techno-economic study of hydrogen as a heavy-duty truck fuel · fuel cell el.motor battery...
TRANSCRIPT
Techno-economic study of hydrogen as a heavy-duty truck fuel
A case study of Oslo – Trondheim transport corridor
By Janis [email protected]
o Backgroundo Methodologyo The trucko The infrastructureo Summary & Outlook
Norway's greenhouse gas emissions
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Tho
use
nd
to
n C
O2
-eq
Year
Norwegian total emissions
Background
27%
23%17%
14%
9%
5%
3%2%
Greenhouse gas emissions 2018
Oil and gas extraction
Manufacturing industries and mining
Road traffic
Aviation, navigation, fishing, motorequip. etc.
Agriculture
Other
Energy supply
Heating in other industries andhouseholds
7.6%
Sources:Miljødirektoratet. (2018). Norske utslipp av klimagasser. Retrieved from https://www.miljostatus.no/tema/klima/norske-klimagassutslippMiljøstatus. (2019, 2019/03/19/). Nasjonale miljømål. Retrieved from https://www.miljostatus.no/nasjonale-mal
3
Emission free HD transport
4Background
H2
Battery powered
Biodiesel powered
Hydrogen powered
[1] H2 Energy. (n.d., 2019/06/24/). Our Business Fields Retrieved from https://h2energy.ch/en/business-fields-2[2] Scania. (2017, 2019/04/20/). Hydrogen a fuel of the future? Retrieved from https://www.scania.com/group/en/hydrogen-a-fuel-of-the-future[3] Hyundai. (2019). Green Hydrogen Allows Hyundai Hydrogen Mobility and Hydrospider … [Press release] Retrieved from https://www.hyundainews.com/en-us/releases/2875[4] Nikola (Producer). (2019, 2019/04/16/). Nikola World 2019. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Dc8J3iSLw4
Scania demo truck for Asko [2] Nikola serial produced truck [4]
Esoro demo truck in Switzerland [1] Hyundai serial produced truck[3]
2016 2020
2019 2022?
Case study
5
1 Source: https://www.ssb.no/transport-og-reiseliv/statistikker/godstrans2 TØI report “Forecasts for Norwegian freight transport, 2016-2050”3 When using national forecast by Norwegian Environment Agency
Now
Yearly transport of cargo
932 000 tons (average last 10 years)1
Trips per working day
~260
Zero emission trucks
0
2030
1 149 0002
~330
~1003
Background
Research questions
• What is an optimal design of Fuel Cell Electric Truck (FCET) in the transport corridor between Oslo and Trondheim?
• What is the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) of an FCET in comparison with other net-zero carbon dioxide fuels such as biodiesel?
• What is the best techno-economic design and scale-up of hydrogen refueling infrastructure in the corridor, dependent on hydrogen demand (fleet size)?
6Background
o Backgroundo Methodologyo The trucko The infrastructureo Summary & Outlook
Approach
8
Truck energy demand
Truck component design
Model different HRS and electrolyzers
TCO for 2020 & 2030
Evaluate created models
Find LCOH for different scenarios in
2020 & 2030
The truck The Infrastructure
Combine results and conclude upon
feasibility in 2020 & 2030
Number of trucks as free variable
LCOH as free variable
o Backgroundo Methodologyo The trucko The infrastructureo Summary & Outlook
Assumption for truck
10
Source: https://www.volvotrucks.no/no-no/trucks/volvo-fh16/media-gallery.html
• The freight is done with a semi-trailer truck (50 ton)
• The first owner will use the truck for 6 years
• Discount rate of 8%
• A hybrid truck with fuel cell and battery
The truck
El.motorFuel cell
Battery
Electrical energy
Mechanical energy
Fuel
Hydrogen storage
Truck Energy flows
Power and energy demand for a truck
11
FuelEnergy demand
per trip
FCET 729 kWh
Biodiesel 850 kWh
Due to regeneration the hybrid truck requires
