comparative analysis of infrastructures€¦ · institute of electrochemical process engineering...

Institute of Electrochemical Process Engineering IEK-3

Comparative Analysis of InfrastructuresHydrogen Fueling and Electric Charging of Vehicles

GRAZ, FEBRUARY 15, 2018 JOCHEN LINSSEN, MARTIN ROBINIUS,THOMAS GRUBE, MARKUS REUSS, PETER STENZEL, KONSTANTINOS SYRNANIDIS,DETLEF STOLTEN

Institute of Energy and Climate ResearchIEK-3: Electrochemical Process Engineering

EnInnov2018, Graz, Austria 2018 February 14th to 16th


MOTIVATION

Transport sector essential for reaching the ambitious climate protection goals

Electric drivetrains key elements of low carbon, clean and energy-efficient transport based on renewable energy

What are the investments, costs, efficiencies and emissions for an infrastructure capable of supplying hundred thousand or several million vehicles with hydrogen or electricity?

Research Question

54% 45%34%

22%2%

CO2 emission reduction per sector 1990 to 2015

CO2 emissions for Germany in 2015 (total: 762 Mt)

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEV) and Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) require new energy supply infrastructures

1

Power sector

Industry/commerce

Residential

Transport

Others 2 %


Number of in million 0.1 1 3 5 10 20 Market penetration scenario

Analysis of investment, costs, efficiencies and emissions

Electric Vehicle PenetrationAPPROACHMeta-analysis of existing

infrastructure scenario studies

In depth scenario analysis of infrastructure designs,

Case Study for Germany

Spatially and temporally resolved models for generation, conversion,

transport and distribution

Consistent scenario framework with different vehicle penetration

2

Renewable electricity and demand Electricity generation and grid

Hydrogen Production

Mass marketRamp up


STATUS QUO OF INFRASTRUCTURE

Existing Hydrogen Pipelines (by 2017-05)The USA 2,608 kmEurope 1,598 km

of which in Germany 340 kmRest of world 337 kmWorld total 4,542 km

• Approx. 2,500 FCEV in operation worldwide

• End of 2016, 213 public Hydrogen Fueling Station (HRS) in operation worldwide: Japan (44%), the USA (17%) and Germany (13%)

• Germany: HRS network reached 30 stations by mid June 2017. At present, 27 HRS are under construction or being planned in Germany, with a goal to build up to 400 HRS before 2023

• pipeline systems for the transportation and distribution of hydrogen concentrated for the chemical uses of hydrogen

Sources: [9], [10], [14], [15]

Roadmap for hydrogen refueling stations in Germany

Sources: [12]

Hydrogen Fueling

3


STATUS QUO OF INFRASTRUCTURE

Sources: [16]

Electric Charging

• By the end 2016, the total BEV and PHEV vehicle stock came to about 2 million worldwide and was largely concentrated in China (32 %) followed by the United States (28 %) [16]

• Dynamic rollout of slow and fast charging worldwide

• Leading countries end of 2016 are China, the United States and the Netherlands

• For fast charging options (Modes 3 and 4) highest dynamic and absolute number in China

4


META ANALYSISSelection criteria of scenario studies

• Focus on Germany (broader context studies for EU, worldwide) and quantitative results; parameters: number of hydrogen fueling stations and charging points, cumulative investment for infrastructure set-up

• Total number of scanned literature sources: 79

• Selected studies for meta analysis: 25 (12 hydrogen and 13 electric charging)

Lessons learned of the meta analysis• Mostly aggregated results and, in many cases without provision of techno-economic

assumptions

• Lack of information in literature of important infrastructure parameters, e.g., hydrogen pipeline length, number of trucks for hydrogen transport => no meta-analysis possible

• Regarding electric charging studies: lack of studies concerning high xEV penetration scenarios, investment for infrastructure build-up, demand for fast-charging and impacts on the distribution grid

5


META ANALYSIS

• Cumulative investment differs significantly due to different assumptions e.g. consideration of power plant investment or number of fueling stations

• Specific cumulative investment per FCEV in the range of € 2,000 to 4,000 per FCEV• Expected decreasing specific investment per FCEV with increasing FCEV stock (due

to learning curve and economy of scale) is not observed

*: Including investment for power plants for upstream electricity productionMcKinsey – EU&CH&NO, IEA - worldwide

