Jennifer Kurtz (PI), Sam Sprik, Chris Ainscough, Genevieve Saur, Matt Jeffers

NREL/PR-5400-66760

June 17, 2016 Advanced Automotive Battery Conference Detroit, MI

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Evaluation

2

• Why FCEVs • Overview of FCEV evaluation • Results

Content

3

NREL RD&D accelerates the process of bringing sustainable transportation technologies to the market with the ultimate goals of:

• Reduction of GHG emissions in the

transportation sector to meet a 2050 goal of 80% below 2005 levels

• Diversification of transportation energy sources to reduce petroleum consumption and promote U.S. energy security

Sustainable Transportation Vision

Figure by NREL

4

Why Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles

Hydrogen FCEVs are clean, efficient, refuel quickly, and provide long driving range

Challenges include hydrogen infrastructure cost & reliability, fuel cell durability & reliability

5

The Hydrogen Fueling Research & Station Technology

Ensure that FCEV customers have a positive fueling experience relative to conventional gasoline/diesel stations as vehicles are introduced (2015-2017), and transition to advanced refueling technology beyond 2017.

1. Reduce the installation cost of a hydrogen fueling station to be competitive with conventional liquid fuel. 2. Improve the availability, reliability, and cost while ensuring the safety of high-pressure components. 3. Focus a flexible and responsive set of technical experts and facilities to help solve today’s urgent challenges and

the future unpredicted needs. 4. Enable distributed generation of renewable hydrogen in a broader energy ecosystem.

Stakeholders Partners Programs

Delivered

On-site

6

Renewable Hydrogen Options

7

NFCTEC Analysis and Reporting of Real-World Operation Data

CDPs

DDPs

Public

Composite Data Products (CDPs) • Aggregated data across multiple systems,

sites, and teams • Publish analysis results every six months

without revealing proprietary data

Detailed Data Products (DDPs) • Individual data analyses

• Identify individual contribution to CDPs • Shared every six months only with the

partner who supplied the data

www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_tech_validation.html

Results

Bundled data (operation and maintenance/safety) delivered

to NREL quarterly Internal analysis

completed quarterly in NFCTEC

National Fuel Cell Technology Evaluation Center

8

On-road FCEVs & Partners

GM

Mercedes-Benz

Honda2

Nissan North America2

Toyota2

Six Data Providers1

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Range of FCEV Model Years

1DOE project overview: • $5.5 million DOE funding • Data to be collected from up to ~90 vehicles

2Project managed by Electricore Award completed

Hyundai

Objectives o Data analysis and reporting of

hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEV) operating in real-world setting

o Identify current status and evolution of the technology

o Publish performance status and progress from multiple FCEV models

9

FCEV Deployment and Operation Through 12/2015

FCEVs retired

Max fleet voltage durability (Hours to 10% degradation metric)

miles traveled

Fuel cell operation hours

Max FCEV odometer miles

Max fuel cell operation hours

Average on-road fuel economy miles/kg

FCEVs total

NREL Hydrogen Station Dedication 10/2015

10

Vehicle Count & Miles Since 2006

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

50

100

150

200

250

Vehi

cle

Cou

nt

Vehicle Count

Total Vehicle Count = 222

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

0

2

4

6

8

Cum

ulat

ive

Mile

s

10 6 Cumulative Miles

Total Miles = 6,335,866

NREL

Created: May-01-16 8:19 P

Pause in evaluation project

Pause in evaluation project

Diverse and statistically significant data set

11

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

LD1

LD2

LD2+

LD3

FCEV Evaluation Phases

Results Published

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 20160

2

4

6

8Number of Participating OEMs

2006

Q1

2006

Q3

2007

Q1

2007

Q3

2008

Q1

2008

Q3

2009

Q1

2009

Q3

2010

Q1

2010

Q3

2011

Q1

2011

Q3

2012

Q1

2012

Q3

2013

Q1

2013

Q3

2014

Q1

2014

Q3

2015

Q1

2015

Q3

2016

Q1

10 4

0

2

4LD Evaluation Trip Count 1

NREL

Created: Mar-04-16 1:33 PM

Participants and Trips Since 2006

NREL analyzed trips decreasing due to planned vehicle decommissioning of older generation vehicles.

Current phase

12

FCEV Analysis Categories

Analyzed data through 12/2015 All results not included here. All results available online at

www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_tech_validation.html

Driving

Deploy

Specs Fuel Economy

Reliability

Durability

Range

FC Performance

H2 Performance

Fueling

Other

13

FCEV Voltage Durability

2006-2007 (LD1)

2008-2009 (LD2)

2010-2011 (LD2+) 5 2012-2015

Hou

rs

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

DOE MYRD&D 2020 Durability Target

Comparison of Fuel Cell Operation Hours and Durability

Max Op Hours

Max Fleet Ave Durability 1 , 2 , 3

Ave Fleet Ave Durability 1 , 2 , 3

NREL

Created: May-03-16 12:38 P

Average fleet voltage durability projection increased > 160% from initial projections in 2006 (CDP-FCEV-31)

14

Operation Hours

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

FC S

tack

(%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Fuel Cell Stacks with Operation Hours Beyond the Voltage Degradation Prediction

1

FC Stack Op Hr > FC Stack 10% V deg

FC Stack Op Hr 2 < FC Stack 10% V deg

NREL

Created: Apr-28-16 12:59 P

Comparison of FC Stacks Operated Beyond 10% Voltage Degradation

More than 60% of analyzed stacks have not operated beyond 10% voltage degradation.

