439
A publication of

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS
VOL. 105, 2023

The Italian Associationof Chemical Engineering
Online at www.cetjournal.it

Guest Editors: David Bogle, Flavio Manenti, Piero Salatino
Copyright © 2023, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l.
ISBN 979-12-81206-04-5; ISSN 2283-9216

DOI: 10.3303/CET23105074

Towards a Sustainability Framework for Hydrogen Refuelling
Stations: a Risk-Based Multidisciplinary Approach
Nicola Paltrinieria,*, Toshiyuki Yamamotob, Andrzej Rusinc, Roser Salad, Yiliu Liua,
Hitomi Satoe, Murat GokcekfaDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU),
Trondheim, Norwayb
Institute of Materials and Systems for Sustainability, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japanc
Silesian University of Technology (SUT), Gliwice, PolanddSocio-Technical Research Centre, Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas (CIEMAT),
Madrid, SpaineInstitutes of Innovation for Future Society, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japanf
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Nigde Omer Halisdemir University, Nigde, Turkey
nicola.paltrinieri@ntnu.no

Sustainable hydrogen technology is becoming increasingly important as the world moves towards cleaner andmore sustainable sources of energy. Hydrogen is a clean and versatile energy carrier that has the potential toplay a critical role in the transition to a low-carbon economy. However, to realize this potential, significant
technological advancements are needed in the production, storage, and distribution of hydrogen. To achievethese advancements, a multidisciplinary approach is required that involves technical, organizational, social, andeconomic factors. Sustainable hydrogen technology development is a complex and multifaceted process that
requires the integration of various perspectives and expertise. A framework is needed to bring together theseperspectives and develop a common approach to assessing risks and opportunities associated with hydrogentechnology. This contribution proposes a framework addressing system modelling and analysis issues in cleanhydrogen production and storage, with a focus on uncertainties that can impact social, economic, andenvironmental sustainability of hydrogen production and refueling facilities. By using risk-based performanceand degradation models, the framework helps prevent and mitigate accidents and builds organizational safety
culture and procedures while better communicating with the public. The framework also identifies optimal
operational modes for increasing the feasibility of hydrogen refueling stations, ultimately leading to thedevelopment of more efficient, reliable, and lower-cost hydrogen-based technologies. The development of acommon risk-based framework promotes sustainable hydrogen technology and identifies new opportunities for
growth and collaboration. The framework is developed collaboratively through an international research network.
By integrating multiple perspectives and disciplines, the framework can provide a roadmap for the developmentof sustainable hydrogen technology and create opportunities for future growth and development in the field.

1. Introduction
Produced through other renewable sources such as solar photovoltaics (PV) and wind, hydrogen not only
exemplifies clean energy but also serves as an energy storage medium. However, the sustainability of hydrogen
hinges upon its safety and consistent accessibility from both a technological and financial standpoint (Dash etal., 2023). Given its high flammability and the difficulty in containing the smallest molecule, hydrogen presents
unique challenges (Ustolin et al., 2020). Hybrid renewable energy resources introduce further complexity.
Variability, intermittency, and unpredictability of PV and wind power may compromise the performance andreliability of water electrolysis equipment, thereby affecting the purity of the hydrogen produced (Brauns andTurek, 2020). Accidents may occur due to equipment failure, oxygen contamination, human error, or misleading
procedures. Addressing these physical and technological challenges necessitates an understanding of humanPaper Received: 16 January 2023; Revised: 15 April 2023; Accepted: 15 May 2023
Please cite this article as: Paltrinieri N., Yamamoto T., Rusin A., Sala R., Liu Y., Sato H., Gokcek M., 2023, Towards a Sustainability
Framework for Hydrogen Refuelling Stations: a Risk-based Multidisciplinary Approach, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 105, 439-444
DOI:10.3303/CET23105074