10,6% less energy
Efficiency of stack or engine
Fuel demand
55% 40 kg
43% 208 l
The truck
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500
met
ers
abo
ve s
ea le
vel
Km from Oslo
Altitude and truck (50 ton) traction power for Oslo - Trondheim route
Altitude (m)
-600.00
-400.00
-200.00
0.00
200.00
400.00
600.00
800.00
1000.00
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500
Net
po
wer
FC
(kW
)
met
ers
abo
ve s
ea le
vel
Km from Oslo
Altitude and truck (50 ton) traction power for Oslo - Trondheim route
Altitude (m) Traction power (kW)
12
Sized components Size
Max traction power 402 kWmech
Fuel cell 200 kWel
Battery 100 kWh
Fuel tank 46 kgH2
The truck
Truck specifications
Source: Scania. (2017, 2019/04/20/). Hydrogen a fuel of the future? Retrieved from https://www.scania.com/group/en/hydrogen-a-fuel-of-the-future
Truck CAPEX & OPEX
13The truck
Biodiesel FCET
Maintenance NOK/km 1.27 [1] 0.91 [1,2]
Tires, washing and requisites NOK/km 1.42 [1] 1.42 [1]
Road taxes NOK/km 0.71 [3] 0
Fuel 13.8 NOK/l [4] Free variable
[1] Grønland, S. E. (2018). Kostnadsmodeller for transport og logistikk – basisår 2016 (TØI rapport 1638/2018). Retrieved from TØI: https://www.toi.no/publikasjoner/kostnadsmodeller-for-transport-og-logistikk-basisar-2016-article35060-8.html[2] Zhao, H., Wang, Q., Fulton, L., Jaller, M., & Burke, A. (2018). A Comparison of Zero-Emission Highway Trucking Technologies (UC-ITS-2017-50). Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1584b5z9[3] Fjellinjen (2019, 2019/08/11) Bompengekalkulator - Takster fra 1. juni 2019 Retrieved from https://www.fjellinjen.no/privat/bompengekalkulator/[4] Circle K. Norge. (2019, 2019/06/21/). Prishistorikk for truckdiesel Retrieved from https://m.circlek.no/cs/Satellite?c=Page&childpagename=NO1%2FLayout&cid=1334077141669&p=1334077141669&packedargs=lang%3Dno_NO%26site%3DNO1&pagename=NO1Wrapper
Truck type Purchase price (NOK)
Biodiesel 1 152 175
FCET 2020 1 936 340
FCET 2030 1 361 893
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
14The truck
𝑇𝐶 Τ𝑂 𝑘𝑚 =𝐼𝑃𝐶 −
𝑅𝑉1 + 𝑟 𝑛 ∗ 𝐶𝑅𝐹 +
1𝑛σ𝑡=1𝑛 𝐴𝑂𝐶
1 + 𝑟 𝑡
𝐴𝐾𝑇
AKT = Annual Kilometers TravelledAOC = Annual Operation CostsCRF = Capital Recovery FactorIPC = Initial Purchase Cost
Source: Wu, G., Inderbitzin, A., & Bening, C. (2015). Total cost of ownership of electric vehicles compared to conventional vehicles: A probabilistic analysis and projection across market segments. Energy Policy, 80, 196-214. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2015.02.004
Annualized CAPEX OPEX
n = years of ownershipr = discount rateRV = Rest value
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
NO
K/k
m
Cost of hydrogen (NOK/kgH2)
Total cost of ownership depending on hydrogen retail price
TCO H2 truck 2020
TCO Biofuel truck
Comparison of TCO
15The truck
The most sensitive parameters:• Economic lifetime (6 years)• Annual mileage (81 100 km)• CAPEX (1 839 144 NOK)
Comparison of TCO
16The truck
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
NO
K/k
m
Cost of hydrogen (NOK/kgH2)
Total cost of ownership depending on hydrogen retail price
TCO H2 truck 2020
TCO H2 truck 2030
TCO Biofuel truck
o Backgroundo Methodologyo The trucko The infrastructureo Summary & Outlook
Location
18The infrastructure
Location is chosen based on:• A full tank is enough for a one-way trip• Allow the truck to make deliveries nearby
the cities• Allows refilling during obligatory rest period
in the middle of the route• Have resilience
Supply chain
19
Electrolysis (Ely)
PEM or Alkaline
Distributed or centralized production
Hydrogen Refueling Station (HRS)
350 or 700 bar
Transport
