Keith Wipke, Sam Sprik, 

Jennifer Kurtz, Todd 

Ramsden 

May 5, 2010

NHA Conference

Long Beach, CA

NREL/PR-560-48200

Exceeding Expectations: Learnings from 

the FCV Learning Demo

This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Outline

• Learning Demo Project Overview and Targets

• Vehicle and H2 Station Deployment Status

• Highlights of Latest Vehicle and Infrastructure 

Analysis Results

• Summary of Key Objectives vs. Targets
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 3 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Fuel Cell Vehicle Learning Demonstration 

Project Objectives, Relevance, and Targets

• Objectives

– Validate H2 FC Vehicles and Infrastructure in Parallel

– Identify Current Status and Evolution of the Technology

• Relevance

– Objectively Assess Progress Toward Technology Readiness 

– Provide Feedback to H2 Research and Development

Burbank, CA station. Photo: NREL

Performance Measure 2009 2015

Fuel Cell Stack Durability 2000 hours 5000 hours

Vehicle Range 250+ miles 300+ miles

Hydrogen Cost at Station $3/gge $2-3/gge

Key Targets

Outside 

review

panel
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 4 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Industry Partners Include Automakers and 

Energy-Suppliers

Gen 1

Gen 1 & 2 Gen 1

Gen 2

Gen 2

Gen 1

Gen 2

83

40

17

-

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 

Cumulative Vehicles Deployed/Retired1

Vehicle Deployment by On-Board Hydrogen Storage Type

700 bar on-road

350 bar on-road

Liquid H2 on-road

700 bar retired

350 bar retired

Liquid H2 retired

(1) Retired vehicles have left DOE fleet and are no longer providing data to NREL

Some project teams concluded in Fall/Winter 2009 Created Mar-09-2010 8:34 AM

144

NREL CDP25

17 vehicles on road

127 retired

(CHIP)

40

83

4
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 5 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Status: >1/2 Learning Demo Stations Still in 

Operation; Remainder Decommissioned

8

10

5

0

5

10

15

20

25

Number of Stations

Reporting Period

Cumulative Stations

Existing Stations

Continuing Outside of Project

Retired Stations

NREL CDP31

Created Mar-19-10 9:05am

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Delivered Compressed 

H2

Natural Gas On-site 

Reforming

Electrolysis Delivered Liquid H2

# of Stations

Production Technology

Infrastructure Hydrogen Production Methods 

Existing Stations

Continuing Outside of Project

Retired Stations

NREL CDP32

Created Mar-19-10 9:05am

Total of 130,000 kg H2

produced or dispensed

from the 23 stations

5

10

8
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 6 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Status: Learning Demo & CHIP Stations Still Serving as 

Critical Backbone of H2 Infrastructure in LA and Northeast

Feb-18-2010

2

56

8

SF Bay Area

DC to New York

6

Detroit Area

Los Angeles Area

15

http://mapserve3.nrel.gov/Hydrogen/HydrogenViewer.html
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 7 Innovation for Our Energy Future

80 Public Composite Data Products Have Been Published; 

New Results and Updates Every 6 Months

Since last NHA:

20 new + 52 updated + 8 static = 80 results

Results presented at:

FC Seminar, NHA, EVS 

Highlights from 

the 80 latest 

results follow...
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 8 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Verified High Gen 2 Fuel Cell System Efficiency 

Maintained (Compared to Gen 1)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Net System Power [%]

Efficiency [%]

Fuel Cell System1

 Efficiency2

 Eff. at 25% Pwr Eff. at 100% Pwr

 ------------------- -------------------

Gen1 51 - 58% 30 - 54%

Gen2 53 - 59% 42 - 53%

DOE Target at 25% Power

DOE Target at 100% Power

Gen 1 Efficiency Range

Gen 2 Efficiency Range

NREL CDP08

Created: Sep-02-09 11:27 AM

1

 Gross stack power minus fuel cell system auxiliaries, per DRAFT SAE J2615. Excludes power electronics and electric drive.

2

 Ratio of DC output energy to the lower heating value of the input fuel (hydrogen). 

3

 Individual test data linearly interpolated at 5,10,15,25,50,75,and 100% of max net power. Values at high power linearly extrapolated 

 due to steady state dynamometer cooling limitations.