440

behaviour within this novel context, emphasizing the need for safe operational procedures, reliableorganizational structures, and robust safety systems.
Public awareness and cost are additional challenges posed by uncertainties. It is crucial that safety-related
incidents are effectively communicated, particularly to the local community. However, non-professionals may
adopt an overly cautious stance when confronted with uncertainties. Although the cost of hydrogen refuelling
stations (HRFSs) can be mitigated to an extent by grid load balancing and low-cost wind and solar power,
unexpected incidents like power outages or local accidents can undermine these cost-saving efforts. Financial
analysis must therefore account for unexpected scenarios (Hecht and Pratt, 2017).
To tackle the obstacles hindering the advancement of hydrogen, a comprehensive examination of cutting-edge
research directions in hydrogen was undertaken by the International Association for Hydrogen Safety ResearchPriorities Workshop. This workshop identified risk assessment relating to HRFSs as a top-tier priority. Moreprecisely, the development of risk-based strategies is essential to minimize costly and overly cautious designs
while ensuring safety, sustainability, and efficiency (Hong, 2022).
In this study, risk is defined as the uncertainties arising from various factors and the potential adverse outcomesof these uncertainties. A novel risk-based philosophy and framework have been proposed. This framework,
which integrates understanding, prevention, and mitigation of various risks, utilizes multidisciplinary approaches
to analyse and manage the uncertainties surrounding HRFSs. This approach aims to enhance the feasibility ofthis innovative solution, thereby making hydrogen energy both sustainable and clean. The focus on HRFSs isdue to the significant role they play in the emerging hydrogen economy, serving as crucial infrastructure forhydrogen-powered vehicles. Furthermore, the challenges and complexities associated with the safe, efficient,and sustainable operation of these stations provide a fertile ground for multidisciplinary research and innovation,
ultimately contributing to the broader goal of renewable energy transition.

2. Risk-based multidisciplinary approachThis scientific endeavor presents a multi-dimensional framework designed to explore the sustainability of
HRFSs, taking into account various critical factors. The framework comprises five interconnected dimensions,
namely Risk Understanding, Operational and Organizational Safety, Technical Safety, Community
Sustainability, and Economic Sustainability. Each dimension is meticulously constructed to address different
aspects of risk, safety, public acceptance, and financial viability related to HRFSs. The fundamental aim of thisframework is to navigate the complexities of these stations, thereby promoting their safe and sustainable
implementation in the future energy landscape.
2.1 Dimension of Risk Understanding
This dimension is dedicated to the comprehension of risks associated with HRFSs. A systematic approach isdesigned to identify both typical and atypical accident scenarios that could result in uncontrolled hydrogen
releases, with a particular focus on those that pose threats to humans and the surrounding environment(Witkowski et al., 2017). Tasks within this dimension include the identification of the hydrogen system structures,the development of potential scenarios for hazardous uncontrolled hydrogen releases, risk analysis in theoperation of hydrogen systems, and the determination of the extent of hazardous zones close to key hydrogensystem components.
2.2 Dimension of Operational and Organizational Safety
This dimension aims to prevent risks by identifying key parameters and safety requirements of HRFSs. It
proposes the development of new procedures to prevent accidents and ensure safety. The promotion of safe
operational control, organizational commitment to safety, lessons learned from past accidents, and identificationof best safety practices are integral to this dimension (Badia et al., 2021). Tasks include the analysis of past
incidents/accidents, identification of key safety performance indicators, and the establishment of a safety culture.
2.3 Dimension of Technical Safety
In this dimension, technical risk mitigation is addressed. These measures mainly include the emergency
response systems at HRFSs, such as leak detectors, automatic shutdown systems, and fire-extinguishingsystems, are examined (Qi et al., 2021). A probabilistic digital twin model is developed to analyze theeffectiveness and performance of these systems under various uncertainties.
2.4 Dimension of Community Sustainability
This dimension focuses on reducing perceived risks by analyzing public acceptance of HRFSs. It takes into
account factors such as public knowledge of hydrogen technology, risk perception, perceived benefits, trust,441

