Hydrogen Posture Plan Hydrogen Posture Plan

An Integrated Research, Development An Integrated Research, Development

and Demonstration Plan and Demonstration Plan

December 2006 

. . United States Department of Energy

United States Department of Transportation
A National Commitment

In his 2003 State of the Union address, President Bush announced a hydrogen initiative to reverse America’s 

growing dependence on foreign oil and improve the environment. The President urged the development of 

commercially viable fuel cells for cars, trucks, homes, and businesses: 

With a new national commitment, our scientists and engineers will overcome obstacles...so that 

the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free. Join 

me in this important innovation to make our air significantly cleaner, and our country much less 

dependent on foreign sources of energy. 

— President George W. Bush 

State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003 

The National Academies’ February 2004 report on the DOE Hydrogen Program concluded that: 

A transition to hydrogen as a major fuel in the next 50 years could fundamentally transform the 

U.S. energy system, creating opportunities to increase energy security through the use of a 

variety of domestic energy resources for hydrogen production while reducing environmental 

impacts, including atmospheric CO2

 emissions and criteria pollutants. 

— The National Academies

The Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities, 

Costs, Barriers, and R&D Needs 

February 2004 

In his speech for Earth Day 2005, DOE Secretary Samuel W. Bodman emphasized the importance of partnerships to 

fulfill the President’s vision: 

Numerous partnerships between all levels of government, the automotive and energy industries 

and their suppliers are making significant progress toward developing and deploying new 

hydrogen vehicles and the infrastructure to support them. 

— U.S. DOE Secretary Samuel W. Bodman 

April 22, 2005 

At the 2005 DOE Hydrogen Program Review, DOE Under Secretary David Garman remarked upon the need for 

teamwork among visionaries and pragmatists: 

Imagining the hydrogen energy economy is easy enough for visionaries and dreamers, but 

ultimately it doesn’t happen unless scientists and engineers overcome technical obstacles, 

entrepreneurs take risks, corporate boards commit capital, and consumers choose. What is 

remarkable about our efforts is that the visionaries and the pragmatists are working together, in 

close partnership, to make the hydrogen energy economy a reality. 

— David K. Garman, Under Secretary, U.S. DOE 

May 23, 2005 

When he signed the Energy Policy Act of 2005, President Bush reiterated his commitment to the hydrogen initiative 

and acknowledged the support of Congress: 

The bill I sign today also includes strong support for hydrogen fuel technology. When hydrogen 

is used in a fuel cell, it can power consumer products from computers to cell phones to cars 

that emit pure water instead of exhaust fumes. I laid out a hydrogen fuel initiative, and I want 

to thank the members of Congress for adding to the momentum of this initiative through this 

energy bill.

 — President George W. Bush 

Signing of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, August 8, 2005 
Foreword

Energy is the life-blood of our nation. It is the mainstay of our standard of living, economy, and 

national security. Clean forms of energy are needed to support sustainable global economic 

growth while mitigating impacts on air quality and the potential effects of greenhouse gas 

emissions. Our growing dependence on foreign sources of energy threatens our national 

security. As a nation, we must work to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy in 

a manner that is affordable and preserves environmental quality. 

To address these challenges, the President’s National Energy Policy, the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005, and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Strategic Plan call for expanding the 

development of diverse domestic energy supplies. In 2006, the President announced the 

Advanced Energy Initiative (AEI).1

 The AEI accelerates research on technologies having 

the potential to reduce near-term oil use in the transportation sector including advanced 

batteries for hybrid vehicles and cellulosic ethanol, and reinforces the President’s Hydrogen 

Fuel Initiative, which aims to make hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and fueling stations available to 

consumers in the longer term. The AEI also supports research to reduce the costs of advanced 

electricity production technologies in the stationary sector such as clean coal, nuclear energy, 

solar photovoltaics, and wind energy. 

The Hydrogen Fuel Initiative accelerates the pace of research and development on hydrogen 

production and delivery infrastructure technologies needed to support hydrogen-powered fuel 

cells for use in transportation and electricity generation. Working with industry, academia, 

and the national labs, the DOE developed a long-term plan for moving toward widespread 

implementation of hydrogen technologies — a solution that holds the potential to provide 

virtually limitless clean, safe, secure, affordable, and reliable energy from diverse domestic 

resources. Ultimately, hydrogen could become one of a diverse set of alternatives that will 

address the energy needs of the United States. To realize this goal, the Nation must develop 

and validate advanced hydrogen fuel cell and infrastructure technologies while continuing to 

promote complementary near-term energy efficiency and renewable energy solutions, such as 

ethanol and hybrid electric vehicles. 

The 2006 Hydrogen Posture Plan satisfies Section 804 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

which requires that the Secretary of Energy transmit to Congress a coordinated plan for the 

Department’s hydrogen and fuel cell programs. This plan also updates the previous plan, 

issued in February 2004, for successfully integrating ongoing and future hydrogen research, 

development and demonstration (RD&D) activities into a focused Hydrogen Program. The 

program will integrate technology for hydrogen production (from fossil, nuclear, and renewable 

resources), infrastructure development (including delivery and storage), and fuel cells for 

transportation and stationary applications. A coordinated Hydrogen Program will improve 

the effectiveness and accountability of the government’s RD&D activities and increase the 

Program’s ability to achieve its goals. Activities by the Department of Transportation (DOT) 

and the DOE are included. 

The policy assumptions implicit in the Hydrogen Posture Plan are: 

✦ The program is focused on the research and development activities needed to 

overcome the barriers to making hydrogen and fuel cell technologies competitive with 

alternative technologies. 

✦ Learning demonstrations will be used to measure progress; identify issues during 

real-world operation that will provide feedback to the R&D program; validate the 

performance, durability, and cost of the technologies; address systems engineering 

issues; enable the DOE to provide information to Congress and the public on the 

status of the technology; and educate the public, especially safety and code officials 

and first responders. 

i Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydro

Wind

Solar

Nuclear

✦ Commercial demonstrations and market transformation will occur only when 

the performance and durability of the technologies are validated. The decision to 

commercialize rests entirely with the private sector. Automakers may decide to 

market a fuel cell vehicle in a different time frame (perhaps earlier, perhaps later) 

than the DOE validation activities might suggest. 

✦ When the performance and durability of the technologies are validated, the 

government may consider becoming an “early adopter” by purchasing or leasing 

hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and hydrogen refueling technologies to promote public 

acceptance of the technologies. 

The goal of the Program is to develop hydrogen production, delivery, storage, and fuel 

cell technologies that enable the automobile and energy companies to opt for commercial 

availability of fuel cell vehicles and hydrogen fuel infrastructure by 2020. 

Hydrogen has the long-term potential to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and lower 

carbon and criteria pollutant emissions from the transportation sector. In the near-term, 

gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles and biofuels (ethanol and biodiesel) offer excellent options for 

reducing oil use. 

Ultimately, hydrogen from diverse domestic resources may be used in a clean, safe, reliable, 

and affordable manner in fuel cell vehicles, stationary, and portable power applications. 

Development of hydrogen, along with other domestic energy resources, will ensure that the 

United States has an abundant, reliable, and affordable supply of clean energy to maintain the 

Nation’s prosperity throughout the 21st century. 

Domestic Hydrogen Production Options 

Di

ZERO/NEAR

ZERO

EMISSIONS

HIGH

RELIABILITY

l

Coal

Sequestration

Nuclear

Distributed

Natural

Gas*

stributed

Generation

Transportation

EFFICIENCY &

Biomass

Hydro

Wind

So ar

Geothermal

with Carbon

* Near term only

Hydrogen Posture Plan ii 
Executive Summary

The Hydrogen Posture Plan was prepared by the U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) Offices of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; Fossil Energy; 

Science; Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology; and the U.S. Department 

of Transportation (DOT) to outline the activities, milestones, and deliverables 

that the Federal government plans to pursue to support the development of 

hydrogen-based energy systems. The Hydrogen Posture Plan integrates the 

planning and budgeting for program activities that will aid in this development. 

More specifically, this Plan outlines the DOE role in hydrogen energy research 

and development, in accordance with the National Hydrogen Energy Vision 

and Roadmap.2, 3 The Plan lays the foundation for a coordinated response, 

including collaboration with the DOT, to the President’s plan for accelerating 

implementation of hydrogen infrastructure and fuel cell technologies. 

Key Points 

✦ Use of hydrogen as an energy carrier, together with other alternative 

domestic fuels and technologies, can enhance long-term energy security 

while mitigating the effects of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. 

✦ Technical challenges to developing cost effective hydrogen technologies 

include lowering the cost of hydrogen production, delivery, storage, fuel 

cells, and end-use applications. Hydrogen systems require effective 

safety codes and standards, not only to ensure that these systems are 

safe, but to help define design standards for future hydrogen vehicles 

and infrastructure. In addition, education and outreach are vital to 

raise awareness, accelerate technology transfer, and to increase public 

understanding of hydrogen energy systems. These challenges and the 

general paths forward are discussed in detail in the National Hydrogen 

Energy Roadmap. 

✦ The Hydrogen Posture Plan integrates “This committee believes that investigating 

existing and future activities by DOE and conducting RD&D activities to determine 

to pursue the R&D priorities laid out in whether a hydrogen economy might be realized 

the Roadmap and overcome the related are important to the nation.” 

— The National Academies technical challenges. The DOE, DOT, 

and other Federal agencies will play a 

leadership role in the development of 

hydrogen technologies. 

Committee on Alternatives and 

Strategies for Future Hydrogen 

Production and Use 

✦ Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies must meet market-based requirements 

for cost, operability, safety, maintenance, and overall performance. 

Given the uncertainty of overcoming all the technical hurdles, this plan 

assumes that the major policy (at this time) is to conduct the research, 

development, and validation necessary to address key technical and cost 

targets. The goal is “technology readiness” of hydrogen production, 

delivery, storage, and fuel cell technologies, to enable the automobile and 

energy companies to opt for commercial availability of fuel cell vehicles and 

hydrogen fuel infrastructure by 2020. Technology that meets consumer 

requirements is necessary, but not sufficient, for industry to move forward 

with commercialization. Portable and stationary power systems, which 

generally have less stringent cost targets, will likely be commercialized 

sooner than vehicles. 

iii Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure ES-1. Possible Scenarios for Hydrogen Technology Development and Market Transformation 

The timeframe is long and the investment is large to develop a hydrogen and transportation market that reduces 

our Nation's dependence on foreign sources of energy while minimizing environmental impacts. 

✦ As shown in Figure ES-1, the Federal government will play a key role in the 

near term, supporting the materials and component research necessary 

to overcome critical path technology barriers. When the performance and 

durability of the technologies are validated, the government may consider 

becoming an early technology adopter, and could enact policies to nurture 

the development of an industry capable of delivering significant quantities 

of hydrogen to the market place. Industry’s role would become increasingly 

dominant as market penetration increases. 

✦ The Hydrogen Program mission is to research, develop, and validate 

technologies for producing, storing, delivering and using hydrogen in an 

efficient, clean, safe, reliable, and affordable manner. Related efforts 

that contribute to resolving technical barriers include DOT’s fuel cell bus 

program, developing high-temperature fuel-flexible fuel cells for stationary 

applications, clean coal technologies, advanced "Gen IV" nuclear reactor 

technologies, carbon sequestration and carbon management technologies, 

renewable electric power generation, biomass and biorefinery technologies, 

and basic research on biological production. DOE will also continue 

to support development of advanced hybrid components and electric 

powertrain technologies for use in the next generation of hybrid vehicles 

and future fuel cell vehicles. 

✦ Key program technical milestones for hydrogen technology readiness 

include the following: 

• Hydrogen produced from diverse, domestic resources at $2.00-$3.00 

per gallon of gasoline equivalent (delivered, untaxed)4 

• On-board hydrogen storage systems with improved capacity to enable 

a driving range greater than 300 miles for most light-duty vehicles5 

• Polymer electrolyte-membrane (PEM) automotive fuel cells that cost 

$30-$45 per kilowatt and deliver 5,000 hours of service (service life of 

vehicle)6 

Hydrogen Posture Plan iv 
Program Accomplishments

✦ Built the world’s first energy station that co-produces electricity and 

hydrogen from natural gas. This energy station demonstrated a reduction 

in the cost of natural gas-based hydrogen production from $5.007

 per 

gallon gasoline equivalent (gge) in 2003 to $3.008

 per gge using innovative 

reforming and purification technologies. The station demonstrates the 

synergy between the transportation and electric generation sectors of the 

hydrogen infrastructure. Data from laboratory research, when used in the 

H2A Model (see page B-2), indicate a hydrogen cost of $3.10/gge9 

based on today’s natural gas reforming technology projected to high 

volume production. 

✦ Reduced the high-volume cost of automotive fuel cells from $275/kW 

(50kW system) in 2002 to $110/kW (80kW system) in 200510 using 

innovative processes developed by national labs and fuel cell developers for 

depositing platinum catalyst. Additional research is needed for fuel cells to 

achieve the cost equivalent target of $30/kW. 

✦	 Assessed, through independent review, the status of two major technical 

milestones: 

• Verified the 2005 modeled cost of $110/kW for 80-kW transportation 

fuel cell systems (based on 500,000 units/year)11 (the 2006 and 

2010 DOE targets are $11012 and $4513 per kilowatt, respectively) 

• In hydrogen production, completed research on distributed natural 

gas reforming to achieve a hydrogen production cost of $3.00 per gallon 

of gasoline equivalent assuming an installation rate of 500 new 

forecourt stations per year (this technology will need to be validated 

later at full-scale)14 

✦ Developed an analytical tool - the H2A model - to address the need for 

consistent analysis methodology and transparent reporting.15 The model, 

which assesses the minimum hydrogen cost (including a return on capital 

investment) for a variety of hydrogen production pathways, will be used 

by the Program and its contractors to evaluate technologies on a common 

basis, to assess technology tradeoffs, and to aid systems analysis efforts. 

The H2A model has been beta tested using several hydrogen production 

pathways, including coal, natural gas, biomass, electrolysis, and forecourt 

receiving and dispensing. An H2A model has also been developed to 

assess hydrogen delivery options. 

✦ Issued Program Research, Development, and Demonstration Plans for the 

Offices of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; Fossil Energy; and 

Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology. Issued Basic Research Needs for 

the Hydrogen Economy, an Office of Science report that describes priority 

basic research areas for fuel cells and hydrogen production, storage, and 

delivery. (See Appendix E.) 

✦ Expanded the partnership with DaimlerChrysler, Ford, and General 

Motors to include major energy companies (ExxonMobil Corporation, 

ConocoPhillips, Chevron Corporation, BP America, and Shell). Known as 

the FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership, these companies will help DOE 

establish the technical requirements and evaluate research results for 

hydrogen and fuel cell technology development. 

v Hydrogen Posture Plan 
✦ Competitively selected over $640 million in projects (over $920 million 

with private cost share), subject to appropriations, to overcome critical 

technology barriers and to bring hydrogen and fuel cell technology from the 

laboratory to the showroom. Through these awards, DOE: 

• Selected 71 new hydrogen production and delivery projects ($120 

million over four years) to address major technical and economic 

hurdles in renewable, nuclear, and coal-based hydrogen production 

and delivery technologies ($75 million for distributed natural gas 

and renewables; $43 million for coal, including 3 hydrogen utilization 

projects; and $2 million for nuclear-based hydrogen)16 

• Created a National Hydrogen Storage Project ($150 million over five 

years) that includes three Centers of Excellence, over 20 independent 

projects addressing applied research, and 17 new basic research 

projects.16 The focus of these efforts, which include approximately 40 

universities, 15 companies, and 10 Federal laboratories, is to develop 

high capacity materials and low-pressure storage technologies 

• Selected 42 new fuel cell projects, including: five projects which 

address critical fuel cell cost and durability issues for consumer 

electronics and other applications ($13 million over three years); 12 

projects ($19 million over five years) for research on polymer 

electrolyte-type membranes with improved performance at higher 

temperatures and lower humidity; and 25 projects ($100 million over 

four years) for research in a range of fuel cell topic areas including 

fuel cell membranes, water transport within the stack, advanced 

cathode catalysts and supports, cell hardware, innovative fuel cell 

concepts, effects of impurities on fuel cell performance and durability, 

and stationary fuel cell demonstration projects to help foster 

international and intergovernmental partnerships16 

• Established a national vehicle and infrastructure “learning 

demonstration” project ($170 million for four teams over six years) to 

measure progress and help guide R&D — auto and energy company 

partners will identify challenges encountered when hydrogen and fuel 

cell technologies are operated in real-world environments.16 This 

project has provided data on vehicle range, fuel cell efficiency and 

durability, and hydrogen quality that enables an accurate assessment 

of the status of the technologies in integrated operating systems 

• Selected 70 projects ($64 million over three years) in basic research 

to address the fundamental science underpinning hydrogen production, 

storage, and use16 

• Developed an “Introduction to Hydrogen Safety for First Responders,” 

held pilot “Hydrogen 101” Workshops for state and local governments 

in six states, and launched middle school and high school curricula and 

teacher professional development programs ($5 million over five 

years)16 

✦ DOE and DOT have initiated the development of first responder and code 

official training and education. 

