# Presentation: 467587

## The Potential of Hydrogen in a

*The Potential of Hydrogen in a*
*Climate-Constrained Future*
- Tom Kreutz
*Princeton Environmental Institute*
*Princeton University*
*Presented at the 2005 AAAS Annual Meeting, Symposium:*
*“**Sustainability - Energy for a Future without Carbon Emissions”*
*19 February 2005, Washington, DC*

**Notes:**
20 sec

## CMI Project Areas:
- Carbon capture (Kreutz, Larson, Socolow, Williams)
- Carbon storage (Celia, Scherer)
- Carbon science (Pacala, Sarmiento, GFDL)
- Carbon policy (Bradford, Oppenheimer)
Integration (Socolow, Pacala)

Funding: 15.1$ from BP, 5 M$ from Ford

- CMI Project Areas:
- - *Carbon capture (Kreutz, Larson, Socolow, Williams)*
- - *Carbon storage (Celia, Scherer)*
- - *Carbon science (Pacala, Sarmiento, GFDL)*
- -* Carbon policy (Bradford, Oppenheimer)*
*Integration (Socolow, Pacala)*
- Funding: 15.1$ from BP, 5 M$ from Ford

*The Carbon Mitigation Initiative (CMI)**at Princeton University, 2001-2010 *

**Notes:**
Old slide

## Brief sketch of the hydrogen landscape
Overview of our work on production of low-carbon H2 and electricity from fossil fuels (primarily coal) 
A potential role for centralized H2 production in an emerging H2 economy

- Brief sketch of the hydrogen landscape
- Overview of our work on production of low-carbon H2 and electricity from fossil fuels (primarily coal)
- A potential role for centralized H2 production in an emerging H2 economy

*Outline of Talk*

## Drivers for the H2 Economy

- H2 is abundant and can be utilized relatively and cleanly (via combustion, electrochemistry)
- Energy security
- Air pollution
- Climate change
- Common clean chemical energy carrier from:
- - renewables,
- - fossil fuels,
- - nuclear power,
- - fusion, etc.

## Difficulties with the H2 Economy

- Efficiency losses during production
- Safety
- Cost:
- - distribution
- - storage (at both large and small scales)
- - utilization
- - safety
- Storage

## H2 Issues

- Zealotry
- Safety
- Straw men
- Poorly designed systems
- Pie in the sky
- Different goals, time scales
- Response to climate change
- Oil prices, politics of nuclear power
- Other ways to solve the problems
- H2 is a package deal

## The Case for Hydrogen - Climate Change 

*The Case for Hydrogen -** **Climate Change*
- Most of the century's fossil fuel carbon must be captured.
- About half of fossil carbon, today, is distributed to small  users  – buildings, vehicles, small factories.
- The costs of retrieval, once dispersed, will be prohibitive.
- An all-electric economy is unlikely.
- An electricity-plus-hydrogen economy is perhaps a more likely alternative.
- Hydrogen from fossil fuels is likely to be cheaper than hydrogen from renewable or nuclear energy for a long time.

## Brief sketch of the hydrogen landscape
Overview of our work on production of carbon-free H2 and electricity from fossil fuels (primarily coal) 
A potential role for centralized H2 production in an emerging H2 economy

- Brief sketch of the hydrogen landscape
- Overview of our work on production of carbon-free H2 and electricity from fossil fuels (primarily coal)
- A potential role for centralized H2 production in an emerging H2 economy

*Outline of Talk*

## Motivation for Studying Coal (vs. Gas)

*Plentiful.*  Resource ~ 500 years (vs. gas/oil: ~100 years).
*Inexpensive (low volatility).*  1-1.5 $/GJ HHV (vs. gas at 2.5+ $/GJ).
*Ubiquitous.** * Wide geographic distribution (vs. middle east).
*Carbon intensive.*
*Potentially clean.* Gasification, esp. with CCS, produces few gaseous emissions and a chemically stable, vitreous ash.
*Ripe for innovation.  *
*Globally significant**. For example:* China: extensive coal resources; little oil and gas.  Potential for huge emissions of both criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases.