Critical result: Efficiency not 

sacrificed in order to 

achieve improved durability 

and freeze capability
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 9 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Quantified Gen 2 Fuel Cell System Durability* 

Improvement from Gen 1

Gen1 Gen2 Gen1 Gen2 Gen1 Gen2 0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

2006 Target

2009 Target

Actual Operating Hours Accumulated To-Date Projected Hours to 10% Voltage Degradation

Time (Hours)

DOE Learning Demonstration Fuel Cell Stack Durability:

Based on Data Through 2009 Q2

Max Hrs Accumulated1,2 Avg Hrs Accumulated1,3 Projection to 10% Voltage Degradation4,5,6

Max Projection

Avg Projection

NREL CDP01

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

(1) Range bars created using one data point for each OEM. Some stacks have accumulated hours beyond 10% voltage degradation.

(2) Range (highest and lowest) of the maximum operating hours accumulated to-date of any OEM's individual stack in "real-world" operation.

(3) Range (highest and lowest) of the average operating hours accumulated to-date of all stacks in each OEM's fleet.

(4) Projection using on-road data -- degradation calculated at high stack current. This criterion is used for assessing progress against DOE targets,

 may differ from OEM's end-of-life criterion, and does not address "catastrophic" failure modes, such as membrane failure.

(5) Using one nominal projection per OEM: "Max Projection" = highest nominal projection, "Avg Projection" = average nominal projection.

 The shaded projection bars represents an engineering judgment of the uncertainty on the "Avg Projection" due to data and methodology limitations. 

 Projections will change as additional data are accumulated.

(6) Projection method was modified beginning with 2009 Q2 data, includes an upper projection limit based on demonstrated op hours.

*

Durability is defined by DOE as projected hours to 10% voltage degradation *

One Gen 1 stack 

accumulated almost 

2400 hours without 

maintenance

Significant 

improvement 

of best-inclass
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 10 Innovation for Our Energy Future

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Stack Count

Fuel Cell Stack Operation Hours: Gen1

Gen1

0 

200 400 600 800 

1000

12001400160018002000

Gen1 Hours

24% of stacks in operation

In Op1

Retired2

Other3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Stack Count

Fuel Cell Stack Operation Hours: Gen2

Gen2

0 

200 400 600 800 

1000

12001400160018002000

Gen2 Hours

34% of stacks in operation

In Op1

Retired2

Other3

NREL CDP67

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

1) Stack currently accumulating hours

2) Stack removed for low performance

3) Stack not currently accumulating hours, but not removed because of low performance.

 Some project teams concluded in Fall/Winter 2009

Fuel Cell Stack Operation Hours Histogram
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 11 Innovation for Our Energy Future

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen1

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen1 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP69

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Completed Final Analysis of Gen 1 Fuel Cell 

System Power Degradation

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen2

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen2 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP70

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Note that 

degradation 

flattens out after 

~200 hours
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 12 Innovation for Our Energy Future

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen1

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen1 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP69

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Completed Final Analysis of Gen 1 Fuel Cell 

System Power Degradation

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen2

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen2 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP70

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Note that 

degradation 

flattens out after 

~200 hours

Need ~1000 hours 

to have higher 

confidence in 

slope of 

degradation
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 13 Innovation for Our Energy Future

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen1

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen1 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP69

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Completed Final Analysis of Gen 1 Fuel Cell 

System Power Degradation

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen2

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen2 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP70

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Note that 

degradation 

flattens out after 

~200 hours

Need ~1000 hours 

to have higher 

confidence in 

slope of 

degradation

From limited Gen 2 data 

received so far, trend of 

flattening after 200 

hours appears similar
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 14 Innovation for Our Energy Future

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen1

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen1 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP69

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Completed Final Analysis of Gen 1 Fuel Cell 

System Power Degradation

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

Stack Op Hour Segments(2)

% Power(1)

Max Fuel Cell Power Loss vs Op Hours: Gen2

1) Normalized by fleet median value at 200 hours.

2) Each segment point is median FC power (+-50 hrs).

 Box not drawn if fewer than 3 points in segment.

Gen2 Data Range

25th & 75th Percentiles

Group Median

Outlier

NREL CDP70

Created: Mar-23-10 10:39 AM

Note that 

degradation 

flattens out after 

~200 hours

Need ~1000 hours 

to have higher 

confidence in 

slope of 

degradation

From limited Gen 2 data 

received so far, trend of 

flattening after 200 

hours appears similar

?