✦ Completed the Hydrogen Program Systems Analysis Plan. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan vi 
✦ Conducted the third annual integrated Hydrogen Program Merit Review 

and Peer Evaluation. 

✦ Selected members for the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory 

Committee (HTAC) and convened the first HTAC meeting on October 2-3, 

2006. 

✦	 Following a recommendation from the National Academy of Engineering, 

implemented a systems analysis and integration effort to integrate all 

Program elements (hydrogen production, delivery, and storage; fuel cells; 

safety, codes and standards; and education) and to monitor progress 

toward technology targets. 

✦ Initiated the International Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy (IPHE), 

which currently includes sixteen nations and the European Commission, 

to foster world-wide collaboration on hydrogen technology RD&D.17 

Since the inaugural IPHE Ministerial meeting in November 2003, two 

IPHE Committees (Steering Committee and Implementation-Liaison 

Committee) have met to identify and develop collaboration mechanisms 

and opportunities. 

✦ Developed the Draft Roadmap on Manufacturing R&D for the Hydrogen 

Economy.

18 The roadmap addresses challenges to manufacturing the 

hydrogen production, storage, and fuel cell technologies that will be 

required for the new hydrogen infrastructure and proposes R&D solutions 

to overcome such challenges. The roadmap (released by Energy Secretary 

Bodman on January 24, 2006) is based on the results of a July 2005 

workshop and consolidates recommendations of hydrogen and fuel 

cell experts from industry, universities, and national laboratories. An 

open public comment period will gather additional feedback that will be 

incorporated into the final roadmap. Led by the DOE and the National 

Institutes of Standards and Technology, the workshop and roadmap 

are a result of a collaboration of the Interagency Working Group on 

Manufacturing R&D established though the President’s National Science 

and Technology Council. 

Next Steps 

✦ Assess, through independent review, the potential of cryogeniccompressed hydrogen tanks to meet DOE’s 2010 targets19 

✦ Transfer lessons learned from distributed reforming of natural gas to 

distributed reforming of renewable liquids. 

✦ Continue to coordinate the detailed multi-year RD&D plans and priorities 

for hydrogen and related technology development efforts within DOE and 

DOT to make them consistent with this planning document, the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005, and the recommendations of the National Academies’ 

studies of the Hydrogen Economy20 and the FreedomCAR and Fuel 

Partnership.21 

✦ Strengthen coordination by continuing to utilize the Hydrogen Program 

Coordination Group composed of representatives from the DOE Offices of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE); Fossil Energy (FE); Nuclear 

Energy (NE); Science (SC); Policy and International Affairs (PI); and the 

Chief Financial Officer (CFO); and the DOT. 

vii Hydrogen Posture Plan 
✦ Complete and publish the DOE Hydrogen Program Safety Plan and the 

DOE Hydrogen Program Risk Management Plan. 

✦ Promote the sharing of safety-related information and maintain a database 

of safety “learnings.” 

✦ Conduct the fourth annual integrated Hydrogen Program Merit Review and 

Peer Evaluation. 

✦ Reflect the importance of the following activities in the Department’s outyear planning and budgeting: 

• Basic and applied research in hydrogen storage, production and 

delivery, and fuel cell cost and durability

• Hydrogen delivery and analysis of infrastructure development (these 

activities will be closely coordinated with the DOT, which is responsible 

for efforts to ensure the safety of the hydrogen delivery system) 

• Economic and systems analyses for determining and mitigating 

investment risks associated with hydrogen infrastructure and related 

technologies (e.g., fuel cell systems engineering and manufacturing 

plants) 

• Education activities focused on the key target audiences directly 

involved in near-term hydrogen technology validation 

✦ Strengthen existing interagency coordination efforts to ensure that 

Federal investments in hydrogen and fuel cell technology development are 

leveraged to the maximum extent. The Interagency Hydrogen and Fuel Cell 

Technical Task Force, in accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

will work toward a safe, economical, and environmentally sound hydrogen 

fuel infrastructure by coordinating the efforts of the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy; the Departments of Energy, Transportation, Defense, 

Commerce, and Agriculture; the Office of Management and Budget; 

National Science Foundation; Environmental Protection Agency; National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration; and other agencies as appropriate. 

In 2005, the task force created a website at www.hydrogen.gov to provide 

information on all Federal hydrogen and fuel cell activities. 

✦ Increase awareness of the nation’s regulatory framework of energy, 

economic, and environmental policies at the Federal, state, and local levels, 

and work with the appropriate agencies to coordinate the timing of policy 

instruments and regulatory actions to allow technology to meet market 

requirements. 

✦ Continue DOT and DOE participation in the development of Global 

Technical Regulations for fuel cell light duty vehicles. 

✦ Identify opportunities to work more closely with emerging state-led 

initiatives to advance hydrogen infrastructure development. 

✦ Strengthen international cooperation on hydrogen-related research, 

development, and demonstration programs and on the development of 

interoperable codes and standards through the International Partnership for 

the Hydrogen Economy and the International Energy Agency. 

✦ Continue to implement relevant provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(see box on page xi) as appropriate. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan viii 
In summary, a great deal of progress has been 

made in planning and carrying out the RD&D 

since the Hydrogen Initiative was announced 

in 2003. The Department of Energy expects 

significant results to be achieved through the 

President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative in FY 2007 

and beyond. 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 

On July 29, 2005, Congress passed the first 

comprehensive energy legislation in over 

a decade. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(P.L. No: 109-058)22 was signed into law by 

the President on August 8, 2005 at Sandia 

National Laboratory in Albuquerque, New 

Mexico. This historic bill follows many of 

the principles outlined by President Bush 

in the National Energy Policy to strengthen 

our nation’s electrical infrastructure, reduce 

our dependence on foreign oil, increase 

conservation, and expand the use of clean 

renewable energy. Title VIII of the bill 

focuses on hydrogen and indicates the 

strong support of Congress for research 

and development of hydrogen and fuel cell 

technologies. The Energy Policy Act of 

2005, together with the Advanced Energy 

Initiative and the President’s Hydrogen 

Fuel Initiative, shows that we have a unified 

commitment by our nation’s leaders to 

reduce our dependence on foreign oil 

through development of more efficient 

energy technologies and alternative, 

domestically produced transportation fuels. 

ix Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan x 
Table of Contents

Foreword.......................................................................................................i

Executive Summary .................................................................................... iii

1. Introduction ............................................................................................1

2. Key Drivers for Developing Hydrogen as an Energy Carrier..................5

Energy Security ................................................................................5

Environmental Quality ......................................................................6

Economic Competitiveness ..............................................................7

3. Development of Hydrogen as an Energy Carrier ...................................9

Status of Hydrogen Today ................................................................9

Technology Development and Market Transformation......................9

4. Hydrogen Program ...............................................................................13

Program Mission.............................................................................13

Program Strategy ...........................................................................13

Program Activities and Highlights ..................................................14

Program Milestones .......................................................................26

Integrated Program Management and Coordination ......................27

5. Next Steps ...........................................................................................33

Notes .......................................................................................................35

Appendices ................................................................................................39

Appendix A. Sample Scenario for Domestic Hydrogen 

Production Options and Resource Needs ............... A-1

Appendix B. Hydrogen Production and Delivery Pathways .........B-1

Appendix C. Hydrogen Fuel Initiative Budget: FY 04-07 ............C-1

Appendix D. Glossary/Acronyms................................................D-1

Appendix E. Contacts, Resources, and Weblinks ........................ E-1

xi Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan xii 
1. Introduction

Today, America is confronted by several major energy challenges: 

✦ Attaining greater energy and economic security by reducing dependence on 

foreign energy supplies 

✦ Increasing affordable domestic energy supplies to meet anticipated demand 

✦ Reducing air pollution and addressing concerns about climate change 

The President’s National Energy Policy (NEP), the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Strategic Plan call for reducing U.S. 

reliance on imported oil. The NEP also acknowledges the need to increase 

energy supplies and use more energy-efficient 

technologies and practices. As highlighted Positive Attributes of Hydrogen in the NEP, energy-related activities are the 

primary source of air pollution and greenhouse as an Energy Carrier 

gas emissions. The need for clean, abundant, ✦ Can be derived from diverse domestic 

affordable, domestically produced energy has resources (fossil, nuclear, renewable) never been greater. 

✦ Is compatible with high-efficiency As President Bush acknowledged in his January fuel cells, combustion turbines and 2003 State of the Union address,23 hydrogen has reciprocating engines to produce power the potential to play a major role in America’s 

future energy system. Hydrogen can be derived with near-zero emissions of criteria 

from a variety of domestically available energy pollutants 

sources (see several example pathways in ✦ Produces near-zero emissions of 

Appendix B). It has a wide variety of applications, greenhouse gases from renewable including fuel for automobiles and distributed and and nuclear sources and from fossil central electricity and thermal energy generation. fuel-based systems with carbon DOE recognizes that the development of this 

abundant element as an “energy carrier,” along sequestration 

with other alternative fuel options such as ethanol ✦ Can serve all sectors of the economy and efficient energy technologies such as plug- (transportation, power, industrial, and in hybrid vehicles, will help address national buildings) concerns about energy supply, security, and 

environmental protection. Congress expressed 

its support for the research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) of these 

technologies in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. 

The DOE also recognizes that developing a hydrogen infrastructure will require 

a coordinated national effort and sustained activities by diverse public and 

private stakeholders. Today, hydrogen is commonly used in refineries and 

industrial applications to manufacture petrochemicals and fertilizers. The 

existing hydrogen production and distribution infrastructure is insufficient, 

however, to support widespread use of hydrogen as a transportation fuel. 

With the exception of pilot-scale research and development (R&D) projects 

and aerospace and rocket propulsion applications, the current hydrogen 

industry does not produce and distribute hydrogen as an energy carrier 

for transportation energy. Taking this step will require R&D to improve 

performance and lower costs for hydrogen production, delivery, and storage. 

R&D will also be required to develop low-cost, safe, technically viable fuel cell 

technologies that can be offered in consumer markets for automotive vehicles; 

commercial, residential, and industrial electric power generation; and portable 

power devices. Technology validation activities will be needed to measure 

 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
progress and provide hands-on experience to safety and code officials. The 

President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative accelerates funding in each of these areas. 

“Critical Path” Technologies 

Necessary for Developing a 

Hydrogen Infrastructure 

✦ More compact, lighter weight, lower 

cost, safe, and efficient storage systems 

✦ Lower cost, more durable materials 

for advanced conversion technologies, 

especially fuel cells 

✦ Lower cost methods for producing and 

delivering hydrogen 

✦ Technologies for low cost carbon capture 

and containment for fossil-based 

hydrogen production (a separate DOE 

program coordinated with the Hydrogen 

Program) 

✦ Designs and materials that maximize the 

safety of hydrogen use 

As a first step, the DOE facilitated a National 

Hydrogen Vision and Roadmap process and 

incorporated the opinions and viewpoints of a 

broad cross-section of stakeholders in two key 

documents: A National Vision of America’s 

Transition to a Hydrogen Economy—to 2030 

and Beyond, and the National Hydrogen Energy 

Roadmap. 

The Hydrogen Posture Plan outlines the 

activities, milestones, and deliverables that DOE 

and DOT must pursue to develop hydrogen 

energy systems, the key elements of which are 

shown in Figure 1. Among the topics addressed 

are the schedules for developing and evaluating 

technologies to: 

✦	 Produce and deliver hydrogen using various 

domestic resources (e.g., distributed natural 

gas; coal using capture and sequestration of 

carbon dioxide; renewables including wind, 

solar, biomass, geothermal, and hydropower; 

and nuclear energy) 

✦ Store hydrogen 

✦ Convert hydrogen to useful energy through advanced fuel cells and other 

devices 

✦ Continue developing advanced hybrid components and electric powertrain 

technologies for use in hybrid electric and fuel cell vehicles 

✦ Conduct “learning” demonstrations to provide feedback to research 

programs, measure technology progress, and incorporate integrated 

system solutions 

Education needs, safety, codes and standards, and systems analysis and 

integration are also major program elements. The Posture Plan also addresses 

the critical role of the FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership, a government/ 

industry partnership for the advancement of high-efficiency hydrogen-powered 

fuel cell vehicles and the infrastructure to support them, and the important role 

of future government policies in overcoming economic and institutional barriers 

to the development of a hydrogen infrastructure. The Posture Plan serves as 

the overarching guidance document for the Hydrogen Program. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 2 
Figure 1. Elements of a Hydrogen Energy Infrastructure 

Production Conversion Applications

Delivery

Storage

Production

Delivery

Storage

Conversion

End-Use Energy Applications

Production

Delivery

Storage

















The production of hy

Involves thermal, electrolytic, and photolytic processes

The distribution of hydrogen from production and storage sites

Involves pipelines, trucks, rail, and barges

Involves efficient reversible solid or liquid carrier systems

The containment of hydrogen for delivery, conversion, and use

Involves tanks for both compressed gases and liquids

Involves reversible and regenerable solid- and liquid-state

systems, including metal and chemical hydrides

drogen from fossil, nuclear,

and renewable resources

Conversion

End-Use Energy Applications











The use of hydrogen to generate electricity and/or

thermal energy

Involves combustion turbines, reciprocating

engines, and fuel cells

The use of hydrogen for transportation systems

such as fuel cell vehicles, internal combustion

engines, and for auxiliary and portable power

devices

The use of hydrogen for stationary energy

generation systems, including distributed energy

systems, central generating stations, and combined

heat and power applications

Involves performance and safety evaluations and

development of codes/standards

3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan  
2. Key Drivers for Developing 

Hydrogen as an Energy Carrier 

Three major factors compel us to consider new approaches to the way the 

United States produces, delivers, and uses energy. These drivers are: 

✦ Energy security 

✦ Environmental quality 

✦ Economic competitiveness 

Energy Security 

Over one-half of the petroleum consumed in the 

United States is imported, and that percentage 

is expected to rise to 60% by 2025.24 America’s 

transportation sector relies almost exclusively 

on refined petroleum products, accounting for 

over two-thirds of the oil used.25 Each day, over 

eight million barrels of oil26 are required to fuel 

over 225 million vehicles27 that constitute the 

U.S. light-duty transportation fleet. As shown in 

Figure 2, the gap between U.S. oil production and 

transportation oil needs is projected to grow, and 

the increase in the number of light-duty vehicles 

will account for most of that growth. On a global 

scale, petroleum supplies will be in increasingly 

higher demand as highly-populated developing 

countries expand their economies and become 

more energy intensive. 

Hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles would not 

be dependent on foreign oil, because hydrogen 

can be produced almost entirely from diverse 

domestic sources of fossil, renewable and 

nuclear energy (see Appendix A for an example 

of domestic hydrogen production options and 

associated resource needs). Fuel cell vehicles 

(FCVs) could provide more than twice the 

efficiency of conventional vehicles and have the 

potential to reduce our dependence on oil while 

substantially reducing emissions of air pollutants 

and greenhouse gases.28 Analysis conducted for 

the Government Performance and Results Act 

(GPRA) projects that oil savings could be 5.3 

mbpd (million barrels per day) by 2050 assuming 

a 37% market penetration of light duty fuel cell 

vehicles.29 Hydrogen’s use as a major energy 

carrier, in addition to the introduction of other 

fuels, would also provide the United States with a 

Fuel Cells Offer Significant 

Improvements in Energy 

Efficiency and Emissions 

Fuel cells represent a radically different 

approach to energy conversion, one 

that could replace conventional power 

generators like engines, turbines, 

and batteries in applications such as 

automobiles, power plants, and consumer 

electronics. Fuel cells, like batteries, 

directly convert chemical energy into 

electric power. But unlike batteries, fuel 

cells do not need recharging; instead 

they use fuel to produce power as long 

as the fuel is supplied. Fuel cells operate 

quietly and are relatively modular. 