## Annual U.S. Carbon Emissions (2002)

- Let’s focus for a moment on the power market...

## Process Modeling

- Heat and mass balances (around each system component) calculated using:
-  Aspen Plus (commercial software), and
-  GS (“Gas-Steam”, Politecnico di Milano)
- Membrane reactor performance calculated via custom Fortran and Matlab codes
- Component capital cost estimates taken from the literature, esp. EPRI reports on IGCC
-  Benchmarking/calibration:

- Economics of IGCC with carbon capture studied by numerous groups
- Used as a point of reference for performance and economics of our system
- Many capital-intensive components are common between IGCC electricity and H2 production systems (both conventional and membrane-based)

**Notes:**
1 min

## “Commercially Ready” Coal IGCC with CO2 Capture

- CO2 venting: 390 MWe @ 1200 $/kWe, ***LHV* = 43.0%, 4.6 ¢/kWh
- CCS:              362 MWe @ 1500 $/kWe, ***LHV* = 34.9%, 6.2 ¢/kWh

**Notes:**
“Commercially ready” technology
This system is used to benchmark/calibrate our work against that of others.
WGS reactors are sulfur tolerant
Syngas expander because 70 bar gasifier (consistency with remainder of work).

## An example of such a plant...

*An example of such a plant...*

## Our Reality...

**Notes:**
“Commercially ready” technology
This system is used to benchmark/calibrate our work against that of others.
WGS reactors are sulfur tolerant
Syngas expander because 70 bar gasifier (consistency with remainder of work).

## Economics of Coal IGCC with CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS)

*Economics of Coal IGCC with CO**2** Capture and Storage (CCS)*

- • Coal IGCC+CCS becomes competitive with *new* coal plants at ~100 $/tC

## Coal IGCC+CCS

- Coal IGCC + CCS *is* a hydrogen plant!

**Notes:**
“Commercially ready” technology
This system is used to benchmark/calibrate our work against that of others.
WGS reactors are sulfur tolerant
Syngas expander because 70 bar gasifier (consistency with remainder of work).

## H2 Production: Add H2 Purification/Separation

- •    Replace syngas expander with PSA and purge gas compressor.
- Reduce the size of the gas turbine.

**Notes:**
15 sec
(transitional slide)

## H2 Production from Coal with CCS

- • 	1070 MWth H2 LHV (771 tonne/day) + 39 MWe electricity,
-     efficiency ***LHV*=60.9%, H2 cost=1.04 $/kg

**Notes:**
30 sec
Mention:
- PSA yields very pure H2 (99.999%)
 Co-product electricity is, by design, not very important economically (to avoid electricity tail wagging H2 dog):
      a) 85% HRF,
      b) ~30 MWe
      c) relatively low electricity price: 3 c/kWh (Frame 7H NGCC at 2.5 $/GJ HHV for gas)
 H2 cost ~$7/GJ (sequestered)

## Disaggregated Cost of H2 from Coal with CCS

- Typical cost is ~1 $/kg  (note: 1 kg H2 ~ 1 gallon gasoline)

## Economics of H2 from Coal with Carbon Storage

- The carbon tax needed to induce CCS in H2 production from coal is significantly lower than that for electric power

*Economics of H*2* from Coal with Carbon Storage*

## H2 Production from Coal with CCS

- Incremental cost for CO2 capture is less for hydrogen than electricity because much of the equipment is already needed for a H2 plant.

**Notes:**
30 sec
Mention:
- PSA yields very pure H2 (99.999%)
 Co-product electricity is, by design, not very important economically (to avoid electricity tail wagging H2 dog):
      a) 85% HRF,
      b) ~30 MWe
      c) relatively low electricity price: 3 c/kWh (Frame 7H NGCC at 2.5 $/GJ HHV for gas)
 H2 cost ~$7/GJ (sequestered)

## Where Might that H2 be Used?

- Displacing traditional H2 from NG (1% of global primary energy).
- At 200 $/tonne C, H2 for industrial boilers, furnaces, and kilns becomes competitive with gas at 4 $/GJ.

