True/False) or have responses selected from an ordered set of data • Chi-square test, a difference of means test and a correlation test used to determine if opinions and knowledge are universally held or sensitive to respondents’ backgrounds • Background information includes: Office setting/warehouse setting, age, GS/WG, pay grade/level/equivalent and wage grade/level/equivalent

5. Task Overview: Comments • LMI edits comments slightly for clarity and grammar; also makes sure they are anonymous • Comments are useful to • Understand survey results better • Highlight aspects not covered in general survey questions

6. Major Conclusions • Only 13 percent of respondents state that they have moderate or advanced knowledge of hydrogen with respect to using hydrogen as a fuel for cars and trucks • By contrast, questions on factual knowledge about hydrogen suggest that moderate levels of hydrogen knowledge exist • For 4 out of the 6 items in the Hydrogen Knowledge Scale, the correct answer is given by the largest fraction of respondents (see slide 11)

7. Major Conclusions (Continued) • In general, there are two knowledge profiles for DDWG participants on hydrogen and fuel cells • For true/false questions, the most frequent score is 5 out of 6 questions correct; the second most frequent score is 0 out of 6 questions correct, suggesting an “all or nothing” (bimodal) distribution of knowledge • Similar scores between groups for office vs. warehouse location, GS vs. WG employee

8. Major Conclusions (Continued) • Knowledge levels show distinctly different distributions by age • Persons who get only 0-2 answers out of 6 correct are more likely than expected to be between the ages of 42 and 49. • Persons who get 3-6 answers out of 6 correct are less likely than expected to be between the ages of 42 and 49, and more likely to be between the ages of 26 and 41. • If educational efforts can be directed to older age cohorts, there is more room for positive impact of the educational efforts. Note: These differences in knowledge levels by age do not test as statistically significant, but might well do so with a larger sample or in future testing. Any future studies of hydrogen knowledge should include an examination by age.

9. Major Conclusions (Continued) • A small percentage of participants (6%) answered both “Hydrogen can be produced using which of the following sources of energy?” and “When using pure hydrogen, fuel cell vehicles generate electricity, water, and…”correctly; while the majority (65%) answered both questions incorrectly* • No significant differences found by age or work location • Strong correlation between GS with office setting and WG with warehouse setting • Warehouse workers are more likely to disagree that everyday hydrogen use is a danger to the public • Warehouse workers are more optimistic about the future commercial applications of hydrogen and fuel cells in onsite power for the home • On the other hand, office workers indicate that electricity (plug-in) and ethanol (E85) are more safe to use as vehicle fuels • Office workers are more likely to consider purchasing an electric (plug-in) vehicle within the next 5 years • Survey comments further support a DDWG workforce that lacks knowledge, but is optimistic about the future of hydrogen and fuel cells * Does not include respondents who answered Don’t Know to either question

10. Survey Results: Level of Knowledge Q1

11. Survey Results: True/False Q2 * Circled item indicates correct answer

12. Survey Results: Hydrogen Knowledge Q3 Q4 Q3 – Q4 * Circled item indicates correct answer

13. Survey Results: Alternative Fuel Vehicle Options Q5

14. Survey Results: Ranking of Fuel or Power Supply Factors Q6

15. Survey Results: Hydrogen Association Q7

16. Survey Results: Feelings about Hydrogen Q8

17. Survey Results: Hydrogen as Fuel Q9

18. Survey Results: Commercial Availability Q10

19. Survey Results: Fuel Safety Q11

20. Survey Results: Future Purchase of Alternative Fuels – Costs Taking into account only the cost of owning and operating a vehicle, which of the following alternative fuel vehicles would you consider purchasing within the next five years?  Q12

21. Survey Results: Future Purchase of Alternative Fuels – Environmental Benefits Taking into account only the environmental benefits of alternative fuel vehicle options, which of the following alternative fuel vehicles would you consider purchasing within the next five years?  Q13

22. Survey Results: Background Information Q14

23. Survey Results: Background Information (Continued) Q15

24. Survey Results: Background Information (Continued) • Of the WG employees: • 89% WG5 – WG8 • 11% WG9 – WG11 Q16- Q18