1 / 28

Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells

Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells. Dolf Gielen Giorgio Simbolotti IEW, Kyoto, 5-7 July 2005. Key points. Hydrogen may play a significant role by 2050 This will require R&D successes and cost reduction FCV cost constitute a key issue for a hydrogen transition

locke
Télécharger la présentation

Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  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 R&D 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 • <50 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) 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. 70 60 50 [Gt CO2/yr] Base 40 GLO50 30 Statistics 20 10 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 CO2 emissions: 50 USD/t CO2 = Emissions Stabilization

  19. 200 ETP results 180 Total oil products Hydrogen 160 CNG 140 Methanol/DME 120 FT fuels coal FT fuels natural gas 100 [EJ/yr] Other biofuels 80 Ethanol 60 FT fuels biomass Refinery products non- 40 conventional oil Refinery products conventional oil 20 0 2002 GLO50, 2050 WEO RS 2030 WBCSD 2050 BASE, 2050 (HDR) GLO50, 2050 (HDR) 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. BASE GLO50 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

  25. 18 16 14 12 10 Other [EJ/yr] Decentralized natural gas 8 Centralized natural gas + CCS 6 FutureGen 4 2 0 2030 2030 2050 2050 GLO50 GLO50CHE GLO50 GLO50CHE 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 R&D 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

More Related