In case fueling station and electrolysis is
separated
The infrastructure
Supply chain
20
Electrolysis (Ely)
PEM or Alkaline
Distributed or centralized production
Hydrogen Refueling Station (HRS)
350 or 700 bar
The infrastructure
Cheapest option:
Electrolyzer set-up
21
Electrolyzer unit
Storage 350 bar
Compressor
Electrolyzer
The infrastructure
450 bar
Cooling(Optional)
Hydrogen refuelling station – 350 bar
Levelized Cost Of Hydrogen
22
𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐻 =σ𝑡=1𝑛 𝐼𝑡 +𝑀𝑡 + 𝐸𝑡
1 + 𝑟 𝑡
σ𝑡=1𝑛 𝐻𝑡
1 + 𝑟 𝑡
It = Investment costs year tMt = Maintenance cost year tEt = Energy costs year t
Ht = Hydrogen produced year tN = Lifetime (30 year)r = Interest rate (8%)
The infrastructure
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 10 20 30 40 50
LCO
H (
NO
K/k
gH2
)
Refueling events per HRS & day
700 bar 2020
350 bar 2020
LCOH based on local electrolyzer
23The infrastructure
The most sensitive parameters:• Amount of trucks• Interest rate (8%)• Electricity price
(0.36 NOK/kWhel)
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 10 20 30 40 50
LCO
H (
NO
K/k
gH2
)
Refueling events per HRS & day
700 bar 2020
350 bar 2020
700 bar 2030
350 bar 2030
LCOH based on local electrolyzer
24The infrastructure
The most sensitive parameters:• Amount of trucks• Interest rate (8%)• Electricity price
(0.36 NOK/kWhel)
o Backgroundo Methodologyo The trucko The infrastructureo Summary & Outlook
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0 10 20 30 40 50
LCO
H (
NO
K/k
gH2
)
Refueling events per HRS & day
700 bar 2020
350 bar 2020
Profitability depending on infrastructure
26The infrastructure
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Ref
uel
ing
even
ts p
er H
RS
& d
ay
Cost of hydrogen (NOK/kgH2)
700 bar 2020
350 bar 2020
27The infrastructure
Profitability depending on infrastructure
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 110.0
TCO
(N
OK
/km
)
Ref
uel
ing
even
ts p
er H
RS
& d
ay
Cost of hydrogen (NOK/kgH2)
2020 Scenario
350 bar
700 bar
TCO H2 truck 2020
TCO Biofuel truck
Profitability depending on infrastructure
Summary and Outlook 28
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
TCO
(N
OK
/km
)
Ref
uel
ing
even
ts p
er H
RS
& d
ay
Cost of hydrogen (NOK/kgH2)
2030 Scenario
350 bar 2030
700 bar 2030
TCO H2 truck 2030
TCO Biofuel truck
Profitability depending on infrastructure
Summary and Outlook 29
Profitability depending on infrastructure
Summary and Outlook 30
Infrastructure
2020 2030
Tru
ck
2020 N/A N/A
203035 refuelings per day and station
5 refuelings per day and station
Infrastructure
2020 2030
Tru
ck
2020- 9 937
kNOK/year- 3 755
kNOK/year
2030- 1 412
kNOK/year4 771
kNOK/year
• 15 trucks refueling daily per HRS• 3 HRS stations• Truck fleet of 72 units in total
Price parity with biodiesel (HVO) Feasibility in comparison with biodiesel (HVO)
Summary & Outlook
31
• Based on current theoretical cost levels FCET are not competitive with HVO fueled trucks.
• There are expected price reduction both for trucks and infrastructure that could make FCET an attractive option. • For example in 2030 it is forecasted that a HRS serving 5 trucks would become a feasible option
both for truck and HRS owner.
• Considering the future expected price reduction, short term subsidies should be considered to help to meet national emission reduction targets.
• Strongest gains from economy of scale is found for HRS serving up to 10-15 trucks
• Production of hydrogen at HRS is the least cost option, due to high transport costs
• Demand ramp-up is not included in the calculation. It would increase LCOH.
Summary and Outlook