Technical and Economic Analysis of Hydrogen Refueling Stations

Amgad Elgowainy, Marianne Mintz, Jerry Gillette, Mark Paster, Matthew Hooks (TIAX), Bruce Kelly (Nexant)

National Hydrogen AssociationSacramento, CAApril 1, 2008

2

The submitted presentation has been created by Argonne National Laboratory, a U.S. Department of Energy laboratory managed by UChicago Argonne, LLC, under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The U.S. Government retains for itself, and others acting on its behalf, a paid-up, nonexclusive, irrevocable worldwide license in said presentation to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to the public, and perform publicly and display publicly, by or on behalf of the Government.

33

Presentation Overview

Refueling Station Configuration Options

Station Storage Requirements

Design and Cost Assumptions

Optimization

Results

Summary and Conclusions

4

Gaseous Refueling Station Configuration Options

Storage

Compression

Dispensing

Cascade ChargingSystem

PipelineSupply

Storage

Compression

Dispensing

Cascade ChargingSystem

PipelineSupply

Compression

Dispensing

Cascade ChargingSystem

Tube-TrailerCompression

Dispensing

Cascade ChargingSystem

Tube-Trailer

5

Liquid Refueling Station Configuration for Liquid H2 Delivery by Trucks

Evaporation

Dispensing

Cascade ChargingSystem

Pumping

LH2 Storage

Evaporation

Dispensing

Cascade ChargingSystem

Pumping

LH2 Storage

66

Station MINIMUM Storage Requirement

-Refueling station storage requires a minimum of 1/3 of the station daily demand

Friday Demand Profile

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Hour of the day

% o

f the

tota

l dai

ly d

eman

d

Average ~30% of Daily Demand

LH2Liquid truck

delivery

Lowpressure vessels

Pipelinedelivery

Tube-trailerdelivery

At refueling station

Friday Demand Profile

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Hour of the day

% o

f the

tota

l dai

ly d

eman

d

AverageAverage ~30% of Daily Demand~30% of Daily Demand

LH2Liquid truck

delivery

LH2LH2Liquid truck

delivery

Lowpressure vessels

Pipelinedelivery

Lowpressure vessels

Pipelinedelivery

Tube-trailerdelivery

Tube-trailerdelivery

At refueling stationAt refueling station

7

STATION DESIGN AND COST ASSUMPTIONS

7

8

Cascade Charging System (NOT Effective for Storage)

ASTM SA372, Grade J, Class 70 low alloy steelVessels are 16 inches diameter, 30 feet long

6500 psia vessel holds 67 kg$926/kg of hydrogen (uninstalled)

Recommended inputs to H2A model$1204/kg of hydrogen, including shipping, auxiliaries, and installationNo economies of scale

99

Low Pressure Gaseous Storage

Gas storage vessel designSA516, Grade 70; 2,500 psia; 2.5 in. wall thickness4.1 ft. diameter, 24.9 ft. long, 91 kg hydrogen capacity$2.30/lb of steel; $900/kg of hydrogen (uninstalled)

Recommended inputs to H2A model$1170/kg of hydrogen, including shipping, auxiliaries, and installationNo economies of scale

Low-Pressure Storage2500 psia

Low-Pressure Storage2500 psia

10

Compressor Cost

y = 4.2058x + 18.975

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 50 100 150 200 250 300Capacity (kg/hr)

Tota

l Uni

nsta

lled

Cos

t ($K

)

Reciprocating

y = 4.2058x + 18.975

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 50 100 150 200 250 300Capacity (kg/hr)

Tota

l Uni

nsta

lled

Cos

t ($K

)

Reciprocating

y = 4.2058x + 18.975

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 50 100 150 200 250 300Capacity (kg/hr)

Tota

l Uni

nsta

lled

Cos

t ($K

)

Reciprocating

11

Refueling Station Optimization: Balance between Cascade & Compressor CapacitiesOptimum:Compressor Capacity / Ave. Station Hourly Demand Rate ~ 2.0Cascade Capacity / Ave. Station Daily Demand ~ 0.15

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Hour

Perc

ent o

f Dai

ly D

eman

d

4.16%

3.64%

7.8%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Hour

Perc

ent o

f Dai

ly D

eman

d

4.16%

3.64%

7.8%

12

Validation: Independent Models Produced Same Result Despite Small Variations in Assumptions

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000Capacity

C/C

m

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

St/C

ap

C/Cm: ExcelC/Cm: MatlabSt/Cap: ExcelSt/Cap: Matlab

C=Compressor CapacityCm=Ave. Station Hourly Demand RateSt=Storage CapacityCap=Ave. Station Daily Demand

Station Average Daily Capacity [kg/day]

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000Capacity

C/C

m

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

St/C

ap

C/Cm: ExcelC/Cm: MatlabSt/Cap: ExcelSt/Cap: Matlab

C=Compressor CapacityCm=Ave. Station Hourly Demand RateSt=Storage CapacityCap=Ave. Station Daily Demand

Station Average Daily Capacity [kg/day]

C = Compressor capacityAHD = Average Hourly DemandCASCAP = Cascade capacityADD = Average Daily Demand

CA

SC

AP

/AD

D

C/A

HD

13

RESULTS

13

14

GH2 Refueling Station Cost Analysis– Refueling station cost is a major contributor to the

total delivery costRefueling Station Cost Relative to Total Delivery Cost

(Pipeline delivery to Indianapolis at 20% penetration, Plant 62 mi from City Gate)

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

$9.00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Average Refueling Station Daily Demand [kg/day]

[$/k

g H2

del

iver

ed]

Total Delivery Cost [$/kg]

Refueling Station Cost Contribution [$/kg]

15

GH2 Refueling Station Cost Analysis– Installed capital cost represents the majority of the

refueling station cost

Breakdown of Total Refueling Station Cost

Total Installed Capital75%

Other Capital17%

Total O&M8%

16

GH2 Refueling Station Cost Analysis– Compressors, Cascade System, and GH2 storage are the

major component contributing to the total capital costRefueling Station Installed Capital Cost [$2005]

$0

$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000

$3,500,000

$4,000,000

$4,500,000

$5,000,000

100 200 500 1000 1500 2000

Average Refueling Station Daily Demand [kg/day]

Inst

alle

d C

apita

l [$2

005]

Controls and Safety

Dispensers

Storage

Cascade

Electrical

Compressor(s)

Note: Compressor cost includes one backup compressor

17

GH2 Refueling Station Cost Analysis– Compressors, Cascade System, and GH2 storage are

the major components contributing to total capital cost

% Cost Contribution of Refueling Station Components to Total Installed Capital[500 kg/day Station]

Compressor(s)31%

Electrical5%

Cascade26%

Storage26%

Dispensers2%

Controls and Safety10%

Note: Compressor cost include one backup compressor

18

Summary and Conclusions

A methodology was developed to design and optimize gaseous and liquid hydrogen refueling stations

Refueling station compressors and cascade system were sized to minimize total station cost

Refueling station storage requires a minimum of 1/3 of the station daily demand

Compressors, cascade system, and GH2 storage are the major components contributing to the total capital cost of hydrogen delivery

The total cost of the refueling station is a major contributor to the total delivery infrastructure cost

19

Thanks to other members of H2A/Nexant project team,

USDOE Delivery Tech Team and OFCHIT

Questions??

aelgowainy@anl.gov

Version 2.0 of the H2A Delivery Models will be Published SOON!