affect, environmental consciousness or travel behavior. A web-based questionnaire survey is conducted, andthe effects of risk information variance are examined for effective risk communication strategies.
2.5 Dimension of Economic Sustainability
This dimension aims to reduce financial risks by evaluating the commercial viability of hydrogen production
under competitive conditions. HRFSs will be sized using artificial intelligence techniques, and the system will beeconomically evaluated considering probabilistic hydrogen load demand and uncertain power of renewableenergies. Tasks within this dimension include the evaluation of the renewable power system, estimation ofhydrogen production costs, development of sensitivity analysis methods, and optimization algorithms forenhancing economic sustainability (Gökçek and Kale, 2018a, 2018b).
2.6 Overall structure
As shown in Figure 1, the dimension of Community Sustainability is pivotal for the framework as it is assumed
to be a central aspect for HRFS technology success (Huétink et al., 2010). Operational and organizational safety
and Technical Safety have also implications on all the other dimensions, given the dynamics of safety andproduction models (Boukas and Kontogiannis, 2019) and the system dependability on operational andorganizational safety barriers (Hosseinnia Davatgar et al., 2021). On the other hand, Risk Understanding andEconomic Sustainability have not been modelled as directly associated, due to the framework focus and theassumption that understanding risk represents the starting point of the approach, while economic sustainability
can be considered as one of the beneficial results. However, their indirect influence must not be disregarded(Chen et al., 2021).

OPERATIONALAND ORGANIZ.
SAFETYRISKUNDERSTANDING

COMMUNITYSUSTAINABILITY

ECONOMICSUSTAINABILITYTECHNICALSAFETY

Figure 1 Graphical representation of the five dimensions for HRFS sustainability framework and theirinterconnections
Each dimension contributes towards sustainability, but the innovative aspect is its risk-based multi-disciplinary
approach (RMDA), which serves as a decision-making support tool to address uncertainties impeding further
implementations of hydrogen. The framework is proposed and developed with a close integration of technology
qualification, operational, societal, and financial analysis, to enable, develop, and evaluate hydrogen techniques
and projects.

442

3. Research techniques
The research techniques outlined within the suggested framework incorporate a risk-based philosophy with amultidisciplinary perspective. Risk refers to uncertainties stemming from various factors and potential
detrimental consequences to hydrogen facilities, operators, surrounding communities, investors, and both thelocal and global environment.
Within the Risk Understanding dimension, analytical and numerical methods are applied to comprehend
uncertainties. Techniques such as Event Tree Analysis (ETA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Failure Mode andEffects Analysis (FMEA), and Systems Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) are used to estimate the likelihoodof perilous or unexpected events, leveraging statistical data. Consequences of these events, including heatradiation or pressure waves, are assessed through analytical models and commercial software (Ustolin et al.,2020).
Operational and Organizational Safety utilizes relevant databases (Campari et al., 2023) to identify principal
operational and organizational factors. The NOMAC (Nuclear Organization and Management Analysis Concept)
methodology is used as a reference to identify and prioritize key organizational behaviours in high-risk contexts(Haber et al., 1991). A comprehensive case study must be carried out, applying quantitative and qualitativetechniques, including the Organizational Culture Inventory (OCI) questionnaire to draft a conceptual model ofsafety culture for hydrogen technologies (Cooke and Szumal, 2000).
In the Technical Safety dimension, methods for comprehending uncertainties are combined with barrierengineering, model-based systems engineering, and digital approaches. Software like AltaRica (Prosvirnova etal., 2013) is used for verifying simulations and facilitating near-real-time assessments. A block-diagram
approach is developed to evaluate the effectiveness of protective facilities in mitigating domino effects, such as
jet fires.
For Community Sustainability, a web-based questionnaire survey is designed and conducted. Data from thesurvey is used to construct structural equation models for understanding risk perception mechanisms anddiscrete choice models for HRFS acceptability. An Integrated Choice and Latent Variable (ICLV) model (BenAkiva et al., 2002) is further developed to understand the correlation between risk perception and HRFS
acceptability. Lastly, an impact analysis predicts changes in acceptability based on changes in specific risk
factors.
The Economic Sustainability dimension sizes the renewable power system for the HRFS with deterministic andprobabilistic methods, alongside artificial intelligence techniques. The whole system, inclusive of uncertain
interactions, undergoes an economic evaluation, considering factors such as uncertain hydrogen load demandand power generation fluctuations of potential renewable energy sources. Tailored optimization algorithms, like
Genetic Algorithm or Particle Swarm Algorithm (Eberhart and Shi, 1998), are employed for dynamic risk
assessment, prioritizing both accuracy and efficiency.

