skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Comparison of conventional vs. modular hydrogen refueling stations and on-site production vs. delivery.

Abstract

To meet the needs of public and private stakeholders involved in the development, construction, and operation of hydrogen fueling stations needed to support the widespread roll-out of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles, this work presents publicly available station templates and analyses. These ‘Reference Stations’ help reduce the cost and speed the deployment of hydrogen stations by providing a common baseline with which to start a design, enable quick assessment of potential sites for a hydrogen station, identify contributors to poor economics, and suggest areas of research. This work presents layouts, bills of materials, piping and instrumentation diagrams, and detailed analyses of five new station designs. In the near term, delivered hydrogen results in a lower cost of hydrogen compared to on-site production via steam methane reforming or electrolysis, although the on-site production methods have other advantages. Modular station concepts including on-site production can reduce lot sizes from conventional assemble-on-site stations.

Authors:
 [1];  [1]
  1. Sandia National Lab. (SNL-CA), Livermore, CA (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Sandia National Lab. (SNL-CA), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Fuel Cell Technologies Office (EE-3F)
OSTI Identifier:
1347655
Report Number(s):
SAND2017-2790R
651741
DOE Contract Number:
AC04-94AL85000
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
08 HYDROGEN; 29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY

Citation Formats

Hecht, Ethan S., and Pratt, Joseph William. Comparison of conventional vs. modular hydrogen refueling stations and on-site production vs. delivery.. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.2172/1347655.
Hecht, Ethan S., & Pratt, Joseph William. Comparison of conventional vs. modular hydrogen refueling stations and on-site production vs. delivery.. United States. doi:10.2172/1347655.
Hecht, Ethan S., and Pratt, Joseph William. Wed . "Comparison of conventional vs. modular hydrogen refueling stations and on-site production vs. delivery.". United States. doi:10.2172/1347655. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1347655.
@article{osti_1347655,
title = {Comparison of conventional vs. modular hydrogen refueling stations and on-site production vs. delivery.},
author = {Hecht, Ethan S. and Pratt, Joseph William},
abstractNote = {To meet the needs of public and private stakeholders involved in the development, construction, and operation of hydrogen fueling stations needed to support the widespread roll-out of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles, this work presents publicly available station templates and analyses. These ‘Reference Stations’ help reduce the cost and speed the deployment of hydrogen stations by providing a common baseline with which to start a design, enable quick assessment of potential sites for a hydrogen station, identify contributors to poor economics, and suggest areas of research. This work presents layouts, bills of materials, piping and instrumentation diagrams, and detailed analyses of five new station designs. In the near term, delivered hydrogen results in a lower cost of hydrogen compared to on-site production via steam methane reforming or electrolysis, although the on-site production methods have other advantages. Modular station concepts including on-site production can reduce lot sizes from conventional assemble-on-site stations.},
doi = {10.2172/1347655},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Mar 01 00:00:00 EST 2017},
month = {Wed Mar 01 00:00:00 EST 2017}
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • This report presents the potential economic benefits of operating hydrogen refueling stations to accomplish two objectives: supply pressurized hydrogen for vehicles, and supply distributed utility generation, transmission and distribution peaking energy and capacity to the utility. The study determined under what circumstances using a hydrogen-fueled generator as a distributed utility generation source, co-located with the hydrogen refueling station components (electrolyzer and storage), would result in cost savings to the station owner, and hence lower hydrogen production costs. The systems studied include a refueling station (including such components as an electrolyzer, storage, hydrogen dispensers, and compressors) plus on-site hydrogen fueled electricitymore » generation units (e.g., fuel cells or combustion engines). The operational strategy is to use off-peak electricity in the electrolyzer to fill hydrogen storage, and to dispatch the electricity generation about one hour per day to meet the utility`s local and system peaks. The utility was assumed to be willing to pay for such service up to its avoided generation, fuel, transmission and distribution costs.« less
  • This report highlights design and component selection considerations for compressed gas hydrogen fueling stations operating at 5000 psig or 350 bar. The primary focus is on options for compression and storage – in terms of practical equipment options as well as various system configurations and how they influence delivery performance and station economics.
  • This summary report describes comparisons of High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor (HTGR) plants based on the monolithic and modular reactor concepts as sources of process steam. This report presents a series of economic case studies comparing total investment requirements and steam production costs. One of the prime objectives of the GFY 1982 HTGR development program was an economic comparison of the 2240 MWt monolithic HTGR with a modular HTGR reactor system (MRS) consisting of a number of small nuclear heat sources (NHSs) coupled in parallel. The power rating of the modules is 250 MWt in the case of the reformer conceptmore » and 300 MTt in the case of the steam cycle-cogeneration concept. Specifically, in this report the economics of monolithic and modular HTGR systems, designed for equivalent process steam availability and for production of the same quantity of process steam, are compared. The report includes monolithic vs modular comparisons for two applications of the HTGR.« less
  • This study compares the capital and operating costs of two different industrial boiler technologies, each producing 250,000 lbs steam/hr: Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC) and Pulverized Coal (PC) combustion used in conjunction with a limestone Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) system. Three separate turnkey plant designs have been completed. Two of these plant designs incorporate FBC technology and have been designated FBA-16 and FBV-16. The first FBC design (FBA-16) contains two shop assembled, rail-shippable, fluid-bed boilers capable of producing 125,000 lbs/h each. The second plant design (FBV-16) utilizes a single fluid bed boiler shipped by rail in large sections for field assembly.more » This single unit is capable of producing 250,000 lbs/h. The third plant design utilizes a conventional pulverized coal (PC) boiler used in conjunction with a C-E Air Quaity Control System (AQCS) limestone scrubber. The FBA-16 and FBV-16 fluid bed designs were found to be competitive with the conventional unit. Capital costs were generated for the three turnkey plant designs just described. The FBA-16, FBV-16, and Conventional Unit plant designs have associated capital costs of $24.4, $22.8, and $24.7 million, respectively. A substantial cost reduction can be realized for plant capacities less than 180,000 lbs steam/h by incorporating a single FBA-16 type boiler. The operating costs for the bed designs are close enough to be considered similar when considering the nature of the study. The efficiency of the fluid bed plant designs can be increased and required capital equipment reduced by improvements to the plant design. Some potential design modifications are outlined. Extensive design and background research was prformed to increase the validity and relevance of this report.« less