Largely because of these characteristics, 

hydrogen-powered fuel cells promise: 

✦ For vehicles, over 50% reduction 

in fuel consumption compared to a 

conventional vehicle with a gasoline 

internal combustion engine30 

✦ Increased reliability of the electric 

power transmission grid by reducing 

system loads and bottlenecks 

✦ Increased co-generation of energy in 

combined heat and power applications 

for buildings 

✦ Zero to near-zero levels of harmful 

emissions from vehicles and power 

plants 

✦ High energy density in a compact 

package for portable power 

applications 

more efficient and diversified energy infrastructure, with a variety of options for 

central and distributed fuel production and electric power generation. 

5 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure 2. Growing U.S. Transportation Oil Gap 

Source: 

(December 2004),

Environmental Quality 

Air quality is a major national concern. It has been estimated that about 50% 

li l 31

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 2, 

 ORNL-6973, http://cta.ornl.gov/cta/Publications/Reports/ 

TEDB_Edition24_ORNL_6973.pdf and U.S. DOE, Energy Information Administration, 

Annual Energy Outlook 2005: With Projections to 2025, (February 2005), EIA0383(2005), http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/forecasting/0383(2005).pdf 

of Americans live in areas where levels of one or more air pollutants are high 

enough to affect pub c hea th and/or the environment. As shown in Figure 3, 

personal vehicles and electric power plants are significant contributors to the 

nation’s air quality problems. Most states are now developing strategies for 

reaching national air quality goals and bringing their major metropolitan areas 

into alignment with the requirements of the Clean Air Act. The introduction of 

Figure 3. Emissions from Fossil Fuel Combustion MMT Per Year

MMT Per Year 

Source: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 25, 

(2006), ORNL-6974, http://cta.ornl.gov/data/tedb25/Edition25_Full_Doc.pdf.

Hydrogen Posture Plan  
hydrogen-based commercial bus fleets is one of the approaches that states are 

considering to improve air quality. 

The combustion of fossil fuels accounts for the majority of anthropogenic 

greenhouse gas emissions (chiefly carbon dioxide, CO2) released into the 

atmosphere. The largest sources of CO2 emissions are the electric utility and 

transportation sectors, as shown in Figure 3. To meet our growing electrical 

demands, it is estimated that electricity generation will increase by 1.5% per 

year between now and 2030.32 Hydrogen used in stationary fuel cells offers an 

opportunity to contribute to this growing electrical demand, and to decouple 

carbon dioxide emissions from power generation and use. For example, if 175 

billion kWh of grid electricity (10% of the growth of the electric generation 

market in 2025) is replaced by fuel cells operating on hydrogen at 50% 

LHV efficiency, about 10.5 million tons of hydrogen would be needed. If this 

hydrogen were made from a non-carbon (e.g., solar or nuclear) or net-zero 

carbon (e.g., biomass or coal with carbon sequestration) source, then it could 

potentially displace about 27.5 million tons of carbon.33 

Economic Competitiveness 

It is clear that there is growing worldwide interest in hydrogen and fuel cell 

technology, as reflected in the dramatic increase in public and private spending 

since the mid-1990s in the U.S. and other countries. The U.S. government 

spends about $400 million annually34 on 

hydrogen and fuel cell related programs. 

A subset of these programs — those that International Partnership for the 

can directly contribute to the development Hydrogen Economy: Membership 

of commercially-viable hydrogen fuel cell 

vehicles and associated infrastructure Australia India 

— comprise the Hydrogen Fuel Initiative. Brazil Italy 

These programs have already begun to see Canada Japan significant funding increases as part of the 

President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative. Other China New Zealand 

countries are increasing investment as well. European Norway 

The Japanese government is also investing Commission Republic of Korea heavily: the Ministry of Economy, Trade France Russian Federation and Industry (METI) budget for fuel cell 

and hydrogen RD&D has grown from $107 Germany United Kingdom 

million in 2001 to $324 million in 2005.35 Iceland United States 

Japan has launched a joint government/ 

industry demonstration of hydrogen fuel 

cell vehicles and stationary power generation facilities as well as ten hydrogen 

refueling stations with different hydrogen sources. Governments and industry 

in Canada, Europe, and Asia are also investing heavily in hydrogen research, 

development and demonstration. 

The United States is striving to continue to be a global leader in hydrogen 

and fuel cell technology development and commercialization. To foster 

cooperation, the DOE and DOT facilitated the formation of the International 

Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy (IPHE), which held its inaugural IPHE 

Ministerial meeting in Washington, D.C. in November 2003. The IPHE, 

which includes 17 partners, provides a mechanism to organize, evaluate, 

and coordinate multinational research, development, and deployment 

programs that will advance the introduction of hydrogen infrastructure at a 

global scale. In the months since the Ministerial meeting, the IPHE Steering 

Committee has established an active IPHE Secretariat to address stakeholder 

 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
involvement, policy coordination, project and event guidelines, technology 

collaboration, and market development issues. Initial meetings of the IPHE 

Implementation-Liaison Committee (ILC) focused on identifying the current 

hydrogen technology research, development, and demonstration activities of 

the IPHE partners and on examining approaches for focusing these activities 

with collaborative efforts. In 2005, collaborative projects were selected and 

prioritized. The ILC has also conducted a series of international research 

and development workshops, including a hydrogen storage workshop in Italy 

in June 2005, a hydrogen safety workshop in Italy in September 2005, and a 

renewable hydrogen production workshop in Spain in October 2005. More 

information on the IPHE can be found at http://www.iphe.net. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan  
3. Development of Hydrogen as 

an Energy Carrier 

Hydrogen technology development is one of the Department’s top priorities. 

The President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative calls for an increasing Federal 

commitment to R&D that will accelerate technology development, and 

thus industry’s ability to make commercialization decisions on hydrogenbased transportation technologies. It is important to note that technology 

development is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for commercialization. 

The National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap and the supporting hydrogen Vision 

provide a guide for the Department’s hydrogen technology development 

efforts. The sections below summarize some of the highlights of the Vision and 

Roadmap and describe key elements of the technology development process. 

Status of Hydrogen Today 

Although hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, it does not 

naturally exist in its elemental form on Earth. Pure hydrogen must be produced 

from other hydrogen-containing compounds such as fossil fuels, biomass, or 

water. Each method of production requires a source of energy, i.e., thermal 

(heat), electrolytic (electricity), or photolytic (light) energy. Hydrogen is either 

consumed on site or distributed to end users via pipelines, trucks, or other 

means. Hydrogen can be stored as a liquid, gas, or chemical compound and 

is converted into usable energy through fuel cells or by combustion in turbines 

and engines. Fuel cells now in development will not only provide a new way to 

produce power, but will also significantly improve energy conversion efficiency, 

especially in transportation applications. 

The U.S. chemical and refining industries have a limited number of commercial 

facilities in place for the production and delivery of hydrogen. About nine 

million tons are manufactured annually for use in these industries.36 Those 

operations are localized, and cannot provide the technology advances and 

carbon management required for widespread use of hydrogen in the energy 

sector (i.e., large-scale, low-cost, high-efficiency production methods, 

and storage and delivery infrastructures compatible with automotive and 

distributed generation applications). As shown in Figure 4, there are a number 

of technical hurdles centered around cost, performance, and safety, that must 

be overcome in each area of the hydrogen energy infrastructure. Addressing 

these challenges will require a coordinated, multi-agency effort. More detailed 

information on the status of hydrogen technology today and the associated 

challenges is provided in the National Hydrogen Vision and Roadmap 

documents. 

Technology Development and Market 

Transformation 

Developing hydrogen as a major energy carrier will require a combination 

of technological breakthroughs, market acceptance, and large investments 

in infrastructure. Success will not happen overnight, or even over years, 

but rather over decades; it will require an evolutionary process that phases 

hydrogen in as the technologies and their markets are ready. Figure 5 presents 

one way in which this process might occur. 

 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan 0

As described in the National Academies’ report on the hydrogen economy, in 

the near- to mid-term most hydrogen would likely be produced by technologies 

that do not require a new hydrogen delivery infrastructure (e.g., distributed 

reforming of natural gas and/or renewable liquid fuels such as ethanol, and 

electrolysis of water using electricity). As vehicle market penetration increases 

and research targets for the diverse hydrogen production and delivery 

technologies are met, these could help strengthen the business case for 

industry investment in large-scale centralized hydrogen production and delivery 

infrastructure. The economic viability of these different production pathways 

(examples of which are shown in Appendix B) will likely be affected by regional 

factors, such as feedstock availability and cost, delivery approaches, and 

regulatory environment. 

For hydrogen to become a viable fuel source, advanced hydrogen storage 

technologies will also be required, especially for automotive applications. 

Current storage systems are too heavy, too large, and too costly to provide 

adequate vehicle range. Technologies to convert hydrogen into useful energy 

— fuel cells and combustion technologies — must be further improved to 

lower cost and improve performance. Finally, the infrastructure to deliver 

hydrogen where it is needed must be developed and constructed. The 

hydrogen delivery infrastructure can evolve along with the production and 

conversion technologies. The same infrastructure can be used for fossilbased, renewable- and nuclear-based hydrogen. Infrastructure may begin in 

small clusters and expand to regional, and ultimately national and international 

Figure 4. Hydrogen Energy System Elements and Challenges
Figure 5. Possible Evolution of Hydrogen Technologies 

Storage

Conversion

Applications

Integrated

fuel/power

systems

(hydrides) stateolid

power

Government

Advanced

combustion

Combustion

Security

Climate

H2 safety

carrier

Production

Delivery

Validation/

Public Policy

Framework

Utility systems

Pressurized tanks

(gaseous and cryogenic)

Chemical hydrogen storage

Fuel refining

Space shuttle

Novel carriers

Solid state

Commercial fleets

Distributed CHP

Market introduction

of personal vehicles

Advanced s

or chemical storage

Stationary distributed

Bus fleets

Vehicle fleets

Military

Portable power

stationary and

fleet systems

Fuel cells

Mature technologies for mass production

Gasification of biomass and coal Photolytic water splitting

On-site distributed production

Cryogenic liquid trucks

Air Quality Public confidence in

hydrogen as an energy Outreach and acceptance

Pipeline distribution

Carbon sequestration Nuclear thermochemical water splitting

Distributed reforming

of natural gas

Pipeline transmission

Electrolysis Electrolysis with renewable and nuclear power

Gaseous tube trailers

Distributed reforming of renewable liquid fuels

Biological processes

applications. More detailed economic analyses of the different production, 

distribution, storage, and conversion options will be essential. 

As shown in Figure 6, a hydrogen-based energy system will take significant 

time to develop and will require strong public and private partnerships. 

Currently, government and private organizations are researching, developing, 

and validating critical path technologies to meet customer requirements, 

ensure safety, and help establish a business case. Public education and 

codes and standards are being addressed concurrently with the research to 

overcome institutional barriers. This approach is designed to meet critical 

cost and performance goals, and enable industry commercialization decisions. 

Research would continue beyond this point to further support basic science 

and advanced hydrogen infrastructure technologies, especially for centralized, 

carbon-neutral hydrogen production pathways. Many market factors could 

influence industry commercialization decisions. 

Although it is impossible to predict exactly how the market will evolve, it 

is likely that early applications for fuel cells will include niche markets with 

less sensitive price points, a high value proposition, and fewer technical 

barriers than fuel cells for passenger vehicles. Examples include fuel cells 

for portable consumer electronic devices, back-up power, small stationary 

power generation, and forklifts. These systems are less complicated, can have 

smaller power requirements, and do not face the same requirements for onboard hydrogen storage. Utilization of fuel cells in these types of applications 

may help resolve technical and institutional barriers, boost production 

volumes, and lower costs, which could help the technology evolve to a level of 

readiness adequate for hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and fueling infrastructure. 

Initial market penetration might also include larger vehicle and infrastructure 

validation where the government can foster further growth by playing the role 

 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
of “early adopter” and by creating policies and incentives that further stimulate 

the market. 

During market expansion, hydrogen could be produced by technologies that do 

not require an up-front investment in hydrogen delivery infrastructure. Instead, 

hydrogen might be produced in a “distributed” fashion at the refueling station 

(via on-site reforming of natural gas or renewable liquid fuels like ethanol or by 

distributed water electrolysis), or at nearby existing large hydrogen production 

plants and trucked to refueling sites. A fuel cell vehicle running on hydrogen 

produced from natural gas would produce 42% less net carbon emissions 

than a gasoline hybrid electric vehicle and 60% less than conventional internal 

combustion engine vehicles on a well-to-wheels basis.37 However, the use 

of natural gas for production of hydrogen is not a viable long-term strategy 

because of concerns of limited supply and the demands of other sectors. As 

vehicle market penetration expands, greater industry investment could lead 

to development of large-scale centralized hydrogen production and delivery 

infrastructure. Government policies may be required to stimulate industry 

investment and market acceptance. 

In a carbon-neutral energy future, hydrogen may offer one of a number of 

alternative fuel options to eliminate oil consumption in the transportation 

sector. When significant market penetration of these technologies is achieved, 

major national benefits in terms of energy security and improved environmental 

quality will result. 

Figure 6. Possible Scenarios for Hydrogen Technology Development and Market Transformation 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 2 
4. Hydrogen Program

Program Mission 

The central mission of the Hydrogen Program is to research, develop, and 

validate hydrogen production, delivery, storage and fuel cell technologies. 

Development of hydrogen energy from diverse domestic resources will ensure 

that the United States has an abundant, reliable, and affordable supply of 

clean energy to maintain the nation’s prosperity throughout the 21st century. 

Program Strategy 

The Hydrogen Program supports RD&D of hydrogen fuel cell technologies in 

parallel with technologies for hydrogen production and delivery infrastructure. 

The current focus is on addressing key technical challenges (for fuel cells and 

hydrogen production, delivery, and storage) and institutional barriers (such 

as hydrogen codes and standards to maximize safety, and training and public 

awareness). The Program is currently conducting basic and applied research, 

technology development and learning demonstrations, underlying safety 

research, systems analysis, and public outreach and education activities. 

These activities include cost-shared, public-private partnerships to address the 

high-risk, critical technology barriers preventing widespread use of hydrogen 

as an energy carrier. Public and private partners include automotive and 

power equipment manufacturers, energy and chemical companies, electric and 

natural gas utilities, building designers, standards development organizations, 

other Federal agencies, state government agencies, universities, national 

laboratories and other national and international stakeholder organizations. 

The Hydrogen Program encourages the formation of collaborative partnerships 

to conduct RD&D and other activities that support Program goals. Figure 

7 shows the types of entities that carry out activities under the Hydrogen 

Program and the non-Federal cost share required. 

These activities address the development of hydrogen energy systems 

for transportation, stationary power, and portable power applications. 

Transportation applications include fuel cell vehicles and hydrogen refueling 

infrastructure. Stationary power applications include use of hydrogen for 

back-up emergency power and residential electric power generation. Portable 

power applications include consumer electronics such as cellular phones, 

hand-held computers, radios, and laptop computers. DOE is funding RD&D 

efforts that will provide the basis for the near-, mid-, and long-term production, 

delivery, storage, and use of hydrogen derived from diverse energy sources, 

including fossil fuel, nuclear energy, and renewable sources. Distributed 

reforming of natural gas and renewable liquid fuels (e.g., ethanol) is likely to be 

the most efficient and economical way to produce hydrogen in the near term. 

As reflected in the Administration’s FutureGen project, technologies will 

continue to be evaluated and developed to produce low-cost hydrogen from 

domestic and secure sources of coal with the capture and sequestration of 

carbon dioxide. With the implementation of carbon management strategies, 

coal could play a key role in the long term because of its abundance and 

low cost. Hydrogen from renewable biomass feedstocks can benefit from 

gasification, reforming, and separation technologies developed for fossil 

resources. The production of hydrogen from non-conventional sources such as 

biological materials will be explored mainly through basic science. 

