H 2 Enabling practical & affordable hydrogen at scale(s) Guillaume Petitpas Salvador M. Aceves 111 Lawrence Livermore セ @National Laboratory IM#: LLNL-PRES-742208
Safe, Long-Range, Scalable, Cost Effective, Zero Emissions Transportation with Cryo-compressed Hydrogen Storage and Dispensing Composite support rings Carbon-fiber, high pressure vessel Vacuum shell stainless steel Liquid H 2 fill line Gaseous H 2 fill line The high density of liquid hydrogen without the vent losses Lowest cost of ownership Improved performance at large scale (volume/weight/cost) Compelling safety advantages Reduced expansion energy Second layer of protection (outer vacuum jacket)
High energy density provides flexibility for design optimization Onboard volume Vehicle weight Onboard energy Cost Range Fill time 3
Liquid hydrogen (LH 2 ) has many benefits, especially at large scale(s) High density LH 2 allows minimum volume & mass, thus minimum storage & transmission cost High capacity per truck & short transfer times facilitates delivery logistics/scheduling Low potential burst energy: 20 K and <6 bar vs. 300 K and >200 bar LH 2 pumps provide high throughput at low dispensing costs 4,300kg H 2 capacity $167/kg LH 2 800kg H 2 capacity $783/kg 350 bar, composite 250kg H 2 capacity $1000/kg 190 bar, steel From Reddi et al, 2016 4
@ セ Today s standard: 700 bar refueling with pre-cooling (Pre-Cooled to -40 C) ---- ==t 1...-=-=-=-::...i.=-=-=-=--' ---- HX Chiller Limits the Flowrate to 3.6 kg/min Dispenser HYDROGEN REFUELING STATION (GASEOUS HYDROGEN SUPPLY) (Mainta ined at 950 bar) Hist, Pressure High Pressure Buffer Storage Accumulator (Compressed to 900 bar) Booster Compressor (Maintaine d at 500 bar) Mid Pressure Hz Mid Pressure Buffer Storage (Compressed to 950 bar): Compressor (Compressed to 530 bar) Compressor HYDROGEN SUPPLY SOURCE Tube-Trailer (200-500 bar) Pipeline (20 bar) Reformer/Electrolyser H 2 Production Unit (20 bar) Does multiplying this design for large stations make sense? 5
Liquid hydrogen pump (Linde) enables practical cryogenic hydrogen storage through rapid (5 minute) refueling of initially warm and/or pressurized vessels High throughput (100 kg/h) Infinite back to back refuels No cascade No refrigerator No booster compressor Small footprint Low capital cost Minimum electricity consumption at station (1 kwh/kg H 2 ) Highest storage density (up to 80 g/l) Up to 875 bar in two stages
Comparison LH 2 vs. gaseous pathway: refueling station CAPEX LH 2 delivery Gaseous delivery Comparison with 350 bar Station designed for 80 trucks or buses per day, 50 kg capacity each (4,000 kg/day) Cost projections from ANL (HDSAM) Centralized production of H 2 Assumes high volume production Pipeline has high transmission costs ($500k- $1m per mile) Direct fill: 16compressors have same throughput as 5 pumps. 7
Comparison LH 2 vs. gaseous pathway: refueling station OPEX Station designed for 80 trucks or buses per day, 50 kg capacity each (4,000 kg/day) Land: $5k/month Electricity: $0.15/kWh O&M: 3% of CAPEX/year Wage: $60k/year Boil-off: 1%/kgH 2, $5/kgH 2 Different efficiencies: 4kWh e /kgh 2 for compressors 0.25to 0.5kWh e /kgh 2 for LH 2 pumps 8
@ セ CcH 2 provides optimal solution for zero-emission transit Same powertrain volume: 1.25 m 3 Same fueling speed: 180 miles/h Same body: carbon fiber Curb weight Assuming carbon fiber body Powertrain cost Range Power draw on grid at station (kw) ~-....-. ~ - -- -.. BATTEFIY ELECTRIC - I.,_._.....:.,.... ' r -~..... -~...; セ @. q - _a-~ - - - ----- - - - -- -- - Battery 28,000 lb $75k 200 miles 540 350 bar, H 2 22,500 lb $25k 180 miles 53 30 kg H 2 H 2 23,000 lb $30k 300 miles 21% lighter than battery 60 kg H 2 3.4 9
CcH 2 enables a cost-effective integrated solution Least expensiveand most compactway todistribute H 2 Least expensiveand most compactway to storeh 2 in bulk Least expensive, fastest and most efficientway to dispenseh 2 Least expensive,most compactway to storeh 2 on-board vehicles + Added BONUS: cryogenic H 2 has many safety features 10
Lawrence Livennore National Laboratory The work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract DE-AC52-07NA27344 LLNL-PRES-742208 Suitable for External Audience (Unlimited) 11