Hydrogen Infrastructure – Vehicle Specific Cumulative Investment

6


META ANALYSIS

investment for public/semipublic normal & fast charging, private charging not included

Electric Charging Infrastructure – Vehicle Specific Cumulative Investment

• According to specific cumulative infrastructure investment per BEV is approx. € 500 per BEV stable for small BEV stocks

• Highest specific investment per BEV occur in the 30 million BEV scenario by Grube et al. => investment for additional grid reinforcements considered and high number of charging points (on-street and additional fast charging)

7


HYDROGEN SUPPLY PATHWAYS

8


NUMBER OF BEV AND CHARGING POINTS

• Number of overnight chargers (Mode 1 & 2) increases with BEV number but with decreasing ratio: 1 by 1 in the first two scenarios (all BEV have an overnight charging option) 1 by 2 in the last scenario (only 58 % of all BEV have an overnight charging option)

• The ratio of BEV per Mode 4 charger increase due to decreasing charging frequency caused by higher driving range (battery capacity)

9

OvN.M1+M2: Home and on-street chargers (Mode 1 and 2); Publc.M3: Public convenience chargers (Mode 3); City.M4: quick chargers in cities (Mode 4); Mtwy.M4: Quick chargers along motorways (Mode 4)


INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGNS

400

42

12,000 km

1,500

2 TWh

730

12,000 km

3,800

10 GW

1,500

12,000 km

7,000

19 GW

3,000

11 million @ 22 kW

245,000 @ 350 kW

187,000

0.1 million 10 million3 million 20 million

100,000 @ 3.7 kW

6,000 @ 150 kW

2.8 million

81,000

6,100

6.5 million

175,000

55,000

H2

1,800 km 28,000 km 183,000 km

3 GW

5 TWh 10 TWh

Mass marketRamp up

cable length

transformer

slow chargers

fast chargers

storage capacity

electrolysis

truck trailer

pipeline

fueling

10


TOTAL CUMULATIVE INVESTMENT Hydrogen Infrastructure

11


TOTAL AND SPECIFIC INVESTMENTCharging Infrastructure

12


CUMULATIVE INVESTMENT

• Hydrogen more expensive during the transition period to renewable electricity-based generation

• High market penetration: battery charging needs more investment than hydrogen fueling

• For both infrastructures investment low compared to other infrastructures

13

Investment [€ billion]Renewable electricity generation scenario 374

Electric grid enhancement plan 2030 34

Federal transport infrastructure plan 2030 265

Hydrogen fueling infrastructure 40

Electric charging infrastructure 51

Infrastructure Roll-Out


COMPARISON MOBILITY COSTS

• For small vehicle fleets, i.e. 0.1 million cars, BEV fuel costs are significantly lower compared to FCEVs.

• Increase for hydrogen between 1 and 3 million cars results of switching to exclusive utilization of renewable energy for hydrogen production via electrolysis

• Mobility costs per kilometer are roughly same in the high market penetration scenario at 4.5 €ct/km for electric charging and 4.6 €ct/km => the lower efficiency of the hydrogen pathway is offset by lower surplus electricity costs.

vehicle purchase and operation costs excluded

14


CO2 EMISSIONS & ELECTRICITY DEMAND

Efficiency of charging infrastructure is higher, but limited in flexibility and use of surplus electricity

Fueling infrastructure for hydrogen with inherent seasonal storage option Low specific CO2 emissions for both options in high penetration scenarios with

advantage for hydrogen, well below the EU emission target after 2020: 95 gCO2/km

15


• Hydrogen and controlled charging key to integration of renewable electricity in transportation

• Complementary development of both infrastructures maximize energy efficiency, optimize the use of renewable energy and minimize CO2 emissions

• Hydrogen infrastructure roll-out for transportation sector enables further large-scale applications in other sectors

• Integrated analysis of infrastructures and energy systems to identify win-win situations

• Modeling of BEV charging require in depth analysis: high uncertainties regarding number of chargers, siting and impact of fast charging on electric distribution grid

• Analyze the impact of new mobility and vehicle ownership concepts as well as autonomous driving on future transport supply concepts