4. Discussion
The ongoing project "Sustainability development and cost-reduction of hybrid renewable energies poweredhydrogen stations by risk-based multidisciplinary approaches" (SUSHy – EIG Concert-Japan platform) plays acrucial role in the development of the sustainability framework for HRFSs. This initiative ushers in noteworthy
scientific and societal implications.
Scientifically, the emerging framework is transformative. It cultivates a common language of risk, providing asolution to multi-objective optimization issues, and creates an adaptable blueprint for a myriad of scenarios
requiring new technical concept verification. It embodies an exemplar for cross-sector collaborations, merging
humanitarian studies and quantitative data. Moreover, it forges a standardized procedure for planning varioushydrogen projects and shares critical insights into risk monitoring data collection in HRFS operations.
Each facet of the project carries distinct scientific implications. The risk identification process under the Risk
Understanding dimension can be utilized extensively in studies focusing on uncertain factors in complex
systems. The Operational and Organizational Safety dimension supports the formation of high-safety
organizations in energy industries, while the Technical Safety dimension offers an innovative digital approach
beneficial to other renewable energy projects. The Community Sustainability dimension provides an integrated
approach to risk management, and the Economic Sustainability dimension delivers a pioneering approach tomultiple optimizations under uncertainties.
Societally, the SUSHy project is poised to bring about significant change. It encourages a symbiosis of costeffective hydrogen production and risk reduction measures, beneficial to various hydrogen applications. It equips
investors with substantial evidence of new HRFS concepts' feasibility and recommends improvements.
Policymakers gain valuable insights for compensation policies regarding HRFSs, while the multidisciplinary
approach also offers direction for the establishment of procedures and regulations related to these stations.

443

The application of the framework has the potential to guide authorities in formulating relevant regulations for
HRFSs, empowering local communities to conduct pre-assessments on hydrogen projects and avoid potential
risks. Moreover, it bridges understanding between European and Japanese industries by providing
comprehensive information about mutual demands, requirements, and regulations.
In a global context, the developed framework implications extend to several key objectives (United Nations,2018). They align with the goal of affordable and clean energy, promoting the feasibility of distributed hydrogenproduction powered by renewable energy sources. This will render hydrogen energy safer, greener, and morecost-effective. It also supports the goal of decent work and economic growth, emphasizing worker safety,
fostering a safety culture, and stimulating job creation in the hydrogen industry.
In terms of sustainable cities and communities, the framework emphasizes accident prevention and effective
communication about safety and risks, fostering trust in HRFSs within local communities. This initiative
contributes to climate action by advocating for hydrogen, especially green hydrogen, as a key solution to
reducing carbon emissions.

5. Conclusions
This contribution presents a robust and comprehensive framework that addresses system modelling andanalysis challenges in the realm of clean hydrogen production and storage. The framework pays particularattention to the uncertainties that can influence the social, economic, and environmental sustainability ofhydrogen production and refuelling facilities.
By utilizing risk-based performance and degradation models, the framework lays the foundation for preventative
measures and mitigation strategies against accidents. It further aids in constructing an organizational safety
culture and procedures, while enhancing communication with the public. It identifies optimal operational modes,
thereby augmenting the feasibility of HRFSs. This, in turn, paves the way for the evolution of more efficient,reliable, and cost-effective hydrogen-based technologies.
Moreover, the development of a common risk-based framework acts as a catalyst for promoting sustainablehydrogen technology, unveiling new horizons for growth and cooperation. This framework, a product of aninternational research network, is a testament to the power of global collaboration and integration of various
perspectives and disciplines.
By providing a roadmap for sustainable hydrogen technology development, this framework not only addresses
the current challenges but also fuels future growth and progress in the field. The implications of this work extend
beyond the scientific community, potentially influencing policy-making, industry practices, and societal
perceptions of renewable energy. Thus, this contribution signals a promising leap forward in our pursuit of asustainable energy future.
Acknowledgments
This study was funded by the Research Council of Norway (grant no. 334340) and JST SICORP (grant no.
JPMJSC21C5) through the EIG CONCERT-Japan platform.
References
Badia, E., Navajas, J., Losilla, J.-M., 2021. Safety Culture in the Spanish Nuclear Power Plants through the
Prism of High Reliability Organization, Resilience and Conflicting Objectives Theories. Appl. Sci.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app11010345
Ben-Akiva, M., Walker, J., Bernardino, A.T., Gopinath, D.A., Morikawa, T., Polydoropoulou, A., 2002. Integrationof choice and latent variable models. Perpetual motion Travel Behav. Res. Oppor. Appl. challenges 2002,
431–470.
Boukas, D., Kontogiannis, T., 2019. A system dynamics approach in modeling organizational tradeoffs in safety
management.
Hum.
Factors
Ergon.
Manuf.
Serv.
Ind.
29,
389–404.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20795
Brauns, J., Turek, T., 2020. Alkaline Water Electrolysis Powered by Renewable Energy: A Review. Processes.
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8020248
Campari, A., Nakhal Akel, A.J., Ustolin, F., Alvaro, A., Ledda, A., Agnello, P., Moretto, P., Patriarca, R.,
Paltrinieri, N., 2023. Lessons learned from HIAD 2.0: Inspection and maintenance to avoid hydrogen-induced
material
failures.
Comput.
Chem.
Eng.
173,
108199.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2023.108199
Chen, C., Reniers, G., Khakzad, N., Yang, M., 2021. Operational safety economics: Foundations, current
approaches
and
paths
for
futureresearch.
Saf.
Sci.
141,
105326.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105326