3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure 7. Types of Entities Involved in the DOE Hydrogen Program and Their Roles 

To address the need for diversified energy supplies, DOE is also investigating 

advanced methods of hydrogen production from renewable and nuclear 

resources, and more advanced systems for storing and delivering hydrogen in 

an expanded hydrogen market. The Program will focus on methods to produce 

affordable supplies of hydrogen from water using renewable electricity (e.g., 

solar, wind) and nuclear sources of energy, and using direct solar conversion. 

In a recent report to Congress (prepared in response to Section 812(e) of the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005), the Program describes options, progress, and plans 

for developing and demonstrating solar- and wind-based hydrogen production 

technologies.38 A mix of diverse energy feedstocks to produce hydrogen is 

needed for a secure, affordable, and environmentally safe hydrogen energy 

system. 

Program Activities and Highlights 

The $1.2 billion Hydrogen Fuel Initiative proposed by President Bush for FY 

2004 through FY 2008 includes $720 million in new R&D funding over FY 2004 

DOE baseline budgeting assumptions.39 The Initiative reflects an enhanced 

hydrogen and fuel cell program to accelerate technology development and 

validation activities. The Executive Summary describes the Initiative’s fiscal 

year (FY) 2004 and FY 2005 accomplishments. The FY 2006 appropriation 

includes funding for efforts in the following areas, which support the 

President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, the National Hydrogen Energy Vision and 

Roadmap, and the Energy Policy Act of 2005: 

✦ Basic Research 

✦ Production and Delivery 

✦ Storage 

✦ Conversion (Fuel Cells) 

✦ Technology Validation 

✦ Safety, Codes and Standards 

✦ Education 

✦ Systems Analysis and Integration 

Hydrogen Posture Plan  
These areas are necessarily interrelated, with developments in one segment 

relying on corresponding developments in other segments. An integrated 

approach to RD&D within the Program will ensure that, regardless of the 

pathway, common challenges are efficiently addressed. Figure 8 shows how the 

Initiative budget request for FY 2007 breaks out into these program areas, and 

the addition of a proposed new area in manufacturing R&D. 

Figure 8. Hydrogen Fuel Initiative Budget Request (FY 2007)40 

Storage

Manufacturing

12%

0.7%

14%

27%

5%

Integration

3%

Education

0.7%

17%

* 

and fuel cells 

Technology Validation

Infrastructure &

Production & Delivery

Safety, Codes & Standards

(includes DOT)

Systems Analysis/

Basic Research*

Basic research is 

focused on hydrogen 

production, storage, 

Conversion (Fuel Cells)

20%

TOTAL: $289.49 Million

The FY 2007 budget request distributes the funding for hydrogen production 

and delivery research as follows:41 

✦ Distributed Natural Gas ($4.2 million) 

✦ Coal-based ($23.6 million) 

✦ Nuclear-based ($18.7 million) 

✦ Renewable-based ($27.6 million) 

✦ Hydrogen Delivery ($7 million) 

Related research conducted within other DOE programs will also contribute 

to achieving Hydrogen Program goals. These RD&D efforts are necessary 

to achieve a hydrogen energy pathway, but would likely be funded for other 

purposes even if there were no Hydrogen Program. The FY 2007 budget 

requests for related RD&D42 include: 

✦ Hybrid electric vehicle research ($109.8 million) 

✦ Carbon sequestration and carbon management (applied R&D: $73.9 

million; basic research: $5.9 million) 

✦ Biomass and biorefinery systems (applied R&D: $150 million; basic 

research: $15.4 million) 

✦ Wind energy (applied R&D: $43.8 million; basic research: $260 thousand) 

✦ Solar energy (applied R&D: $148.4 million; basic research: $62.3 million) 

✦ High-temperature stationary fuel cells ($63.3 million) 

5 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Basic Research Will Target 

Breakthroughs in Key Areas 

Recent advances in nanoscience, 

catalysis, modeling, simulation, and bioinspired approaches offer exciting new 

research opportunities for addressing 

both short-term showstoppers and longterm challenges to hydrogen and fuel 

cell technologies. The DOE Office of 

Science seeks to foster fundamental 

understanding and revolutionary advances 

in hydrogen production, delivery, storage, 

and conversion technologies in the 

following five critical basic research areas: 

Novel Materials for Hydrogen Storage; 

Membranes for Separation, Purification, 

and Ion Transport; Design of Catalysts 

at the Nanoscale; Bio-Inspired Materials 

and Processes; and Solar Hydrogen. The 

basic hydrogen research program will be 

coordinated with the needs of applied 

research and development, and will employ 

coupled experimental and theoretical 

components for maximum impact. The 

integration will ensure that discoveries and 

related conceptual breakthroughs achieved 

in basic research programs will provide 

a foundation for the innovative design of 

materials and processes that will produce 

improvements in the performance, cost, 

and reliability of hydrogen production, 

storage, and use. For more information 

on how basic research can help overcome 

technical challenges to a hydrogen 

economy, see the recent Basic Energy 

Sciences report at 

http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/files/ 

NHE_rpt.pdf 

✦ Basic research on biological hydrogen 

production ($50.6 million) 

✦ DOT fuel cell bus RD&D, infrastructure 

development, and SAFETEA-LU activities 

($28 million) 

The following sections provide an overview of 

key ongoing and planned hydrogen activities in 

basic research, production, delivery, storage, 

conversion (fuel cells), technology validation, 

safety, codes and standards, education, and 

systems analysis and integration. Out-year 

planning may identify needs for additional 

RD&D to support and expand this portfolio of 

activities. 

Hydrogen Production 

Lowering hydrogen production cost is a critical 

need. The National Academies’ study20 

requested by DOE and completed in 2004 

provides insight into a hydrogen feedstock 

strategy for the near and long term. The study 

has helped DOE set priorities for hydrogen 

production research needs. Ongoing and 

planned activities include the following: 

✦	 Conduct research to develop smallscale, distributed natural gas, liquid 

reformer, reforming, and electrolysis 

technologies (needed for the near term) 

that can operate reliably, safely, and costeffectively in a typical fueling station using 

various feedstocks including natural gas, 

coal-derived carriers, or renewable liquids 

such as ethanol or other sugar derivatives. 

R&D activities include: 

• Improved reformer technologies 

using partial oxidation (or autothermal 

reforming) and steam reforming 

processes achieving higher energy 

efficiency and lower capital cost 

• Electrolysis technologies with reduced capital costs, enhanced 

system efficiency, and improved durability for distributedscale hydrogen production from electricity and water 

• Lower-cost membranes and catalysts that can operate at higher 

temperatures and pressures, as well as improved system integration 

to lower the cost of manufacturing 

✦	 Conduct research to develop large-scale, centralized, efficient hydrogen 

production from coal with carbon sequestration, including: 

• Computational methods and advanced technologies to reform high 

hydrogen content coal-derived carriers 

Hydrogen Posture Plan  
• Advanced water-gas shift, separation, 

cleanup, and process intensification 

technologies to produce lower-cost 

hydrogen 

• Technologies to integrate carbon 

sequestration (capture and containment) 

with fossil-based production systems 

• Multi-fueled, oxygen-blown gasification 

system for co-producing hydrogen and 

electric power 

✦	 Accelerate and expand research on the lowcost production of hydrogen from renewable 

resources, including: 

• Component development and systems 

Fossil Energy Focuses on 

Hydrogen From Coal 

The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) will build 

upon ongoing RD&D activities within 

FE to demonstrate low-cost, novel, and 

advanced hydrogen production from 

coal, including delivery, and utilization 

technologies where appropriate. These 

technologies include advanced watergas shift reactors; and separation 

technologies, including membranes to 

separate hydrogen and/or carbon dioxide 

(for carbon capture and sequestration) 

from coal-derived synthesis gas. 

integration efforts that will enable electrolyzers to operate from 

inherently intermittent and variable-quality power derived from wind 

and solar sources 

• Solar-driven high-temperature chemical cycle water splitting 

• Photoelectrochemical systems 

• Thermochemical conversion of biomass 

• Photolytic and fermentative micro-organism 

systems 

✦	 Accelerate and expand research on centralized, 

low cost production of hydrogen using nuclear 

energy, including high-temperature electrolysis 

and sulfur-based thermochemical cycles. 

This activity could lead to the construction 

of an advanced nuclear demonstration plant 

with electricity and hydrogen co-production 

capabilities. 

✦	 Conduct supporting basic research for hydrogen 

production to enable breakthroughs in catalysis, 

separations, and fundamental processes 

including: 

• Design of catalysts at the nanoscale with 

the main emphasis on nanoscale 

phenomena; innovative synthesis and 

screening techniques; novel characterization 

Coal-Fired 

Electricity and Hydrogen 

Production with Near-Zero 

Atmospheric Emissions 

announced that the United States would 

sponsor a $1 billion, 10-year initiative to 

43 

This DOE effort, while not part of the 

the technical and economic feasibility of 

coal while capturing and sequestering 

the carbon dioxide generated in the 

These advanced technologies 

atmospheric emissions at a competitive 

FutureGen: 

On February 27, 2003, President Bush 

create the world’s first coal-based, nearzero atmospheric emissions power plant 

to produce electricity and hydrogen.

Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, supports program 

goals through its objective to establish 

producing electricity and hydrogen from 

process. 

offer the promise of dramatically reduced 

cost with increased reliability. 

techniques; and theory, modeling, and 

simulation of catalytic pathways

• Improved understanding of light-induced dynamic processes in 

molecules, polymers, and semiconductor nanoparticles to support the 

development of low-cost solar cells and photocatalysts 

• Investigation of new semiconductors, polymers, supramolecular 

assemblies, and catalysts (including biological or bio-inspired materials) 

to enable the synthesis of two- and three-dimensional chemical systems 

for efficient lightharvesting, charge separation, and fuel formation 

 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Nuclear Hydrogen Activities Will 

Harness Heat to Produce Hydrogen 

From Water 

The Office of Nuclear Energy, Science & Technology 

(NE) will work with its partners to demonstrate 

the commercial-scale production of hydrogen from 

water using heat from a nuclear energy system. In 

addition to the emission-free electricity currently 

produced by nuclear reactors, some advanced nuclear 

reactor designs operate at very high temperatures, 

making them well-suited to drive highly efficient 

thermochemical and electrolytic hydrogen production 

processes. NE’s Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative (NHI) 

will conduct RD&D to develop hydrogen production 

technologies that can be coupled to next generation 

nuclear reactors. The major program elements of 

the NHI include the candidate production processes 

and high temperature interface technologies that 

are involved in coupling a thermochemical or hightemperature electrolysis plant to an advanced hightemperature reactor. 

The Solid State Energy Conversion 

Alliance (SECA) Will Fast-Track 

Commercialization of Solid Oxide 

Fuel Cells and Develop Fuel Cell 

Technology for FutureGen 

While not part of the Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, SECA is 

a parallel effort to reduce cost and achieve technology 

breakthroughs in solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs). The 

materials and engineering developments achieved 

through SECA may also have applications in other fuel 

cell technologies. The goal of this joint governmentindustry effort is to develop 3-10kW SOFCs by 2010 

that can be mass-produced in modular form, and to 

scale-up the technology to serve as building blocks for 

FutureGen type plants. SECA fuel cells will be used 

for a broad array of applications, including auxiliary 

power and combined heat and power. A ten-fold 

cost reduction over existing technology is required to 

reach the goal of producing SOFCs at $400/kW. Key 

milestones include: 

By 2010, develop modular and scalable 3-10kW 

distributed generation fuel cell designs at $400/kW 

and 40-60% LHV efficiency. 

By 2015, demonstrate MW-class coal and carbon 

sequestration ready fuel cell or fuel cell/turbine hybrid 

systems at $400/kW, 50% HHV efficiency (75% with 

natural gas) and 90% CO2

 capture. 

By 2020, demonstrate 100 MW–class fuel cell/turbine 

hybrid system fueled by coal gasification. 

More information on the SECA Program can be found 

at http://www.seca.doe.gov/. 

• Improved understanding of the pathways 

by which hydrogen is made and 

processed in living organisms to 

enable breakthroughs in feasible 

photobiological and biological reactor 

technologies 

• Investigation of membrane materials 

for separation, purification, and ion 

transport including integrated nanoscale 

architectures; fuel cell membranes; and 

theory, modeling, and simulation of 

separation processes and mechanisms 

Hydrogen Delivery 

Delivery technologies and economics will 

heavily influence the level of infrastructure 

investment and safety assurance required. 

New concepts will be needed to reduce delivery 

costs from the point of hydrogen production 

to the point of use at refueling stations and 

distributed power facilities. Systems analysis 

of delivery alternatives will show the lifecycle 

cost advantages and disadvantages of the 

alternative approaches for transporting 

hydrogen over long distances and will identify 

areas in which R&D could provide the greatest 

cost reductions and the greatest value. Ongoing 

and planned R&D activities include the 

following: 

✦	 Conduct research to lower the cost of the 

hydrogen delivery infrastructure, including 

the development of: 

• More reliable lower-cost compression 

technology 

• Lower cost gaseous hydrogen tank 

technology and systems for stationary 

storage and tube trailers 

• More energy efficient and lower cost 

liquefaction technology 

• Improved pipeline materials to resolve 

hydrogen embrittlement concerns and to 

reduce capital costs 

• New liquid or solid hydrogen carriers 

(e.g., metal or chemical hydrides, carbonbased materials, etc.) that can increase 

the energy density of hydrogen transport 

✦	 In coordination with the DOT, develop 

technologies (e.g., seals, valves, sensors 

and controls) to ensure the safety of the 

hydrogen delivery system 

Hydrogen Posture Plan  
The FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership Seeks a Clean 

and Sustainable Transportation Energy Future 

The FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership is a government-industry partnership including the 

U.S. DOE, the U.S. Council for Automotive Research (members include Ford Motor Company, 

General Motors Corporation, and DaimlerChrysler Corporation), and five major energy 

companies (BP America, Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil Corporation, 

and Shell). The collaboration was formed to examine the pre-competitive, high-risk research 

needed to develop the component and infrastructure technologies necessary to enable a 

full range of affordable cars and light trucks, including the fueling infrastructure. These new 

technologies will reduce the dependence of the nation’s personal transportation system on 

imported oil and minimize harmful vehicle emissions, without sacrificing freedom of mobility and 

freedom of vehicle choice. The C-A-R 

in FreedomCAR stands for Cooperative The goals of this program are extremely 

Automotive Research. challenging and success is uncertain, 

but it could have an enormous beneficial 

The long-term vision of the Partnership is a impact on energy security and the U.S. clean and sustainable transportation energy economy. Although it is still too early future. A major thrust of the Partnership to speculate whether the program will is to identify and address the technologies achieve its long-term vision, it is making necessary to enable high volume production significant headway. of affordable hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and 

fuels, and the national infrastructure necessary — Craig Marks, Chair of the NRC 

to support them. Additionally, the Partnership Committee on Review of the FreedomCAR 

addresses technology needs to enable mass and Fuel Research Program, NAS Press penetration of hybrid electric and advanced Release,

combustion vehicles that also offer the August 2, 200544 

potential to significantly reduce the nation’s 

dependence upon imported oil. The Partnership 

Plan identifies technology-specific goals for 2010 and 2015 to promote R&D innovation (the 

plan can be downloaded from www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/). In addition to the 

hydrogen and fuel cell technology goals described in this Posture Plan, the key FreedomCAR 

partnership goals for advanced hybrid vehicle technologies include: 

✦ Electric propulsion system with a 15-year life capable of delivering at least 55 kW for 18 

seconds, and 30 kW continuously at a system cost of $125/kW peak 

✦ Internal combustion engine powertrain systems costing $30/kW, having a peak brake 

engine efficiency of 45%, and meeting or exceeding emission standards 

✦ Electric drivetrain energy storage with a 15-year life at 300 Wh and with a discharge power 

of 25 kW for 18 seconds at a cost of $20/kW 

✦ Material and manufacturing technologies for high-volume production vehicles that enable/ 

support the simultaneous attainment of affordability, increased use of recyclable/renewable 

materials, and a 50% reduction in the weight of the vehicle structure and subsystems 

The detailed R&D plan for advanced vehicle technologies can be found at 

www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/resources/fcvt_mypp.shtml. 