Gen 2 results have larger degree 

of uncertainty projected against 

2000 hour target

All vehicles continuing in the 

project will be Gen 2 vehicles
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Accomplishment: Developed Methodology 

for Tracking FC System Voltage Transients

1) Define a voltage transient cycle

dV1

dV2

dT dTss

dVss

time

voltage

Cycle Definition:

dV >= 10% Nom Stack V

dTss >= 10 sec

dVss <= 5% Nom Stack V

2) Find voltage transient cycles

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 440

460

480

500

520

540

560

580

600

620

data pt

voltage

EcoCars Trip Fuel Cell Voltage

FC Volt

Transient Pt

Created: Mar-01-10 3:33 PM

50 100 150 200 250

460

480

500

520

540

560

580

600

dt t

g

EcoCars Trip Fuel Cell Voltage

 FC Voltage in Trip

FC Voltage in Trip

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

voltage

time

3) Categorize and collect voltage 

transient cycle details

Cycle Categories
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 16 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Quantified Transient Cycle Reduction Between Gen 

1 and Gen 2 FC Systems

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

0

5

10

15

20

Cycle Per Mile

Trip Frequency [%]

Number of Cycles1

 per Trip Mile

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Cycle Per Min

Trip Frequency [%]

Number of Cycles1

 per Trip Minute

Gen1 Gen2

0

10

20

30

40

Cycle per Mile

Range of Fleet Average Cycle1

 per Mile

Gen1 Gen2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Cycle per Min

Range of Fleet Average Cycle1

 per Min

NREL CDP74

Created: Mar-22-10 4:46 PM 1) A fuel cell voltage transient cycle has a decrease and increase with a minimum delta of 5% max stack voltage.

Significant 

reduction in 

transients 

observed
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 17 Innovation for Our Energy Future

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

DownUp

SlowUp

SlowDown

SlowDownUp

DownSSUp

Frequency [%]

Transient Cycle1

 Count by Category2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

dV/dt

Frequency [%]

DownUp Cycle1

 dV/dT

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0

10

20

30

40

50

dV/dt

Frequency [%]

SlowUp Cycle1

 dV/dT

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0

10

20

30

40

50

dV/dt

Frequency [%]

SlowDown Cycle1 dV/dT

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

dV/dt

Frequency [%]

SlowDownUp Cycle1 dV/dT

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0

20

40

60

80

100

dV/dt

Frequency [%]

DownSSUp Cycle1 dV/dT

NREL CDP76

Created: Mar-22-10 4:46 PM 1) A fuel cell voltage transient cycle has a decrease and increase with a minimum delta of 5% max stack voltage.

2) Cycle categories based on cycle up and down times. A slow up or down transient has a time change >= 5 seconds.

 SS = Steady State, where the time change is >= 10 seconds and the voltage change is <= 2.5% max stack voltage.

Characterized Fuel Cell Transient Rates by 

Cycle Category

This characterization 

of transients will be 

used in future 

multivariate analysis

Type: The 

slow down, 

fast up are the 

most common 

transients
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 18 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Tracked Refueling Rates Over 5 Year Period 

of Project

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Avg Fuel Rate (kg/min)

Number of Fueling Events

Histogram of Fueling Rates

All Light Duty by Year Through 2009Q4

5 minute fill of

5 kg at 350 bar

3 minute fill of

5 kg at 350 bar

Year Avg (kg/min) %>1 

------- ----------------- -------

2005 0.66 16%

2006 0.74 21%

2007 0.81 26%

2008 0.77 23%

2009 0.77 22%

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2006 MYPP Tech Val Milestone

2012 MYPP Tech Val Milestone

NREL CDP52

Created: Mar-09-10 3:35 PM

Average refueling 

rate has stabilized 

at 0.77 kg/min for 

last 2 years

Note: other results 

include splits by 

700 bar vs. 350 

bar, comm. vs. 

non-comm.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 19 Innovation for Our Energy Future

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Avg Fuel Rate (kg/min)

Number of Fueling Events

Histogram of Fueling Rates

Comm vs Non-Comm Fills - All Light Duty Through 2009Q4

5 minute fill of

5 kg at 350 bar

3 minute fill of

5 kg at 350 bar

Fill Type Avg (kg/min) %>1 

------------- ------------------ -------

Comm 0.86 30%

Non-Comm 0.66 12%

Comm

Non-Comm

2006 MYPP Tech Val Milestone

2012 MYPP Tech Val Milestone

NREL CDP29

Created: Mar-09-10 3:08 PM

Fueling Rates Communication and NonCommunication Fills

Communication fills 

allow for higher fill 

rate than non-comm.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 20 Innovation for Our Energy Future

