Project ABSOLUTE: A ZEBRA Battery/Intermediate Temperature Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Hybrid for Automotive Applications

Brett, Dan J. L.; Aguiar, P.; Brandon, Nigel P.; Bull, R.N.; Galloway, R. C.; Hayes, Gary W.; Lillie, K.; Mellors, C.; Millward, M.; Smith, Christopher L.; Tilley, A. R.

doi:10.1115/1.2205348

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We have also assumed that the fuel cell type is a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell (PEMFC), and have not considered other types of fuel cell which are also suitable for vehicle applications, such as solid oxide fuel cells, which are particularly suited for vehicles with well defined duty cycles in a hybrid configuration (Brett et al, 2006a;Brett et al, 2006b).…”

Section: Other Considerations and Sensitivitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a pre-print version of: Offer, G.J., et al., Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system. Energy Policy (2009Policy ( ), doi:10.1016Policy ( /j.enpol.2009 AbstractThis paper compares battery electric vehicles (BEV) to hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEV) and hydrogen fuel cell plug-in hybrid vehicles (FCHEV). Qualitative comparisons of technologies and infrastructural requirements, and quantitative comparisons of the lifecycle cost of the powertrain over 100,000 miles are undertaken, accounting for capital and fuel costs. A common vehicle platform is assumed. The 2030 scenario is discussed and compared to a conventional gasoline-fuelled internal combustion engine (ICE) powertrain. A comprehensive sensitivity analysis shows that in 2030 FCEVs could achieve lifecycle cost parity with conventional gasoline vehicles. However, both the BEV and FCHEV have significantly lower lifecycle costs. In the 2030 scenario, powertrain lifecycle costs of FCEVs range from $7,360 to $22,580, whereas those for BEVs range from $6,460 to $11,420 and FCHEVs, from $4,310 to $12,540. All vehicle platforms exhibit significant cost sensitivity to powertrain capital cost. The BEV and FCHEV are relatively insensitive to electricity costs but the FCHEV and FCV are sensitive to hydrogen cost. The BEV and FCHEV are reasonably similar in lifecycle cost and one may offer an advantage over the other depending on driving patterns. A key conclusion is that the best path for future development of FCEVs is the FCHEV.

show abstract

Section: Other Considerations and Sensitivitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Eq. (2) represents the calculation of the total costs of the battery-only vehicle, which includes the battery, electric motor and power electronics cost, as well as the cost associated with electricity consumption. Eq.…”

Section: Techno-economic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have looked at the design process of sizing the battery and fuel cell system for different applications and considered the fuel economy and range of different vehicles operated on different fuels [1][2][3]; in addition, modelling of the battery and fuel cell system [4] with a view to assessing the feasibility of thermal integration has been performed. This study considers the feasibility of developing such a hybrid system based on factors 0378 such as system size, emissions and techno-economics, by comparing it to a fuel cell-only, a battery-only and an ICE vehicle.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%