DaimlerChrysler F-Cell GM Sequel

Ford Focus 

 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
✦ Supporting basic research needs include: 

• Improved understanding of how hydrogen reacts and interacts with 

the surface, interface, grain boundaries, and bulk defects of particular 

materials to clarify the mechanisms of hydrogen embrittlement and help 

guide proper selection of existing materials or discovery/design of 

suitable new materials (e.g., nanostructured composites, advanced 

polymers) 

• Design/development of novel new materials for off-board (bulk) 

hydrogen storage or as hydrogen carriers

Hydrogen Storage 

Lower-cost, lighter-weight, and higher-density hydrogen storage is one of the 

key technologies needed for the introduction of hydrogen-based systems. 

Advanced storage materials that show promise include complex metal 

hydrides, chemical hydrides, carbon structures, and metal organic frameworks. 

Understanding how to produce and contain these advanced materials will 

be required as well as how to fill and discharge hydrogen, manage pressure 

and thermal properties, and integrate the materials into practical systems for 

stationary and mobile applications. The DOE’s “Grand Challenge” solicitation 

for Hydrogen Storage formed the basis for the National Hydrogen Storage 

Project (depicted in Figure 9), which involves approximately 40 universities, 

15 companies, and 10 Federal laboratories in conducting R&D to address 

these challenges.12 Ongoing and planned hydrogen storage R&D includes the 

following activities: 

✦	 Complete research, including materials work, to validate high-pressure and 

cryogenic tanks as near-term approaches 

✦	 Develop and evaluate innovative storage approaches including reversible 

storage materials, such as carbon nanotubes and metal hydrides, 

regeneration issues related to chemical hydrides, and other novel materials 

and concepts 

✦	 Downselect pure, undoped, single-walled carbon nanotube technology 

based on material capacity of six wt % hydrogen15 

✦	 Conduct collaborative research on complex metal hydrides, chemical 

hydrides, and carbon-based materials at the Centers of Excellence through 

the National Hydrogen Storage Project 

✦	 Conduct basic research, with an emphasis on understanding the chemical 

and physical processes governing materials-hydrogen interactions to 

enable the design and discovery of new, higher-capacity hydrogen storage 

materials, including: 

• Investigation of new properties and capabilities offered by 

nanostructures to further enhance storage capacity and to improve 

uptake/release kinetics 

• Design of two- and three-dimensional nanoarchitectures to improve 

the capabilities of today’s metal and complex hydrides 

• Theory, modeling, and simulation approaches 

• Novel analytical and characterization tools 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 20 
Figure 9. Organization of the National Hydrogen Storage Project 

a 

b 

Sciences 

c 

Basic

Science

a

b

c

Coordinated by DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of Hydrogen, Fuel Cells and 

Infrastructure Technologies 

Basic science for hydrogen storage conducted through DOE Office of Science, Basic Energy 

Coordinated with Delivery Program element 

National Hydrogen Storage Project

Metal Hydrides

Chemical Hydrogen Storage

Carbon-Based Materials

New materials/processes

for on-board storage

Compressed/cryogenic

& hybrid tanks

Off-board

storage systems

Centers of Excellence Independent Projects

Testing & Analysis

Cross Cutting

Conversion (Fuel Cells) 

Reducing fuel cell cost (by a factor of approximately 4)45 and improving 

durability and reliability will be required to ensure the commercial viability of 

fuel cells in both mobile and stationary applications. Fuel cell research will 

continue on high-efficiency polymer electrolyte membranes (PEMs) and other 

stack components and systems to meet cost, durability, power density, heat 

utilization, cycling, load-following, operation and start-up in cold weather, 

and other key performance targets. In 2004, DOE conducted a go/no-go 

review of on-board fuel processing activities. The review resulted in a nogo decision, concluding that on-board fuel processing would not improve 

sufficiently from its current status to compete effectively with gasoline hybrid 

vehicles or to support a hydrogen infrastructure. Projects that focus on onboard fuel processing have therefore been terminated or redirected to support 

development of fuel processors for stationary applications or development of 

catalysts suitable for a variety of fuel processing applications (e.g., auxiliary 

power units). Ongoing and planned fuel cell R&D includes the following 

activities: 

✦	 Focus on overcoming critical technical hurdles at the component level to 

improve overall polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell performance and 

durability while lowering costs, including: 

• Proton-conducting membranes that operate at 120oC46 (maximum) for 

transportation applications and greater than 120oC47 for stationary 

applications 

• Membranes that can operate at low relative humidity 

• Cathodes with decreased precious metal loading 

• Non-precious metal cathode catalysts 

• Bipolar plate materials and coatings with improved corrosion resistance 

2 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
✦	 Continue the development of auxiliary power unit systems for heavy vehicle 

application and the feasibility assessment of fuel cells for portable power 

applications 

✦	 Evaluate the impact of hydrogen quality (i.e., tolerance to impurities) on fuel 

cell performance and durability 

✦	 Independently review the status of progress toward critical targets, such as 

cost 

✦	 Conduct research to address technology shortfalls associated with coldweather start-up and operations 

✦	 Conduct basic research to: 

• Better characterize the mechanisms of ionic (including protonic)

transport in fuel cell materials (including dependence on relative 

humidity, temperature, acidity, etc.)

• Improve understanding of the relationship between precious metal 

catalytic behavior (catalytic activity, selectivity, deactivation, etc.) and 

catalyst composition, crystal structure, and morphology to guide design 

of new, non-precious metal catalysts 

• Improve understanding and ability to control the electrochemical 

processes at the electrodes and membrane electrolyte interfaces

Manufacturing 

R&D is needed to reduce manufacturing cost of evolving hydrogen technologies 

and develop a domestic supplier base. In support of the President’s 

Manufacturing Initiative and Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, the manufacturing R&D 

effort will enable the mass production of both supply and end-use technologies 

– in parallel with technology development – and will foster a strong domestic 

supplier capability. Activities will address the challenges of moving today’s 

laboratory produced technologies to high-volume, pre-commercial manufacturing 

thereby driving down the cost of hydrogen and fuel cell systems. Research will 

be conducted in coordination with the Department of Commerce and the White 

House Office of Science and Technology Policy’s Interagency Working Group 

on Manufacturing R&D. A research and development technology roadmap has 

been developed with industry to identify critical technology development needs 

for high volume manufacturing of fuel cell and hydrogen systems. Planned 

activities include: 

✦ Conduct research to design innovative and cost-effective manufacturing 

processes and technologies for PEM fuel cells, potentially including: 

• Investigation of an array of fabrication and process techniques 

amenable to high volume production of fuel cells, hydrogen production, 

delivery, and storage components and systems 

• Research on manufacturing of technologies critical to near-term 

technology deployment, such as 1) membrane electrode assemblies 

and bipolar plates for fuel cells, 2) distributed reforming and 

electrolysis systems and components for producing hydrogen, and 3) 

vessels, valves, and regulators for hydrogen storage and dispensing 

✦ Support technical, market, economic, and other analyses to address 

manufacturability and cost reduction in critical technology areas, i.e., 

hydrogen production and delivery, hydrogen storage, and fuel cells 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 22 
Figure 10. National Hydrogen Learning Demonstration Project 

j

i i

i l

Chevron hydrogen station and

Hyundai fuel cell vehicle, Chino, CA

Shell hydrogen station and GM

fuel cell vehicle, Washington, D.C. BP hydrogen station, Los Angeles, CA

DaimlerChrysler fuel cell vehicle Ford fuel cell vehicle

DTE/BP Power Park, Southfield, MI

* To verify progress toward 2015 targets ** Subsequent pro ects to validate 2015 target

Hydrogen Cost at Station $3.00/gge $2.00 - $3.00/gge

Vehicle Range 250+ miles 300+ miles

Fuel Cell Stack Durability 2000 hours 5000 hours

Performance Measure 2009* 2015**

The National Hydrogen Learn ng Demonstration ncludes four industry teams

that are working towards meet ng the 2009 targets isted below.

Technology Validation 

Efforts are needed to validate hydrogen energy systems (including fuel cells, 

engines, and turbines) in mobile and stationary applications. “Learning 

demonstrations” provide technical data on operation in a real world 

environment to measure progress and to help guide the research program 

as well as financial data for determining market and investment risks. The 

National Hydrogen Learning Demonstration Project (see Figure 10) will 

support a statistically significant number of hydrogen vehicle and refueling 

station demonstrations in several locations to: 

✦ Validate technology status and develop data to guide R&D addressing: 

• Hydrogen fueling station safety, operations, and reliability; vehicle 

fueling interface; and hydrogen production efficiency and cost 

• Vehicle performance and reliability under real operating and climate 

conditions 

✦ Validate safety and performance data from power park systems to 

coproduce hydrogen and electricity for vehicles and grid, respectively 

Demonstration projects will also be conducted through DOT and the Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users or 

SAFETEA-LU (see box on page 24). 

Safety, Codes and Standards 

Commercialization of hydrogen technologies cannot proceed unless effective 

domestic and international codes and standards are in place. DOE and DOT, 

in collaboration with Environmental Protection Agency, National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, Department of Defense, National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration, and other agencies, can play a role in fostering 

23 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
codes and standards development. Ongoing and 

Department of Transportation planned efforts include the following: 

Demonstrations Focus on ✦	 Conduct top-down safety analysis of 

Fuel Cell Buses and Related hydrogen-related processes and equipment 

for transportation and stationary applications Infrastructure and begin identifying design requirements 

The Department of Transportation (DOT) ✦	 Assist national and international code 

established the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell developers in developing and disseminating Bus Initiative to help pave the way for new building codes and equipment standards, successful commercialization of fuel cells 

in other transportation applications. These 

activities do not fall within the scope 

of the Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, but are 

closely related as transit buses will likely 

be one of the early markets for hydrogen 

and fuel cell technologies based on the 

fundamental characteristics of transit 

bus operations. The Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 

Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEALU)48 supports DOT’s fuel cell bus 

activities. SAFETEA-LU (P.L. 109-59) 

was enacted on August 10, 2005, and 

authorizes programs through FY 2009 for 

including: 

• Model building, fire, and safety codes 

• Codes and standards for the hydrogen 

delivery infrastructure 

• Utility interconnection and safety 

standards for hydrogen-fueled 

distributed energy devices 

• Product safety and performance 

standards and design requirements 

for vehicles, fuel cells, storage tanks, 

and other products and equipment that 

handle hydrogen or hydrogen-carrier fuels highways, highway safety, transit, and 

other transportation purposes. Section ✦	 Develop best safety practices, including 

3045 of the law directs the Secretary publication of a Best Practices Manual in of Transportation to establish a national 2007 

fuel cell bus program to aid development 

of commercially viable fuel cell bus ✦ Document and disseminate safety “learning” 

technology and related infrastructure. on a national basis

Education and Outreach 

The President’s National Energy Policy and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

recommend education activities to communicate the benefits of alternative 

energy, including hydrogen. Effective education is critical to enabling the 

successful implementation of near-term hydrogen demonstration projects 

and early market fuel cell installations, as well as the longer-term market 

adoption and acceptance that is required to realize the benefits of hydrogen 

and fuel cell technologies. Key audiences include state and local governments 

(including safety, code, and zoning officials), educators, professional and trade 

organizations, real estate developers and building owners and operators, public 

and private fleet operators, and the general public. Ongoing and planned 

education efforts include the following: 

✦	 Develop educational materials for state and local government officials 

and potential end users to help ensure an understanding of state-of-theart hydrogen technologies, hydrogen safety, opportunities, and timing for 

facilitating the introduction of fuel cell vehicles and supporting hydrogen 

infrastructure 

✦	 Develop and implement training modules for safety and code officials 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 2 
✦ Conduct activities to educate the public and key target audiences in 

communities where new hydrogen fueling stations will be implemented as 

part of technology validation 

✦	 Facilitate the expansion of hydrogen and fuel cell programs and learning 

modules at educational institutions, including: 

• Trade schools, colleges, and universities, for use in training a workforce 

of engineers and technicians and to engage students in a variety of 

disciplines in resolving the challenges to hydrogen technologies and 

infrastructure 

• Elementary and secondary schools, to engage younger students in the 

study of science and technology and to ensure an informed firstgeneration of hydrogen technology users 

Systems Analysis 

Systems analysis, aided by various modeling tools, will be used in the program 

management process to establish goals, evaluate tradeoffs, set priorities, 

and make technology down-selects and go/no-go decisions. Analysis will be 

required to assess the challenges, evaluate the contribution and interaction of 

the individual components, and support R&D efforts to resolve the technical 

barriers. The conversion from carbon-based to carbon-neutral energy 

technologies will require well-to-wheels analysis of cost, greenhouse gas 

emissions, energy efficiency, distribution, and analysis of nontechnical issues 

such as policy requirements and consumer preference. Analysis and modeling 

of components, pathways, and development scenarios will be a continual 

process that is directly linked to the Technology Validation activity. Ongoing 

and planned activities include the following: 

✦ Conduct well-to-wheels analysis of production, delivery, and storage 

pathways to enable informed tradeoff decisions 

✦ Conduct analysis to predict vehicle and component characteristics to 

evaluate technology options and tradeoffs 

✦ Conduct analysis to examine infrastructure development, resource 

availability, and cost goals 

✦ Develop a comprehensive macro-system model to analyze options and 

tradeoffs and better understand infrastructure constraints and barriers to 

the use of hydrogen as an energy carrier 

✦ Validate the models and evaluations using the results of the learning 

demonstration efforts 

✦ Compare the analysis of hydrogen fuel cell pathways to other 

technologies and fuels such as hybrid vehicles (gasoline, plug-in hybrid), 

all-electric vehicles, or vehicles that run on alternative fuels such as ethanol 

Systems Integration 

The breadth and complexity of the overall RD&D effort, as well as the 

interaction of program elements, requires an integrated Program approach 

to reduce risk and maximize the potential for technology readiness. Systems 

Integration will ensure all requirements are being addressed; track and measure 

the progress of projects; conduct independent analysis to aid the multiple 

programmatic decisions that need to be made over the course of the program; 

25 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
support a performance-based management approach; and identify and 

quantify programmatic and technical risks to ensure the program is proactive in 

response to issues and challenges. Ongoing and planned activities include: 

✦ Develop and maintain an Integrated Baseline for the DOE Hydrogen 

Program that links technology requirements, current status, costs, and 

schedule 

Hydrogen Cost Goal 

In 2005, the DOE developed a new 

hydrogen cost goal.4 The hydrogen 

cost goal, which is independent of the 

production pathway, was adjusted from 

$1.50 to $2.00-$3.00 per gallon of gasoline 

equivalent (gge) based on the Energy 

Information Administration’s forecast of 

gasoline cost in 2015, and the relative fuel 

economy of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles to 

advanced vehicle technology in 2015. The 

methodology used ensures that consumers’ 

operating cost ($/mile) in a hydrogen fuel 

cell vehicle will be equal to or less than the 

competitive gasoline vehicle in 2015. 

Program Milestones

✦	 Provide independent analysis supporting key 

program milestones and decisions, including 

an effort to evaluate the potential of 

cryogenic compressed hydrogen tanks to 

meet DOE’s 2010 storage targets19 

✦	 Verify performance of RD&D efforts and 

progress toward meeting the program’s 

technical targets 

✦	 Provide hydrogen infrastructure modeling 

and simulation capabilities in support of 

systems analysis 

✦	 Facilitate the implementation of risk 

management and configuration 

management/change control processes to 

enhance Program effectiveness 

The milestone chart shown in Figure 11 (see pages 28-29) presents the 

key activities of the Hydrogen Program through completion of critical path 

technology development. The Program is projected to continue beyond this 

point to support basic science and RD&D on advanced technologies and longerterm, centralized hydrogen production alternatives that are carbon-neutral. 

The milestones are organized according to the National Hydrogen Energy 

Roadmap’s key elements. 

Milestones for each of the timelines specify a delivery date for the given 

technology development, improvement or validation effort. Some milestones 

have slipped due to shortfalls in appropriations or changes in program planning. 