15

On-Road Fuel Economy

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

Fuel Economy (miles/kg)4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Vehi

cle

Cou

nt [%

]Average On-Road Vehicle Fuel Economy

1 ,2

Max57.5

Median51

Min40.9

Average EPA adjusted fuel economy

for comparable gasoline car5

Model year 2004 = 22.8 mpgModel year 2008 = 24.5 mpgModel year 2013 = 27.6 mpg

NREL

Created: Apr-28-16 10:46 A

The median on-road vehicle fuel economy is 51 miles per kg, nearly twice the 2013 EPA adjusted fuel economy for gasoline.

16

Comparison of On-Road Fuel Economy

2006-2007 (LD1) 2008-2009 (LD2) 2012-201530

35

40

45

50

55

60

Fuel

Eco

nom

y (m

iles/

kg)

Comparison of On-Road Fuel Economy1 ,2 ,3

NREL

Created: May-16-16 2:07 P

The on-road fuel economy has consistently increased over the last 10 years.

17

0 - 50k 50 - 100k > 100kVehicle Odometer [miles]

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Fuel

Eco

nom

y [m

iles/

kg]

Average On-Road Fuel Economy by Vehicle Odometer

Overall Median

NREL

Created: Feb-19-16 7:41 AM

Average On-Road Fuel Economy by Vehicle Odometer

Overall median fuel economy = 51 m/kg, more than two times the average 2008 (comparable model year of FCEVs analyzed) EPA car fuel economy.

18

A. SMR LH2

B. SMR G

H2

C. Onsit

e RH2

D. Onsit

e 33%

RH2

E. Onsit

e CA G

rid H

2

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Wel

l-to-

Whe

els

Emis

sion

s (g

CO

2-eq

uiv/

mile

)

Well-to-Wheels CO2

and GHG Emissions 1 by FCEV On-road Fuel Economy

2

CO2 FCEV Min/Max On-road FE 2 ,3

GHGs 4 FCEV Min/Max On-road FE

CO2/GHG FCEV Median EPA FE 5

CO2 Baseline 6 Passenger Car - CA Gas

GHG Baseline 6 Passenger Car - CA Gas

CO2 Baseline 6 Light Duty Truck - CA Gas

GHG Baseline 6 Light Duty Truck - CA Gas

NREL

Created: Apr-28-16 12:39 P

GHG Emissions Comparisons

Scenario B: Median FCEV GHG 30% lower than passenger car and 35% lower than light duty truck baselines. Majority of current stations are delivered gas and FCEVs analyzed include sedan and SUV.

1. GREET Fuel Cycle 2. CDP-FCEV-14 3. On-road FCEV 40.9 – 57.5 miles/kg 4. GHG includes CO2 and CO2 equivalent global warming

potential CH4, N2O, VOC, CO, NOx, Black Carbon, and Organic Carbon

5. Median FCEV EPA combined rating 6. Gasoline (model year 2015) passenger car 28.8 mpg,

light duty truck 26.8 mpg

19

Number of Events26% were unscheduled

8%

12%

27%

45%

FILTER

COOLANT

SENSOR

STACK

MISC

Mile

s/La

bor H

our

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Miles per Labor Hour

Typical, regular vehicle maintenance

FCEV Maintenance and Reliability

Majority of FCEVs are older generation without commercial grade maintenance expectations. Simple unscheduled maintenance (72%) filters and coolant fills. Only 3.5% of failures occurred on-road (CDP-FCEV-73). Average maintenance per vehicle decreasing since 2012 (CDP-FCEV-68).

20

Comparison of Fills to SAE J2601 Temperature and Pressure Limits

Fills (35 and 70 MPa) following pressure and temperature SAE J2601 limits

21

Summary of Key Metrics

Updated values since 6/2015 report and continued progress demonstrated over the four evaluation periods with FCEV technology improvements especially in key technical areas like fuel cell durability, range, and fuel

economy.

22

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

Learn more at www.nrel.gov/transportation

and www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_tech_validation

Technical Back-Up Slides

24

% of Rated Stack Power0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Stac

k LH

V Ef

ficie

ncy

(%)

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80Fuel Cell Stack Efficiency

On Road Stack Efficiency 1

Reported System Efficiency2

DOE 2020 Target 3

NREL

Created: Apr-29-16 2:26 PM

On-Road Fuel Cell Stack Efficiency

On-road stack efficiency compared with dyno system efficiency and DOE MYRDD 2020 Stack Target (65%). Average system efficiency at 25% power is 57%.

25

Voltage Degradation Analysis Approach Analysis – EXAMPLE DATA

• Voltage and current data 1

1

• Apply polarization fit

2

2

3

• Corresponding operation hour 3

Voltages from polarization fit at set currents

4 4

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

Op Hours

Volta

ge

Voltage vs. Operation Hours at 300A: Vehicle19-Stack1

871

900

847

288

259

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1Stack Weight Factors

Wei

ght V

alue

Overal

l

DatQty

DatGap

DR1ci

DR2ci

Created: Oct-09-08 3:01 PM

warm-up time=10 min

pwr rate filt=1000 kW/s

amp rate filt=1000 A/s

pts per fit=2500

1 data pt every 1seconds

5

5 Fit voltage and operation data

6

6 Degradation linear fit 7

7 Y-intercept beginning of life voltage

8 8 Record operation hour when fit crosses 10% nominal voltage drop

9

9 Investigate fit quality

26

Key Analysis Topics

Critical

• Fuel cell durability • Vehicle operation (hours,

miles) • Specs (power density, specific

power) • Range, fuel economy, and

efficiency • Fill performance • Reliability

Important

• Drive behaviors • Fill behaviors • Power management • Energy • Transients • Comparisons to conventional

vehicles

These key topics were selected based on review of past CDPs, targets, most commonly referenced topics, and DOE feedback.

27

Data Templates and Tools

Templates enable collection of similar data from all the projects

Thank you!