16

CONCLUSIONS

NEED FOR FURTHER RESEARCH


Full Report Available:

Funded by

http://hdl.handle.net/2128/16709

Project team:Martin Robinius, Jochen Linßen, Thomas Grube, Markus Reuß, Peter Stenzel, Konstantinos Syranidis, Patrick Kuckertz and Detlef Stolten

17

Institute of Electrochemical Process Engineering IEK-3 18

REFERENCES[7] IEA: Energy Technology Perspectives 2012 - Pathways to a Clean Energy System. International Energy Agency - OECD: Paris, 2012. ISBN 978-92-64-17488-7[9] HyARC: Hydrogen Data Book. Hydrogen Analysis Reserach Center, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory & Department of Energy, 2017. http://hydrogen.pnl.gov/hydrogen-data/hydrogen-delivery, access date: 2017-05-11.[10] Adolf, J.; Balzer, C.; Louis, J.; Schabla, U.; Fischedick, M.; Arnold, K.; Pastowski, A.; Schüwer, D.: Shell Wasserstoff-Studie -Energie der Zukunft? Nachhaltige Mobilität durch Brennstoffzelle und H2. 37. Shell Deutschland Oil GmbH, Hamburg, 2017. https://www.shell.de/medien/shell-publikationen/shell-hydrogen-study/, access date: 2017-10-11.[12] MOBILITY, H.: H2-Stations. http://h2-mobility.de/en/h2-stations/. Aktualisierungsdatum: 18.07.2017. H2 MOBILITY.[14] Linde Gas, Der sauberste Energieträger, den es je gab. Hydrogen Solutions von Linde Gas, Linde AG, Höllriegelskreuth, 2005.[15] Wild, J.; Freymann, R.; Zenner, M.: Wasserstoff - Schlüssel zu weltweit nachhaltiger Energiewirtschaft - Beispiele aus Nordrhein-Westfalen von der Produktion zur Anwendung. EnergieRegion.NRW - Netzwerk Brennstoffzelle und Wasserstoff c/o Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Mittelstand und Energie des Landes Nordrhein-Westfahlen, 12/2009. https://broschueren.nordrheinwestfalendirekt.de/herunterladen/der/datei/wasserstoff2009-pdf/von/wasserstoff-schluessel-zu-weltweit-nachhaltiger-energiewirtschaft/vom/energieagentur/1162.[16] IEA: Global EV Outlook 2017. International Energy Agency - OECD, Paris, 2017. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/GlobalEVOutlook2017.pdf, access date: 2017-06-25.[24] Robinius, M.: Strom- und Gasmarktdesign zur Versorgung des deutschen Straßenverkehrs mit Wasserstoff. RWTH Aachen, Institut für elektrochemische Verfahrenstechnik, Dissertation. 2015.[26] Seydel, P.: Entwicklung und Bewertung einer langfristigen regionalen Strategie zum Aufbau einer Wasserstoffinfrastruktur - aus Basis der Modellverknüpfung eines Geografischen Informationssystems und eines Energiesystemmodells. In: (2008).[27] BMVBS; NOW: GermanHy - Woher kommt der Wasserstoff in Deutschland bis 2050? Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung (BMVBS), 2009. http://www.dena.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationen/Verkehr/Dokumente/germanHy_Abschlussbericht.pdf, access date: 2017-04-15.[30] McKinsey & Co.: A Portfolio of Powertrains for Europe: a Fact Based Analysis – The Role of Battery Electric Vehicles, Plug-in-Hybrids and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles. McKinsey & Co., 2010.[ [45] BDEW: Aktualisierung und Fortführung der Studie "Die zukünftige Elektromobilitätsinfrastruktur gestalten". Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e.V. (BDEW), Berlin, 2013.[47] Grube, T.; Linke, A.; Xu, D.; Robinius, M.; Stolten, D.: Kosten von Ladeinfrastrukturen für Batteriefahrzeuge in Deutschland. In proceedings: 10. Internationale Energiewirtschaftstagung Wien, 2017, Vienna, 15.-17.02.2017, TU Wien, 2017.

comparative analysis of infrastructures€¦ · institute of electrochemical process engineering...

Documents