The values given are compiled mainly from the EE, FE, and NE RD&D Plans, 

but include other sources such as DOE analysis, the FreedomCAR and Fuel 

Partnership Plan, the National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap, DOT, and ongoing 

Federal laboratory research. As technologies evolve and economic and 

systems analyses progress, these targets will be refined. 

The milestones listed in Figure 11 describe DOE hydrogen RD&D activities 

at a high level of aggregation and do not articulate all component activities 

represented by the milestone. The timelines do not list all of the interim 

milestones for each pathway, nor do they include every critical go/no-go 

decision point and technology option downselect point integral to each 

activity at the sub-program and project level. (See office-level multi-year 

plans, listed in Appendix E, for a more detailed description of milestones and 

activities.) Some production technologies, such as photoelectrochemical, will 

require development beyond this time frame to be cost-competitive with other 

hydrogen production methods. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 2 
For each milestone, the most appropriate measurement units are provided in 

the legend. For some technologies, costs are primarily associated with scale 

(e.g., dollars per megawatt of capacity); for others, costs are associated with 

delivered hydrogen (e.g., dollars per gallon of gasoline equivalent, or gge). The 

term “project to” means that the technology demonstrated at the indicated 

time point would meet the specified cost target if that technology were in full 

commercial-scale (i.e., high-volume) production.

As described in the text box, a new hydrogen cost target and methodology was 

recently developed by DOE. The new cost target of $2.00-$3.00 per gallon of 

gasoline equivalent (delivered, untaxed, 2005$) is independent of the pathway 

or feedstock cost used to produce and deliver the 

hydrogen, and provides a range reflecting variability in The effective management of the future fuel efficiency improvement factors. The cost Department of Energy hydrogen target will be used to guide the Department’s hydrogen program will be far more challenging and fuel cell research and development activities. than any activity previously under-taken 

As technical milestones are achieved, market or end- on the civilian energy side of the DOE.

user incentives may be needed to overcome additional — The Hydrogen Economy: barriers to commercialization and infrastructure Opportunities, Costs, Barriers, development. An increased focus on educating and R&D Needs, National

consumers about the safe use of hydrogen and its Academy of Sciences, benefits will be essential to enhance awareness February 2004 and widespread acceptance of the technology. 

Detailed analysis of life-cycle costs and benefits and 

environmental impacts will continue to inform decisions 

regarding future hydrogen research. 

Integrated Program Management and Coordination 

The Hydrogen Program currently includes participation from the DOE Offices 

of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE); Fossil Energy (FE); Nuclear 

Energy, Science and Technology (NE); and Science (SC); and the DOT. Each 

office manages activities addressing hydrogen technologies that are consistent 

with their respective missions and objectives, in accordance with the guiding 

documents shown in Figure 12. As the Nation focuses more attention and 

resources on exploring the potential for a hydrogen energy future, close 

coordination among these offices becomes critical. 

One benefit of hydrogen is the ability to use a diverse set of energy resources 

for supply. The program’s research activities will provide the U.S. with a 

variety of options for producing cost-competitive hydrogen. However, technical 

challenges associated with hydrogen storage, delivery, conversion, and enduse applications are the same regardless of whether the hydrogen is derived 

from a renewable, fossil, or nuclear pathway. Fuel cells are being designed to 

meet the unique needs of particular end-use applications (e.g., transportation 

systems, stationary power generation stations, and portable power devices), 

but these will ultimately be fueled with hydrogen from the energy feedstock 

mix that makes the most sense, both economically and environmentally, for a 

particular region. 

A program management and operations plan has been developed to provide 

more detail on how DOE hydrogen activities will be integrated and managed 

within the Department. The Interagency Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Task 

Force meets regularly to share information and coordinate Federal government 

activities. The Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee (HTAC) 

has been chartered in accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to advise 

the Secretary of Energy on the Hydrogen Program. External evaluation is 

2 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Production

Education,

Safety, and

Codes and

Standards

Conversion Centralized

(Fuel Cells) Delivery

2

2

3

1

2

1 2 2

3 4

7

8 9

10

1 2 4

1

3 1

Figure 11. Technology Development Timeline: Milestones and Decision Pointsa Analysis Storage

1

3

11

3 

4 

2 

3 

1 3 4

5 

2 

demonstrated 

43 

11 

10 

8 

Technology

Validation

Systems

4, 5

Direct hydrogen PEM fuel cell vehicles 

and infrastructure demonstrated 

Technologies for renewable hydrogen production developed 

High and ultra-high temperature thermochemical 

hydrogen production 

Analytical tools and assessments 

in place to support decisionmaking 

Codes and standards in place to support 

transportation and stationary applications milestones 

PEM distributed generation and automotive fuel cells developed 

On-board storage system technology developed 

Technologies for distributed hydrogen production 

from natural gas and water electrolysis developed 

Technologies for centralized and distributed hydrogen delivery developed 

Centralized hydrogen production from coal demonstrated 

with zero emissions using carbon capture and sequestration 

Distributed stationar y fuel cell power generated 

Distributed generation and fuel cell/turbine hybrid operating on coal developed 

5,6 

2005 2010 2015 2020

Establish Technology Readiness 

Based on meeting the program’s technology 

performance and cost targets 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 2 
Figure 11 (cont'd). Legend for Technology Development Timelinea 

Distributed Natural Gas and Electrolysis

Central Coalc, d

Renewable Resourcese

High-Temperature Thermochemicalf

2010: Develop technology to produce hydrogen from natural

gas at a refueling station that projects to a cost of

$2.50/gge for hydrogen. [At the pump, untaxed, at 5,000

psig]

2015 2017: Develop technology to produce hydrogen

utilizing distributed electrolysis that projects to a cost of

<$3.00/gge. [At the pump, untaxed, at 10,000 psig]

2010 2011: Develop pre-engineering membrane

separation modules and reactors for hydrogen production

that meet membrane cost target of $150-200/ft

2015: Demonstrate a near-zero atmospheric emission coal

plant producing hydrogen and power with carbon capture

and sequestration at a 25% cost reduction that projects to

$0.80/gge at the plant gate (ultimate target: $1.80/gge

delivered)

2015 2017: Develop technology to produce hydrogen

through distributed reforming of renewable liquid fuels at a

refueling station that projects to a cost of <$3.00/gge for

hydrogen [At the pump, untaxed, at 10,000 psig]

2015 2017: Develop technology for central hydrogen

production integrating wind electricity production and

electrolysis that projects to a cost of <$2.00/gge at the

plant gate (<$3.00/gge delivered)

2015 2018: Demonstrate laboratory-scale

photobiological water splitting system to produce hydrogen

at an energy efficiency of 5% (solar-to-hydrogen).

Demonstrate laboratory-scale photoelectrochemical water

splitting system to produce hydrogen at an energy efficiency

of 10% (solar-to-hydrogen)

2007 2008: Operate laboratory-scale thermochemical

and electrolytic processes to determine the feasibility of

coupling them with a nuclear reactor

2010 2012: Laboratory-scale demonstration of solardriven high-temperature thermochemical hydrogen

production that projects to a cost $6.00/gge (ultimate

target: $7.00/gge delivered)

2011 2014: Pilot-scale demonstration of

thermochemical hydrogen production system for use with

nuclear reactors that projects to a cost of $2.50/gge

(ultimate target: $3.50/gge delivered)

2017 2020: Engineering-scale demonstration of

thermochemical hydrogen production system for use with

nuclear reactors that projects to a cost less than $2.00/gge

($3.00/gge delivered)

2

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Production Milestonesb Production Milestones

11.

2007: Downselect hydrogen

storage options with potential to

meet 2010 targets

2010: Develop and verify onboard storage systems achieving:

6% by weight capacity and 1,500

watt hours/liter energy density at

a cost of $4.00/kWh of stored

energy

2015: Develop and verify onboard storage systems achieving:

9% by weight capacity, 2,700 watt

hours/ liter, and $2.00/kWh

1.

2.

3.

Storage Milestones

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

2004: Decision to discontinue

on-board fuel processing R&D

based on inability to achieve 78%

efficiency and <0.5 minute

start time

2010 2011: Distributed

stationary generation natural

gas/propane 5-250 kW fuel cell

go/no-go decision based on ability

to achieve: 40% electrical

efficiency, 40,000 hours durability

(equivalent to service life between

major overhauls), at a cost of less

than $400-$750/kW (depending on

application)

2010: Develop direct hydrogen

polymer electrolyte membrane

automotive fuel cell operating at

60% peak efficiency, 220 W/L

density, 325 W/kg specific power

at a cost of $45/kW (automotive

production quantity)

2015: Polymer electrolyte

membrane automotive fuel cell

meets cost of $30/kW

2015: Fuel cell/turbine hybrid

operating on coal developed at

a cost of $400/kW with a HHV

efficiency of 50% with carbon

sequestration

Conversion Milestonese

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

2008: Validate stationary fuel

cell system that co-produces

hydrogen and electricity at

20,000 hours durability with 40%

efficiency at a cost of $1500/kW

or less

2009: Validate polymer

electrolyte membrane fuel cell

vehicles at multiple sites,

achieving 2,000 hours durability,

a 250-mile range, and $3.00/gge

of hydrogen

2014: Validate stationary fuel

cell system that co-produces

hydrogen and electricity at

40,000 hours durability with 40%

efficiency at a cost of $750/kW

or less

2015: Validate PEM fuel cells on

operational vehicles in different

climatic conditions that can be

produced for $45/kW when produced in quantities of 500,000

2015: Validate polymer

electrolyte membrane fuel cell

vehicles achieving 5,000 hours

durability (service life of vehicle)

and a 300-mile range

Validation Milestones Validation Milestones

2006 2007: Facilitate publishing

domestic and international hydrogen

quality standards and publish initial set

of basic safety training materials

2007 2008: Publish initial Best

Practices manual for hydrogen safety

2007 2009: Education program for

safety and code officials in place

2010 2012: Initial set of technical

codes and standards in place to support

demonstrations, commercialization

decisions and regulatory standards

1.

2.

3.

4.

Education, Education, Safety, and Codes

and Standards Milestonese and Standards Milestonese Safety and

2007: Define the criteria for a cost-effective hydrogen fuel delivery

infrastructure for supporting the introduction and long-term use of

hydrogen for transportation and stationary power

2010 2012: Develop technologies to reduce the cost of

hydrogen fuel delivery from the point of production to the point of

use in vehicles or stationary power units to <$1.70/gge of hydrogen

2015 2017: Develop technologies to reduce the cost of

hydrogen fuel delivery from the point of production to the point of

use in vehicles or stationary power units to <$1.00/gge of hydrogen

Centralized Delivery Milestonese Centralized Delivery Milestonese

1.

2.

3.

Systems Analysis Milestonese Systems Analysis Milestonese

1. 2007: Complete technoeconomic analysis of current

production technologies

2008: Develop a macro-system model of the hydrogen fuel

infrastructure to support the transportation system

2009 2010: Complete assessment of hydrogen quality

requirements for production, delivery, storage and fuel cell

pathway

2010 2011: Develop electricity infrastructure module for

the macro-system model

2.

3.

4.

a Achieving the milestones is dependent on requesting and receiving funding at the Hydrogen Program planning

levels for each office. b The hydrogen cost milestones are not yet normalized across the Hydrogen Program. The Program is in the 

process of normalizing the criteria used to determine the Hydrogen Program cost goals using the recentlydeveloped “H2A” modeling tool.

The assumed feedstock cost for coal is $2.00/short ton. d Milestone delay due to changes in Fossil Energy program planning. e Milestone delays are due to shortfalls in appropriations. f Milestone delays are due to changes in the DOE budget planning profile.

2 Hydrogen Posture Plan 

c 
also provided through a quadrennial review of the Program by the National 

Academy of Sciences in accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005. 

The DOE Hydrogen Program Manager, responsible for coordinating all the 

Department’s hydrogen activities, is located within the Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the lead organization for the President’s 

Hydrogen Fuel Initiative. An internal Hydrogen Program Coordination Group 

has been established (comprised of representatives of DOT and the DOE 

Offices of EE, FE, NE, SC, PI, and CFO) to: 

✦ Evaluate the progress of the Department’s hydrogen and related activities 

with regard to milestones and performance goals 

✦ Strengthen information exchange on programmatic and technical 

developments 

✦ Ensure that the various program activities (e.g., budgeting, execution, 

reporting, and evaluation) remain well-coordinated 

✦ Provide suggestions for management improvements and enhanced 

technical performance 

Figure 12. Program Document Hierarchy 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 30 
✦ Collaborate on systems analysis to understand the economic, energy, and 

environmental impacts of alternative technology pathways 

International cooperation and collaboration will also be important to efficiently 

achieve national hydrogen and fuel cell technology goals. The DOE has led 

the creation of the International Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy, which 

facilitates global cooperative R&D efforts, common codes and standards, and 

sharing of information necessary to develop a hydrogen fuel infrastructure. 

3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan 32 
5. Next Steps

✦ Assess, through independent review, the potential of cryogeniccompressed hydrogen tanks to meet DOE’s 2010 targets15 

✦ Continue to coordinate the detailed multi-year RD&D plans and priorities 

for hydrogen and related technology development efforts within DOE and 

DOT to make them consistent with this planning document, the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005, and the recommendations of the National Academies’ 

studies of the Hydrogen Economy20 and the FreedomCAR and Fuel 

Partnership.21 

✦ Strengthen coordination by continuing to utilize the Hydrogen Program 

Coordination Group composed of representatives from the DOE Offices of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE); Fossil Energy (FE); Nuclear 

Energy (NE); Science (SC); Policy and International Affairs (PI); and the 

Chief Financial Officer (CFO); and the DOT. 

✦ Complete and publish the DOE Hydrogen Program Safety Plan and the 

DOE Hydrogen Program Risk Management Plan. 

✦ Promote the sharing of safety-related information and maintain a database 

of safety “learnings.” 

✦ Conduct the fourth annual integrated Hydrogen Program Merit Review and 

Peer Evaluation. 

✦ Reflect the importance of the following activities in the Department’s outyear planning and budgeting: 

• Basic and applied research in hydrogen storage, production and 

delivery, and fuel cell cost and durability

• Hydrogen delivery and analysis of infrastructure development (these 

activities will be closely coordinated with the DOT, which is responsible 

for efforts to ensure the safety of the hydrogen delivery system) 

• Economic and systems analyses for determining and mitigating 

investment risks associated with hydrogen infrastructure and related 

technologies (e.g., fuel cell systems engineering and manufacturing 

plants) 

• Education activities focused on the key target audiences directly 

involved in near-term hydrogen technology validation 

✦ Strengthen existing interagency coordination efforts to ensure that 

Federal investments in hydrogen and fuel cell technology development are 

leveraged to the maximum extent. The Interagency Hydrogen and Fuel Cell 

Technical Task Force, in accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 

will work toward a safe, economical, and environmentally sound hydrogen 

fuel infrastructure by coordinating the efforts of the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy; the Departments of Energy, Transportation, Defense, 

Commerce, and Agriculture; the Office of Management and Budget; 

National Science Foundation; Environmental Protection Agency; National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration; and other agencies as appropriate. 

In 2005, the task force created a website at www.hydrogen.gov to provide 

information on all Federal hydrogen and fuel cell activities. 

33 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
✦ Increase awareness of the nation’s regulatory framework of energy, 

economic, and environmental policies at the Federal, state, and local levels, 

and work with the appropriate agencies to coordinate the timing of policy 

instruments and regulatory actions to allow technology to meet market 

requirements. 

✦ Continue DOT and DOE participation in the development of Global 

Technical Regulations for fuel cell light duty vehicles. 

✦ Identify opportunities to work more closely with emerging state-led 

initiatives to advance hydrogen infrastructure development. 

✦ Strengthen international cooperation on hydrogen-related research, 

development, and demonstration programs and on the development of 

interoperable codes and standards through the International Partnership for 

the Hydrogen Economy and the International Energy Agency. 

✦ Continue to implement relevant provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(see box on page xi) as appropriate. 

