online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste iii Executive SummaryAs renewable electricity becomes a larger portion of the electricity generation mix, new strategies will be required to accommodate fluctuations in energy generation from these sources. One of the primary strategies proposed for integrating large amounts of renewable energy is using energy storage to absorb excess electricity-generating capacity during times of low demand and/or high rates of generation by renewable sources and then reconverting this stored energy into electricity during periods of high demand and/or low renewable generation.Various energy storage technologies have been developed or proposed. The goal of this analysis was to develop a cost survey of the most-promising and/or mature energy storage technologies and compare them with several configurations employing hydrogen as the energy carrier. A simple energy arbitrage scenario was developed for a mid-sized energy storage system consisting of a 300-MWh nominal storage capacity that is charged during off-peak hours (18 hours per day on weekdays and all day on weekends) and discharged at a rate of 50 MW for 6 peak hours on weekdays.For all the hydrogen cases, off-peak and/or excess renewable electricity is used to electrolyze water to produce hydrogen, which is stored in compressed gas tanks or underground geologic formations. The hydrogen is reconverted into electricity using a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell or hydrogen expansion combustion turbine. The hydrogen storage scenarios are compared with the use of several battery systems (nickel cadmium, sodium sulfur, and vanadium redox), pumped hydro, and compressed air energy storage (CAES).All the energy storage systems are evaluated for the same energy arbitrage scenario using consistent financial and operational assumptions. Costs and performance parameters for the technologies were gathered from literature sources and, in the case of the hydrogen expansion combustion turbine, Aspen Plus modeling. Producing excess hydrogen for use in vehicles or backup power is also evaluated. Two production levels are analyzed: 1,400 kg/day (roughly equivalent to the U.S. Department of Energy's standard model for smallscale distributed hydrogen production) and 12,000 kg/day. As for the purely energy arbitrage scenarios, it is assumed that hydrogen would be produced with offpeak/renewable electricity. Cost results for the analysis are presented in terms of the annualized ("levelized" 1 Figure ES -1 ) cost for producing the energy output from the storage system: electricity fed back onto the grid during peak hours ($/kWh) and, in the case of producing excess hydrogen for vehicles, hydrogen ($/kg).summarizes the comparison of levelized cost of delivered electricity for hydrogen (green bars) and competing technologies (blue bars). For each technology, high-cost, mid-range, and low-cost cases were analyzed, and sensitivity analyses were 1 The leve...
online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste The H2A Production Model analyzes the technical and economic aspects of central and forecourt hydrogen production technologies. Using a standard discounted cash flow rate of return methodology, it determines the minimum hydrogen selling price (or levelized cost), including a specified after-tax internal rate of return from the production technology. Users have the option of accepting default technology input values-such as capital costs, operating costs, and capacity factor-from established H2A production technology cases or entering custom values. Users can also modify the model's financial inputs.This new version of the H2A Production Model features enhanced usability and functionality. Input fields are consolidated and simplified. New capabilities include performing sensitivity analyses and scaling analyses to various plant sizes.The model is actually two models: one Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to analyze central hydrogen production technologies and another to analyze forecourt hydrogen production technologies. The two models are very similar; the primary difference is that the central model performs carbon sequestration calculations, whereas the forecourt model performs refueling station compression, storage, and dispensing calculations. The models and detailed technology cases can be downloaded from www.hydrogen.energy.gov/h2a_production.html.This User Guide helps users already familiar with the basic tenets of H2A hydrogen production cost analysis get started using the new version of the model. It introduces the basic elements of the model then describes the function and use of each of its worksheets. More detailed and explanatory instructional materials are being developed.
online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste iii Executive SummaryAs renewable electricity becomes a larger portion of the electricity generation mix, new strategies will be required to accommodate fluctuations in energy generation from these sources. One of the primary strategies proposed for integrating large amounts of renewable energy is using energy storage to absorb excess electricity-generating capacity during times of low demand and/or high rates of generation by renewable sources and then reconverting this stored energy into electricity during periods of high demand and/or low renewable generation.Various energy storage technologies have been developed or proposed. The goal of this analysis was to develop a cost survey of the most-promising and/or mature energy storage technologies and compare them with several configurations employing hydrogen as the energy carrier. A simple energy arbitrage scenario was developed for a mid-sized energy storage system consisting of a 300-MWh nominal storage capacity that is charged during off-peak hours (18 hours per day on weekdays and all day on weekends) and discharged at a rate of 50 MW for 6 peak hours on weekdays.For all the hydrogen cases, off-peak and/or excess renewable electricity is used to electrolyze water to produce hydrogen, which is stored in compressed gas tanks or underground geologic formations. The hydrogen is reconverted into electricity using a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell or hydrogen expansion combustion turbine. The hydrogen storage scenarios are compared with the use of several battery systems (nickel cadmium, sodium sulfur, and vanadium redox), pumped hydro, and compressed air energy storage (CAES).All the energy storage systems are evaluated for the same energy arbitrage scenario using consistent financial and operational assumptions. Costs and performance parameters for the technologies were gathered from literature sources and, in the case of the hydrogen expansion combustion turbine, Aspen Plus modeling. Producing excess hydrogen for use in vehicles or backup power is also evaluated. Two production levels are analyzed: 1,400 kg/day (roughly equivalent to the U.S. Department of Energy's standard model for smallscale distributed hydrogen production) and 12,000 kg/day. As for the purely energy arbitrage scenarios, it is assumed that hydrogen would be produced with offpeak/renewable electricity. Cost results for the analysis are presented in terms of the annualized ("levelized" 1 Figure ES -1 ) cost for producing the energy output from the storage system: electricity fed back onto the grid during peak hours ($/kWh) and, in the case of producing excess hydrogen for vehicles, hydrogen ($/kg).summarizes the comparison of levelized cost of delivered electricity for hydrogen (green bars) and competing technologies (blue bars). For each technology, high-cost, mid-range, and low-cost cases were analyzed, and sensitivity analyses were 1 The leve...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.