## System Parameter Variations

* **System Performance:*
- gasifier/system pressure
- syngas cooling via quench vs. syngas coolers
- - hydrogen recovery factor (HRF)
- hydrogen purity
- sulfur capture vs. sulfur + CO2 co-sequestration
- - membrane reactor configuration
- - membrane reactor operating temperature
- - hydrogen backpressure
- - raffinate turbine technology (blade cooling vs. uncooled)
* **System Economics (Sensitivity Analysis):*
- membrane reactor cost (and type)
- co-product electricity value, capacity factor, capital charge rate, fuel cost, CO2 storage cost, etc.

**Notes:**
30 sec
Read quickly.
Not time here to tell them the results (summarized in paper).  More detail in 2 forthcoming papers.

## Membrane System Results Summary

- No matter how hard we work, the cost of coal-based H2 with CCS is ~1 $/kg!

**Notes:**
15 sec
Unfortunately, the low HRF actually leads to lower overall system efficiency (effective efficiency of H2 production), and higher H2 prices.

## Hydrogen in the Transportation Sector

## Production Cost of H2 (Scale=1 GWth HHV)

## Add CO2 Transport and Geologic Storage...

## Add H2 Storage and Distribution Pipelines...

## Add H2 Refueling Stations...

## Add the Incremental Vehicle Cost...

- Switching to H2 as a transportation fuel is expensive!
- The cost of H2 production is only a small piece of the whole.

## Brief sketch of the hydrogen landscape
Overview of our work on production of low-carbon H2 and electricity from fossil fuels
Is there a role for centralized H2 production in an emerging H2 economy?

- Brief sketch of the hydrogen landscape
- Overview of our work on production of low-carbon H2 and electricity from fossil fuels
- Is there a role for centralized H2 production in an emerging H2 economy?

*Outline of Talk*

## Slide 32

## H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):                            YEAR 1:  25% OF NEW Light Duty Vehicles = H2 FCVs

- H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):                            YEAR 1:  25% OF NEW Light Duty Vehicles = H2 FCVs
- Blue shows good locations for refueling station

## H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):  

- H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):
- YEAR 5: 25% OF NEW LDVs = H2 fueled

## H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):  

- H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):
-   YEAR 10: 25% OF NEW LDVs = H2 fueled

## H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):  

- H2 DEMAND DENSITY (kg/d/km2):
-   YEAR 15: 25% OF NEW LDVs = H2 fueled

## What is this Curve?

- Time

- Consumption

## The “Elephant-in-the-Snake” Problem

*“**Le Petit Prince”, Antoine de Saint Exupéry *

*or**“How does Ohio swallow a 1 GW**th** H**2** plant?”*

## 2004 NRC Report:

*The Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities,*
*Costs, Barriers, and R&D Needs*

-   Among the “major messages” of the report:
- “The (50 year) transition to a hydrogen fuel system will be best accomplished through distributed production of hydrogen, because distributed generation avoids many of the substantial infrastructure barriers faced by centralized generation.”  (pp. 117)
- “It seems likely that, in the next 10 to 30 years, hydrogen produced in a distributed rather than centralized facilities will dominate.”  (pp. 120)

## 2004 NRC Report: Consensus Slides

- Distributed production of hydrogen by SMR is likely transition strategy
- Potential role for natural gas conversion to supply hydrogen both in transition (small, distributed) and long term (large, centralized generators)
- Focus DOE program on development of mass-produced hydrogen appliances for fueling stations (SMR and POX/ATR)
- Downsize effort on centralized generation

## Likelihood of a H2 Economy

- Primary drivers for a U.S. H2 economy:
- 1) secure energy supply,
- 2) improved air quality,
- 3) reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
*H**2** via distributed SMR provides only one of these (#2).*
- Will a H2 economy emerge in this scenario?
*H**2** from coal IGCC+CCS satisfies all three drivers.*
- Yes, large scale, dedicated H2 plants from coal with CCS *are* economically problematic in the transition.
- However, “*slipstream H**2*” from coal IGCC+CCS is *not*.