In summary, a great deal of progress has been made since 2003 in planning and 

carrying out the research, development, and demonstrations. The Department 

of Energy expects significant results to be achieved through the President’s 

Hydrogen Fuel Initiative in FY 2006 and beyond. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 3 
Notes

1 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5025: 

Advanced Energy Initiative,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

2 U.S. Department of Energy, A National Vision of America’s Transition to 

a Hydrogen Economy—to 2030 and Beyond (February 2002), retrieved 

January 20, 2006 from http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/vision_ 

doc.pdf. 

3 U.S. Department of Energy, National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap 

(November 2002), retrieved January 20, 2006 from http://www. 

hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/national_h2_roadmap.pdf. 

4 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5013: 

Hydrogen Cost Goal,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

5 FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership, Hydrogen Storage Technologies 

Roadmap (November 2005), retrieved October 6, 2006, from 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/program/ 

hydrogen_storage_roadmap.pdf. The 300 mile driving range for hydrogen 

powered vehicles was set to be comparable to the 370 mile driving range 

of a weighted average corporate vehicle, the presumed preference of the 

average U.S. consumer, p. 7. 

6 U.S. Department of Energy, HFCIT Multi-Year Plan, 3.4-1. 

7 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5030: 

Hydrogen Baseline Cost of $5 per gge in 2003,” http://www.hydrogen. 

energy.gov/program_records.html. 

8 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen Program 200 Annual Progress 

Report (December 2004), “Research and Development of a PEM Fuel 

Cell, Hydrogen Reformer, and Vehicle Refueling Facility” (Air Products 

and Chemicals, Inc.), 701, retrieved January 20, 2006 from http://www. 

hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/progress04/vd5_wait.pdf. 

9 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5038: 

Hydrogen Cost Competitive on a Cents per Mile Basis – 2006,” http:// 

www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_records.html. 

10 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5005: Fuel Cell 

System Cost – 2002 vs 2005,” http://www.energy.gov/program_records. 

html. 

11 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Fuel Cell System for 

Transportation -- 2005 Cost Estimate Independent Review (October 

2006), 5, retrieved October 5, 2006, from http://www.hydrogen.energy. 

gov/pdfs/40160.pdf. 

12 U.S. Department of Energy, FY 200 DOE Budget Request to Congress 

for Interior and Related Agencies: Energy Conservation, (February 

2005), 316, retrieved January 20,2006, from http://www.mbe.doe.gov/ 

budget/06budget/Content/Volumes/Vol_7_INT.pdf. 

35 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
13 U.S. Department of Energy, HFCIT Multi-Year Plan, 3.4-1. 

14 National Renewable Energy Laboratory Distributed Hydrogen Production 

from Natural Gas Independent Review (October 2006), 4, retrieved 

October 5, 2006, from http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/bk40382. 

pdf. 

15 More information on the H2A model can be found at http://www. 

hydrogen.energy.gov/h2a_analysis.html. 

16 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), "Record 5002: DOE 

Hydrogen Program Solicitation Awardee Announcements," http://www. 

hydrogen.energy.gov/program_records.html. 

17 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5032: Overview 

of IPHE,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_records.html. 

18 U.S. Department of Energy, Draft Roadmap on Manufacturing R&D for 

the Hydrogen Economy (December 2005), retrieved February 4, 2006, 

from http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/roadmap_manufacturing_ 

hydrogen_economy.pdf. 

19 U.S. Government Printing Office, Federal Register: August 24, 2006 

(Volume 71, Number 164, page 50052-50054), U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Carbon 

Nanotubes for On-Board Hydrogen Storage Go/No-Go Decision, 

retrieved October 4, 2006, from http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index. 

html. 

20 National Research Council and National Academy of Engineering, 

Committee on Alternatives and Strategies for Future Hydrogen 

Production and Use, The Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities, Costs, 

Barriers, and R&D Needs (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 

2004), http://www.nap.edu/books/030909/632/html. 

21 National Research Council, Committee on Review of the FreedomCAR 

and Fuel Research Program, Review of the Research Program of 

the FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership: First Report (Washington, 

DC: National Academies Press, 2005), http://www.nap.edu/ 

books/0309097304/html.11.html. 

22 U .S. House, 109th Congress, 1st Session, H.R. , Energy Policy Act 

of 2005 (Public Law No: 109-058), retrieved September 15, 2005, from 

http://thomas.loc.gov. 

23 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5028: State 

of the Union 2003,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_records. 

html. 

24 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual 

Energy Outlook 200: With Projections to 2030, (February 2006), DOE/ 

EIA-0383(2006), 8, retrieved September 13, 2006, from http://www.eia. 

doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2006).pdf. 

25 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 

25, (2006), “Table 1.13 Consumption of Petroleum by End-Use Sector, 

1973-2005,” 1-17, retrieved August 16, 2006, from http://cta.ornl.gov/ 

data/tedb25/Edition25_Full_Doc.pdf. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 3 
26 Ibid., "Table 2.5 Transportation Energy Use by Mode, 2002-2003,” (2-7). 

27 Ibid., "Table 3.3 U.S. Automobiles and Trucks in Use, 1970-2003,” (3-5). 

28 Singh M., A. Vyas and E. Steiner, Argonne National Laboratory, VISION 

Model: Description of Model Used to Estimate the Impact of Highway 

Technologies and Fuels on Energy Use and Carbon Emissions to 2050, 

(December 2003), ANL/ESD/04-1, retrieved September 27, 2005, 

from http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/299.pdf. The energy 

efficiency assumed for FCVs relative to conventional vehicles is 2.25 in 

2018 and 2020, 2.5 in 2030 and 2040 and 3.0 beginning in 2050 with 

linear interpolation used for intervening years (assumes average new light 

duty vehicle fuel economy of 24.3 mpg for baseline vehicles). 

29 U.S. Department of Energy, Projected Benefits of Federal Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy Programs, FY 200 Budget Request, 

NREL/TP-620-39684, (March 2006), Table 3-10 Light-Duty Vehicle 

Market Shares for the Hydrogen Case, p. 3-10, and Table 3-11 

Calculation of Petroleum Savings, p. 3-11, retrieved July 26, 2006, from 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/gpra_estimates_fy07.html. 

30 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5018: 

Reduction in Fuel Consumption with FCVs,” http://www.hydrogen. 

energy.gov/program_records.html. 

31 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5017: Air 

Quality and Population,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

32 U.S. Department of Energy, Annual Energy Outlook 200 (see note 24), 

"Table A8: Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions,” (147). 

33 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5003: Carbon 

Displacement Using Net-Zero Carbon Sources” http://www.hydrogen. 

energy.gov/program_records.html. 

34 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5001: Federal 

Funding of Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Related Programs,” http://www. 

hydrogen.energy.gov/program_records.html. 

35 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5019: Japan 

Government Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Budget,” http://www.hydrogen. 

energy.gov/program_records.html. 

36 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5022: Current 

U.S. Hydrogen Production,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

37 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5020: Vehicle 

Carbon Emission Comparisons,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/ 

program_records.html. 

38 U.S. Department of Energy, Solar and Wind Technologies for Hydrogen 

Production: Report to Congress, ESECS EE-3060, December 

2005, retrieved February 3, 2006 from http://www.eere.energy.gov/ 

hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/solar_wind_for_hydrogen_dec2005.pdf. 

3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
39 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5027: 

Hydrogen Fuel Initiative (White House Press Release),” http://www. 

hydrogen.energy.gov/program_records.html. 

40 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), "Record 500: HFI 

Budget FY 200-200,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

41 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 500: HFI 

FY200 Budget Request for H2

 Production,” http://www.hydrogen. 

energy.gov/program_records.html. 

42 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), "Record 500: 

Hydrogen-Related Research at DOE," http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/ 

program_records.html. 

43 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5016: 

FutureGen Press Release,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

44 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5029: National 

Academies Press Release,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

45 U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program, "Record 502: Fuel Cell 

System 2005 Cost vs Goal," http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

46 U.S. Department of Energy, HFCIT Multi-Year Plan, 3.4-21. 

47 U.S. Department of Energy, HFCIT Multi-Year Plan, 3.4-2. 

48 U.S. House, 109th Congress, 1st Session, H.R. 3, Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users or 

SAFETEA-LU (P.L. 109-59), retrieved January 20, 2006, from http:// 

www.thomas.loc.gov. 

49 U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program, "Record 5008: FCV 

Hydrogen Demand in 2040," http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

50 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5009: 

Hydrogen Production from Geothermal,” http://www.hydrogen.energy. 

gov/program_records.html. 

51 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5024: 

Hydrogen Production from Hydropower,” http://www.hydrogen.energy. 

gov/program_records.html. 

52 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5026: Uranium 

Production and Consumption,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/ 

program_records.html. 

53 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5031: World 

Nuclear Association,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_ 

records.html. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan 3 
Appendices

A. Sample Scenario for Domestic Hydrogen Production Options and 

Resource Needs 

B. Hydrogen Production and Delivery Pathways 

C. Hydrogen Fuel Initiative Budget: FY 04-FY 07 

D. Glossary/Acronyms 

E.	 Contacts, Resources, and Weblinks 

3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan 0 
Appendix A: Sample Scenario for 

Domestic Hydrogen Production 

Options and Resource Needs 

The long-term strategy is to produce hydrogen from a diverse array of carbon-neutral domestic 

resources, including biomass, coal (with sequestration) wind, solar, and nuclear. The table below 

provides perspective on the availability of these domestic resources for hydrogen production 

compared with the amount of hydrogen that may be needed to meet future demand. The total 

future hydrogen demand used in this example is 64 million metric tons, which represents the 

amount of hydrogen needed for 300 million fuel cell vehicles.49 This aggressive scenario is 

employed here to illustrate how domestic resources could be utilized to provide a large amount of 

hydrogen. DOE is pursuing other options for replacing oil in the transportation sector, including 

biofuels and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, so this level of hydrogen demand for fuel cell 

vehicles is speculative. In addition, advances in hydrogen production technologies that make the 

processes more efficient could further reduce the future resource needs. 

In the table below, each resource is assumed to provide 20% of the total future hydrogen demand 

(i.e., almost 13 million tons of hydrogen each), just as an example. The amount of the resource 

needed to provide this much hydrogen is shown in column 2 (“Needed for Hydrogen”) and is 

compared with estimated resource availability and current consumption. This analysis does 

not include demand increases for these resources from other sectors (e.g., stationary power, 

industry, buildings, etc.). Hydrogen production from natural gas is not included in the table to 

convey that it is not a viable long-term strategy due to concerns of limited supply, volatility, and 

the demands of other sectors. However, distributed production of hydrogen from natural gas 

provides a potential near term strategy, and market conditions will determine whether this option 

is implemented during the initial market penetration of fuel cell vehicles. 

a Shows the amount of each resource needed to produce 20% of the total hydrogen demand of 64 million metric tons/yr (13 million 

metric tons) in this potential hydrogen fuel cell vehicle scenario. (See note 49—Record 5008—for calculation of 64 million metric 

tons.) 

b The National Renewable Energy Laboratory H2A Production Model, version 1.0.9, was used to determine the amount of 

hydrogen needed for each advanced technology (see note 11). 

A- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
c Calculations were made for the exclusive production of the amount of hydrogen requested. However, 

these systems can be configured to capture heat and generate both heat and electricity in combined 

heat and power (CHP) systems. 

d Walsh, M.E. et al., Biomass Feedstock Availability in the United States:  State Level Analysis, 

(2000), retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/resourcedata/index.html. 

e Includes only biomass not currently used for food, feed and fiber products. 

f Perlack, R. D. et al., Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical 

Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply, (April 2005), performed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory for 

the U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Energy, ORNL/TM-2005/66, DOE/GO102995-2135, retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/billion_ton_ 

vision.pdf. 

g U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual Coal Report – 200, (November 

2005), DOE/EIA-0584(2004), Table 15: “Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines, Estimated 

Recoverable Reserves, and Demonstrated Reserve Base by Mining Method, 2004,” 31, retrieved 

January 23, 2006 from http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/table15.html 

h U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Quarterly Coal Report: July – 

September 2005, (December 2005), DOE/EIA-0121(2005/03Q), Table 28: “U.S. Coal Consumption by 

End-Use Sector 1999-2005, 32, retrieved January 23, 2006 from http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/ 

quarterly/html/t28p01p1.html. 

i Other renewable power generation technologies can also serve as a resource for water electrolysis. 

For example, geothermal could provide 11 million tons of hydrogen per year or up to 68 million tons 

of hydrogen if estimates of undiscovered accessible resources are considered (see note 50—Record 

5009). Undeveloped hydropower resources and upgrades to existing hydroelectric plants could supply 

an additional 15 million tons of hydrogen per year (see note 51—Record 5024). 

j Elliott, D.L. and M.N. Schwartz., Wind Energy Potential in the United States, (Richland, WA: Pacific 

Northwest National Laboratory, September 1993), PNL-SA-23109, retrieved September 29, 2005, from 

http://www.nrel.gov/wind/wind_potential.html. 

k U.S. Department of Energy and National Renewable Energy Laboratory, “United States 2005 Installed 

Wind Power Capacity,” (as of June 30, 2006), retrieved October 23, 2006 from http://www.eere. 

energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/wind_installed_capacity.asp. 

l U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5006: Solar Resources in the U.S.,” http:// 

www.hydrogen.energy.gov/program_records.html. 

m Land and Water Fund of the Rockies, Renewable Energy Atlas of the West, (Boulder, CO: July 2002), 

10, retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.energyatlas.org. 

n Uranium is sold on a very open, competitive market. Annual U.S. production provides less than 4-5% of 

U.S. needs under the current once-through fuel cycle approach (see note 52—Record 5026). However, 

nuclear systems can be configured for greater fuel use efficiency, even to the point of extending a 

known supply by a factor of 50 (see note 53—Record 5031). In the extremely unlikely event that U.S. 

uranium resources became the sole supply for U.S. reactors, they could be extended to last for over a 

thousand years. 

o Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2005-200 Edition Information Digest, NUREG-1350, Volume 17, 

(July 2005), 23, retrieved January 24, 2006 from http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ 

nuregs/staff/sr1350/v17/sr1350v17.pdf. 

p The nuclear thermo-chemical route to hydrogen production is based on the use of high-temperature 

reactor technology which is under development to generate the higher temperatures needed (800-

1000°C). The 310 GWth is the amount of thermal energy equivalent currently generated by today’s 

conventional nuclear energy that is in service for electricity production (100 GWe divided by 32% 

thermal efficiency). 

Hydrogen Posture Plan A-2 
Appendix B. Hydrogen Production 

and Delivery Pathways* 

The ultimate goal is for hydrogen to be produced and delivered utilizing 

several feedstocks, processing methods, and delivery options at a variety of 

scales ranging from large central production to very small local production, 

depending on what makes the most economic and logistical sense for that 

location. One of the tasks at hand is to develop a better understanding of 

the options available, the current and potential costs and energy efficiencies 

of these options, and the tradeoffs each offer. From this understanding, we 

will continue to refine the DOE research and development plan for hydrogen 

production and delivery to ensure that viable, cost-effective options become 

available for both the short term and long term. 

This Appendix contains well-to-wheels (WTW) analysis results comparing 

current (2005) gasoline internal combustion engine (ICE) and hybrid vehicles 

and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCVs). It includes several potential options 

for hydrogen production and delivery. Two time frames are examined for 

the hydrogen cases. The “current” cases represent 2005 technology in the 

laboratory; however, this technology has not been validated at full scale. The 

“future” cases examine 2015 potential technology for distributed production 

of hydrogen at refueling stations and 2030 for central hydrogen production 

options. Projected costs are also presented for the hydrogen FCV cases. 

The hydrogen production and delivery analyses presented here utilize the H2A 

Production and Delivery model approach and tools (which can be accessed 

at www.hydrogen.energy.gov/h2a_analysis.html). The assumptions for each 

production technology-specific case are provided to clarify the basis for and 

data used in the analyses. 

For the central hydrogen production cases, two delivery technologies are 

analyzed. For the current cases it is assumed that the hydrogen is liquefied 

and transported by cryogenic liquid trucks to the forecourt station where it is 

stored, and then vaporized under pressure and dispensed as a high pressure 

gas to the FCV. For the 2030 future cases, it is assumed that a hydrogen 

pipeline infrastructure is available to transport the hydrogen to the forecourt. 