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Avg Fuel Rate (kg/min)

Number of Fueling Events

Histogram of Fueling Rates

350 vs 700 bar Fills - All Light Duty Through 2009Q4

5 minute fill of

5 kg at 350 bar

3 minute fill of

5 kg at 350 bar

Fill Type Avg (kg/min) %>1 Count

------------- ------------------ ------- --------

350 bar 0.82 29% 19659

700 bar 0.63 4% 5590

350 bar

700 bar

2006 MYPP Tech Val Milestone

2012 MYPP Tech Val Milestone

NREL CDP14

Created: Mar-09-10 3:10 PM

Fueling Rates – 350 and 700 bar

Average 700 bar fill rate 

is 23% slower than 

average 350 bar fill
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 21 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Range: Quantified Real-World Improvement in Driving 

Range Between Gen 1 and Gen 2 Vehicles

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0

5

10

Percentage of Refuelings

Distance between refuelings [Miles]2

Distance Driven Between Refuelings: All OEMs

Gen1

Gen2

NREL CDP80

Created: Mar-23-10 10:53 AM

Total Refuelings1 = 25811

 Gen1

 Refuelings = 18941

 Median distance between refuelings = 56 Miles

 Gen2

 Refuelings = 6870

 Median distance between refuelings = 81 Miles

1. Some refueling events are not detected/reported due to data noise or incompleteness.

2. Distance driven between refuelings is indicative of driver behavior and does not represent the full range of the vehicle.

45% improvement 

in real-world 

driving range in 

Gen 2 vehicles

NREL 2009 NHA 

results showed 

“window-sticker” range 

of 196-254 miles
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 22 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Range: NREL/SRNL Verified Toyota FCHV-adv Driving Range 

>400-Mile (Without Refueling) on June 30, 2009 

Average 

trip 

distance 

(miles)

H2

consumed 

(kg)

Remaining 

usable H2

(kg)

Calculated 

remaining 

range 

(miles) (miles) (miles)

Vehicle 

#1

331.50 4.8255 1.4854 102.04 433.55

Vehicle 431

#2

331.45 4.8751 1.4328 97.41 428.87

0 MPG

30 MPG

60 MPG

90 MPG
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 23 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Summary – Key Performance Metrics

Vehicle Performance Metrics Gen 1 Vehicle Gen 2 Vehicle 2009 Target

Fuel Cell Stack Durability 2000 hours

Max Team Projected Hours to 

10% Voltage Degradation 1807 hours 2521 hours

Average Fuel Cell Durability Projection 821 hours 1062 hours

Max Hours of Operation 

by a Single FC Stack to Date 2375 hours 1261 hours

Driving Range 103-190 miles 196-254 miles 250 miles

Fuel Economy (Window Sticker) 42 – 57 mi/kg 43 – 58 mi/kg no target

Fuel Cell Efficiency at 1⁄4 Power 51 - 58% 53 - 59% 60%

Fuel Cell Efficiency at Full Power 30 - 54% 42 - 53% 50%

Infrastructure Performance Metrics 2009 Target

H2 Cost at Station (early market)

On-site natural gas 

reformation

$7.70 - $10.30

On-site 

Electrolysis 

$10.00 - $12.90

$3/gge

Average H2 Fueling Rate 0.77 kg/min 1.0 kg/min

Outside of this project, DOE independent panels concluded at 500 replicate stations/year:

Distributed natural gas reformation at 1500 kg/day: $2.75-$3.50/kg (2006)

Distributed electrolysis at 1500kg/day: $4.90-$5.70 (2009)
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 24 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Summary

• Project has completed 5 full years of operation

• Vehicle operation: 106,000 hours, 2.5 million miles, 

427,000 trips

• H2 station operation: 130,000 kg produced or dispensed, 

25,000 refuelings

• DOE FC Durability and Range Targets Met

• Two of the OEMs will be continuing operation of Gen 2 

vehicles through end of 2011; more results to come

• Future work: Additional collaboration with remaining auto 

OEM teams to make analyses useful for technology 

evolution and preparation for 2014-2015 market entry
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 25 Innovation for Our Energy Future

Questions and Discussion

Project Contact: Keith Wipke, National Renewable Energy Lab

303.275.4451 keith.wipke nrel.gov

All public Learning Demo papers and presentations are available 

online at http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_tech_validation.html

@