## Coal IGCC+CCS

- Coal IGCC + CCS *is* a hydrogen plant!

**Notes:**
“Commercially ready” technology
This system is used to benchmark/calibrate our work against that of others.
WGS reactors are sulfur tolerant
Syngas expander because 70 bar gasifier (consistency with remainder of work).

## “Slipstream Hydrogen” System Design

- H2 production “piggybacks” off of coal IGCC+CCS:
- - *H**2** is economical *(marginal production cost ~0.8 $/kg) and has a stable price relative to natural gas-based H2.
*H**2** flow rate is flexible* (only PSA, compression and storage change to match increasing demand).
- Assume medium-sized refueling stations (1 tonne/day H2) for commercial/government fleet vehicles
- Begin with a handful of plants, and increase to many over time.

## An Alternative Scenario

- The U.S. gets serious about climate change in the next quarter century (before fusion, large-scale renewables).
- The cost of CO2 emissions becomes high enough to force significant reductions in the power sector (~100 $/tC).
- CCS is shown to be a safe and economical strategy.
- All new coal power plants are IGCC+CCS, built near demand centers (cities).
- Arbitrary quantities of low-carbon H2 is available to those demand centers for industry and transportation.
- The H2 economy builds from this base.

## Scenarios Investigated

*Scenarios Investigated*

*Temporal:* early “fleet phase” through “commuter phase”
*Geographic:* two limiting cases (Ohio case study):
- - “city gate” plant  Cincinnati, 24 driving miles
- “distant plant”  Columbus, 106 driving miles (91 rural)

## Preliminary Results

- Slipstream H2 from coal IGCC+CCS is competitive with distributed SMR.

*Preliminary Results*

## Preliminary Results

- -  At low demand (< 20-50 tonne/day), trucked H2 from CGCC+CCS is lowest cost option; pipelines thereafter.

## NRC Report Results

-  Our work agrees with theirs.

## Preliminary Results

* **Don’t* upsize the gasification train!  Displace or replace power instead.

## How does this play out in Ohio?

| Year 2000-2003 data: | Cincinnati | Columbus | Ohio |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Population (million people) | 2.0 | 1.6 | 11.4 |
| Light Duty Vehicles (million) | 1.6 | 1.3 | 8.9 |
| LDV gasoline (10^6 gal/day, at 20.1 mpg) | 2.5 | 2.0 | 14 |
| LDV H2 use (tonne/day, at 60 mpge) | 828 | 664 | 4675 |
| LDV H2 requirement (MWth HHV H2) | 1358 | 1090 | 7673 |
| HPQ plants needed for all H2 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Electric capacity (GWe) | 6.6 | 5.3 | 32.3 |
| EPQ / (total electric demand) | 6% | 7% | 1% |
| EPQ plants needed for all power | 18 | 15 | 89 |
| (Coal for H2) / (coal for electricity) | 10% | 10% | 11% |
| H2 from EPQ+X% (tonne/day H2) | 48 | 48 | 55 |
| Fraction of total H2 from "extra" coal | (i.e. HHV = 33.9% 37.7%)  |  | 48% |

| Electricity and H2 Plants with CCS | EPQ | HPQ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Coal input (MWth, HHV) | 1036 | 1962 |
| Power output (MWe) | 362 | 39 |
| H2 output (tonne/day) | - | 771 |
| Efficiency (%, HHV) | 34.9% | 68.4% |
| Product cost (¢/kWh, $/kg H2) | 6.2 | 1.0 |

*How does this play out in Ohio?*

## Slipstream H2 Upshot

- Slipstream H2 with compressed H2 truck delivery is an economical (~2 $/kg, delivered), *flexible* source of low-carbon H2 from indigenous coal.
- This H2 can be used by fleets of (and commuters with) H2 ICVs (and later, FCEVs).
- It requires nearby IGCC+CCS, and associated high carbon prices.
- Since the former is an oft-cited outcome of a serious climate management regime, a H2 economy for transportation seems to me much more likely than before because it *aggressively addresses climate change*.