444

Cooke, R.A., Szumal, J.L., 2000. Using the organizational culture inventory to understand the operating culturesof organizations. Handb. Organ. Cult. Clim. 4, 1032–1045.
Dash, S.K., Chakraborty, S., Elangovan, D., 2023. A Brief Review of Hydrogen Production Methods and Their
Challenges. Energies. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16031141
Eberhart, R.C., Shi, Y., 1998. Comparison between genetic algorithms and particle swarm optimization, in:
Evolutionary Programming VII: 7th International Conference, EP98 San Diego, California, USA, March 25–
27, 1998 Proceedings 7. Springer, pp. 611–616.
Gökçek, M., Kale, C., 2018a. Optimal design of a hydrogen refuelling station (HRFS) powered by hybrid powersystem. Energy Convers. Manag. 161, 215–224.
Gökçek, M., Kale, C., 2018b. Techno-economical evaluation of a hydrogen refuelling station powered by WindPV hybrid power system: A case study for İzmir-Çeşme. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 43, 10615–10625.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.01.082
Haber, S.B., O’Brien, J.N., Metlay, D.S., Crouch, D.A., 1991. Influence of Organizational Factors on’Performance Reliability. Washington.
Hecht, E., Pratt, J.W., 2017. Comparison of conventional vs. modular hydrogen refueling stations, and on-site
production vs. delivery. United States. https://doi.org/10.2172/1481211
Hong, J., 2022. Hydrogen Safety for Hydrogen Energy Applications and Large-scale Commercialization. New
Energy Exploit. Appl. 1, 19–20. https://doi.org/10.54963/neea.v1i3.96
Hosseinnia Davatgar, B., Paltrinieri, N., Bubbico, R., 2021. Safety Barrier Management: Risk-Based Approachfor the Oil and Gas Sector. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9070722
Huétink, F.J., der Vooren, A. van, Alkemade, F., 2010. Initial infrastructure development strategies for thetransition to sustainable mobility. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77, 1270–1281.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.03.012
Prosvirnova, T., Batteux, M., Brameret, P.-A., Cherfi, A., Friedlhuber, T., Roussel, J.-M., Rauzy, A., 2013. The
AltaRica 3.0 project for model-based safety assessment. IFAC Proc. Vol. 46, 127–132.
Qi, X., Wang, H., Liu, Y., Yang, M., Chen, G., 2021. Bi-directional connectivity diagram for accident propagation
analysis considering the interactions between multiple-process units. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 71, 104442.
United Nations, 2018. The Sustainable Development Goals Report. New York, USA.
Ustolin, F., Paltrinieri, N., Landucci, G., 2020. An innovative and comprehensive approach for the consequence
analysisofliquidhydrogen vessel
explosions. J.
Loss Prev.
Process Ind. 68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104323
Witkowski, A., Rusin, A., Majkut, M., Stolecka, K., 2017. Comprehensive analysis of hydrogen compression andpipeline transportation from thermodynamics and safety aspects. Energy 141, 2508–2518.