The hydrogen is first compressed from its assumed production pressure 

of 300 psi to a pipeline pressure of 1,000 psi. At the forecourt it is further 

compressed, stored, and charged as a high pressure gas to the FCV at a 5,000 

psi fill. The cost of hydrogen delivery used for the current central hydrogen 

production cases is $3.50/gge of hydrogen. This includes liquefaction, truck 

transport, and forecourt operations. This is based on the H2A Delivery 

Scenario model under development. This model is available at www.hydrogen. 

energy.gov. The cost of hydrogen delivery used for the future central hydrogen 

production cases is $1.00/gge of hydrogen. This includes compression, 

pipeline transport, and forecourt operations of compression, storage, and 

dispensing. This is based on the Program’s targeted cost for hydrogen delivery 

technology. Note that all costs are expressed in real 2005 dollars. 

* For additional information, see Chapter 5 and Appendix E of the National Research Council report The 

Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities, Costs, Barriers, and R&D Needs (Washington, DC: National 

Academies Press, 2004). 

B- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure B-1. Distributed Hydrogen Production via Steam Methane Reforming 

Distributed production of hydrogen from natural gas utilizes small scale steam methane reforming technology. The 

advantages of distributed hydrogen production are the production unit can be located at the consumer refueling 

site, the unit capacity can be tailored to the site’s fueling requirements, and this approach eliminates the need for 

an extensive hydrogen delivery infrastructure. This process may be the most viable for introducing hydrogen as 

an energy carrier since it requires less capital investment for the smaller hydrogen volumes that are needed in the 

early stages of hydrogen technology adoption. 

This analysis is based on the best available technology in the laboratory. Currently, it has not been validated 

through demonstration. 

Notes: Distributed Hydrogen Production via Steam Methane Reforming 

1. Source: Well-to-wheels energy, petroleum, and greenhouse gas emissions information from the Argonne National Laboratory 

GREET model, Version 1.7. Well-to-wheels values represent primary fuel production, electricity production, hydrogen production, 

hydrogen compression, and hydrogen dispensing. Fossil resource exploration and equipment manufacture are not included. 

2. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for the 

current (2005) case are from the H2A model cases (Version 1.0.9) modified to reflect the Hydrogen Program 2005 cost goals as of 

November 2005. Capacity of plant represented here is 1,500 kg/day. 

3. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for the 

future (2015) case are from the H2A model cases modified to reflect the Hydrogen Program 2015 cost goals as of November 2005. 

4. Basis is 1 kg of hydrogen, dispensed from filling station for 5,000 psi fills. A kg of hydrogen contains approximately the same 

amount of energy as one gallon of gasoline, or one gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge). 

5. Diagram is for future (2015) case, showing feedstock and energy consumption levels required to meet technology cost goals. 

Flows in diagram represent direct energy and emissions between production and dispensing, and are not based on well-to-wheels 

calculations. 

6. Costs include hydrogen production, compression, storage, and dispensing to vehicle. Cost assumes that small-scale steam 

methane reforming technology is added to an existing fueling station. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan B-2 
7. Efficiency results are presented in terms of lower heating value (LHV) of hydrogen. 

8. The efficiency of the electric forecourt compressor, which raises the pressure of gaseous hydrogen for 5,000 psi fills, is 94%. 

9. The operating capacity factor of the forecourt station is 70%. This value accounts for on-stream availability as well as consumer 

demand variations between week days/weekends and winter/summer. 

10. Natural gas feedstock prices are based on the 2015 projections for industrial natural gas by the DOE Energy Information 

Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2005 High A case. Prices shown in table are in 2005 $. Feedstock is inflated at 1.9%/year 

for the 20-year operating life of the plant. 

11. Electricity is consumed by the process for production and compression operations. Electricity prices are based on the 2015 

projections for commercial-rate electricity by the DOE Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2005 High A case. 

Prices shown in table are in 2005 $. Electricity is inflated at 1.9%/year for the 20-year operating life of the plant. 

12. Capital cost of current (2005) and future (2015) cases are $1.40/kg hydrogen and $0.60/kg hydrogen, respectively. 

13. Cost of hydrogen is the minimum required to obtain a 10% internal rate of return after taxes on the capital investment. 

14. The data relevant to the Distributed SMR technology diagram above are provided in the table below. 

B-3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
November 05 Price

� $12.5/MM Btu

FCV fuel economy relative to

the gasoline hybrid (1.66)

Understanding Effects of Feedstock Volatility 

Distributed natural gas/renewable liquid reforming and on-site electrolysis (promoting 

renewable electricity) strategies provide advantages as potential near-term hydrogen 

production options because they obviate the need for a new delivery infrastructure. Current 

delivery methods (high pressure tube trailers and “liquid” trucks) are very energy intensive 

and not cost effective for distances over 100 miles. The distributed reforming approach is 

an enabling technology to produce hydrogen not only from natural gas, but from a portfolio 

of options such as methanol, ethanol and other renewable liquids. In the longer term, when 

diverse domestic resources are used, volatility of hydrogen price should not be an issue. 

However, natural gas prices are known to be volatile and this is an important consideration Hydrogen Cost, $/gge

for planning. The chart below shows this sensitivity. 

Hydrogen Production Cost from Distributed Natural Gas Versus Sensitivity to 

Natural Gas Price (HHV) 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

November 05 Price

~$12.5/MM Btu

0 

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 

Natural Gas Price, $/MM Btu (HHV)

For example, using a November 2005 data point for industrial natural gas price ($12.50 per 

million Btu), hydrogen would currently cost $4.50 per gallon-gasoline-equivalent (gge). This 

cost is calculated using the H2A financial model which calculates hydrogen costs based 

on the current technology development status. The H2A model is a cash flow model that 

allows us to understand the cost of various hydrogen production and delivery pathways 

on a consistent basis. This portfolio analysis tool provides a levelized cost of hydrogen 

for a given rate of return (input) and accounts for capital costs, construction time, taxes, 

depreciation, O&M, inflation, and feedstock prices. See http://www.hydrogen.energy. 

gov/h2a_anaylsis.html. As shown in the chart below, hydrogen at $4.50/gge would make 

hydrogen fuel cell vehicles competitive on a cents per mile basis with gasoline vehicles 

(ICE) at gasoline prices of $1.90/gge (untaxed) and gasoline hybrid-electric vehicles at 

gasoline prices of $2.70/gge (untaxed). 

Model for Hydrogen Cost Goal (Yielding Equivalent $/ml. for the Consumer 

($2.00-$3.00/gge)) Hydrogen Cost, $/gge 

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

$9.00

$10.00

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 1.29

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

$9.00

$10.00

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 1.29

EIA projected gasoline 

price in 2015 is $1.29/gal. 

(2005$). Based on EIA hi “A” World Oil 

Prices from the EIA AEO 2005 used to 

calculate the hydrogen cost goal. 

FCV fuel economy relative to the 

gasoline hybrid (1.66) 

FCV fuel economy relative to the 

gasoline ICE (2.4) 

Gasoline Price (untaxed), $/gal 

Note: The FCV fuel economy ratios relative to the gasoline ICE and hybrid were obtained from the NRC 

report: The Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities, Costs, Barriers, and R&D Needs, p.66. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan B- 
The impact of the volatility of natural gas prices will continue to be evaluated to ensure the 

viability of this hydrogen production pathway. Feedstock price volatility will significantly 

influence investment decisions. 

The chart below shows the major variables that influence natural gas-based hydrogen costs. 

Sensitivity Analyses for Distributed Hydrogen Production from Natural Gas 

(current estimate is $3.10/gge with 2005 EIA High A estimate) 

Total Direct Cap. Investment

(deprec.) Million $

Natural Gas Price

$/MMBTU (HHV)

H2 Storage

Quantity %

Production Capacity Factor %

Production

Efficiency 71 65

90 60

25 100

2.0 5.0

3.0 12.0

2.8

69

70

35

5.0

2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8

Hydrogen Cost, $/gge Note: Base Hydrogen Cost = $3.10/gge 

The pie chart below shows the composition of costs contributing to the current estimate 

of producing hydrogen from distributed natural gas. This estimate is based on the best 

available research, projected to high volume, but not yet validated under real-world 

operating conditions by the Program’s Technology Validation Sub-Program. This estimate is 

based on the 2005 EIA High A estimate for natural gas in 2015.

Cost Breakdown of Hydrogen from Distributed Natural Gas ($3.10/gge) 

Other Variables

8%

NG Feedstock

30%

Capital Cost

44%

Other Variables

8%

NG Feedstock

30%

Capital Cost

44%

Fixed O&M

18%

B-5 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure B-2. Distributed Hydrogen Production from Wind 

Wind power is currently utilized as a renewable power technology for generating electricity. Combining this 

electricity with water electrolysis, wind can provide hydrogen with few emissions and with very low consumption 

of petroleum. Wind-generated electricity can be sent to distributed electrolyzers via the electric grid. The 

petroleum energy use and resultant CO2 emissions from this process are associated with hydrogen compression 

at the forecourt, as well as the use of grid electricity. Grid electricity supplements the electricity from wind to 

increase the capacity factor on the electrolyzer. 

This analysis is based on the best available technology in the laboratory. Currently, it has not been validated 

through demonstration. 

Notes: Distributed Hydrogen Production from Wind 

1. Source: Well-to-wheels energy, petroleum, and greenhouse gas emissions information from the Argonne National Laboratory 

GREET model, Version 1.7. Well-to-wheels values represent primary fuel production, electricity production, hydrogen production, 

hydrogen compression, and hydrogen dispensing. Fossil resource exploration and equipment manufacture are not included. 

2. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for 

the current (2005) case are from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the H2A model, Version 1.0.9 for a forecourt 

electrolysis facility. Capacity of plant represented here is 1,500 kg/day. 

3. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for 

the future (2015) case are from the H2A advanced forecourt case modified to include a $250/kW installed capital cost for the 

electrolyzer and $0.038/kWh electricity price. 

4. Basis is 1 kg of hydrogen, dispensed from filling station for 5,000 psi fills. A kg of hydrogen contains approximately the same 

amount of energy as one gallon of gasoline, or one gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge). 

5. Diagram is for future (2015) case, showing feedstock and energy consumption levels required to meet technology cost goals. 

Flows in diagram represent direct energy and emissions between production and dispensing, and are not based on well-to-wheels 

calculations. 

6. The petroleum use and resultant GHG emissions are associated with the grid electricity for compression, and to supplement the 

wind-based electricity for electrolysis. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan B- 
7. Energy from incoming wind is not included in the overall energy balance, although the wind-generated electricity is. Grid 

efficiency loss = 7.3% as per assumption in ANL GREET model. 

8. Diagram is for future (2015) case. Cost of future (2015) case assumes electricity assistance provided by grid to maintain 

capacity factor at 70%; the electricity to the electrolyzer is assumed to be 50% wind, 50% grid. Cost of current (2005) case also 

assumes electricity assistance provided by grid to maintain capacity factor at 70%; the electricity to the electrolyzer is assumed 

to be 30% wind, 70% grid. Wind energy is assumed to be transported via the electrical grid to the distributed electrolyzer. 

9. Current (2005) electrolyzer uses 53.4 kWh of electricity per kg of hydrogen generated. Future (2015) electrolyzer uses 44.5 

kWh/kg. The LHV electrolyzer efficiencies for the current (2005) and future (2015) cases are 64% and 76%, respectively. 

10. Installed electrolyzer capital cost for 2005 and 2015 cases is $730/kW and $250/kW, respectively. 

11. Efficiency results are presented in terms of lower heating value (LHV) of hydrogen. 

12. The efficiency of the electric forecourt compressor, which raises pressure of the gaseous hydrogen for 5,000 psi fills, is 94%. 

13. The operating capacity factor of the production unit is 70%. 

14. Electricity is consumed by the process for compression and electrolyzer operations. Electricity prices for the current (2005) 

case is based on the 2005 projection for industrial-rate electricity by the DOE Energy Information Administration Annual Energy 

Outlook 2005 High A case. Electricity price for the future (2015) case is $0.038/kWh. Prices shown in table are in 2005 $. 

Electricity is inflated at 1.9%/year for the 20-year operating life of the plant. It is assumed that both grid electricity and wind 

electricity is available at the same price. 

15. Cost of hydrogen is the minimum required to obtain a 10% internal rate of return after taxes on the capital investment. 

16. The data relevant to the Distributed Hydrogen Production from Wind technology diagram above are provided in the table below. 

B- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure B-3. Centralized Hydrogen Production from Wind 

Wind power is currently utilized as a renewable power technology for generating electricity. Combining this 

electricity with water electrolysis, wind can provide hydrogen with few emissions and with very low consumption 

of petroleum. Grid electricity supplements the electricity from wind to increase the capacity factor of the 

electrolyzer for the future case. The petroleum energy use and resultant CO2 emissions from this process are 

associated with hydrogen delivery, as well as the use of grid electricity for the future case. 

This analysis is based on the best available technology in the laboratory. Currently, it has not been validated 

through demonstration. 

Notes: Centralized Hydrogen Production from Wind 

1. Source: Well-to-wheels energy, petroleum, and greenhouse gas emissions information from the Argonne National Laboratory 

GREET model, Version 1.7. Well-to-wheels values represent primary fuel production, electricity production, hydrogen production, 

and hydrogen delivery. Fossil resource exploration and equipment manufacture is not included. 

2. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for the 

current (2005) cases are from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the H2A model, Version 1.0.9 for a 125,000 kg/day 

capacity wind electrolysis facility. 

3. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for the 

future (2030) case is from the H2A model cases modified to reflect the Hydrogen Program 2015 cost goals as of November 2005. 

4. Basis is 1 kg of hydrogen, dispensed from filling station for 5,000 psi fills. A kg of hydrogen contains approximately the same 

amount of energy as one gallon of gasoline, or one gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge). 

5. Diagram is for future (2030) case, showing feedstock and energy consumption levels required to meet technology cost goals. 

Flows in diagram represent direct energy and emissions between production and dispensing, and are not based on well-to-wheels 

calculations. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan B- 
6. Cost of 2030 case assumes electricity assistance provided by grid to maintain capacity factor at 97%; the electricity to the 

electrolyzer is assumed to be 50% wind, 50% grid. Current (2005) case uses only wind-generated electricity, with an electrolyzer 

capacity factor of 41%. While the higher capacity factor is required for an economic future (2030) case, it results in higher well-towheels total energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. The greehouse gas emissions are slightly higher for the future (2030) case, 

although rounding to significant figures hides this effect. In the future (2030) case, grid electricity is purchased at the avoided price 

of $0.03/kWh. Avoided cost estimates the incremental cost of fuel and capacity displaced by a unit of the specified resource and 

more accurately reflects the as-dispatched energy value than comparison to the levelized cost of other individual technologies. See 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/electricity.html for more details. 

7. The price of electricity produced from wind in the current (2005) case was calculated from the current (2005) central wind 

electrolysis H2A case and assumed to be the price at which wind electricity was produced in the model. In the future case (2030) it 

was assumed the grid and wind electricity prices were the same (at $0.03/kWh). 

8. The petroleum use and resultant GHG emissions are associated with the grid electricity for delivery, as well as for grid assistance in 

the future (2030) case. Fossil-based power plants generating grid electricity for the future (2030) case are assumed to sequester 

carbon emissions at a rate of 85%. 

9. Energy from incoming wind was not included in the overall energy balance, although the wind-generated electricity is. 

10. The hydrogen delivery in the current (2005) case assumes liquid hydrogen delivery by truck from a central plant located 76 miles 

from the forecourt station. Liquefier efficiency is 77.4%. Truck fuel consumption is 6 mi/gallon. Data was obtained from the H2A 

Delivery Scenario Model and GREET. The future (2030) case assumes hydrogen pipeline delivery over 76 miles. Delivery costs 

include necessary compression and/or liquefaction equipment. 

11. Cost of hydrogen delivery for the current (2005) and future (2030) cases is assumed to be $3.50/kg and $1.00/kg, respectively. 

12. Future (2030) case assumes pipeline compressed gas delivery to the forecourt station. Pipeline energy use calculated using the 

H2A Scenario Model. 

13. The efficiency of the electric forecourt compressor, which raises the pressure of the gaseous hydrogen for 5,000 psi fills, is 94%. 

14. For the current (2005) case, hydrogen is assumed to be received at the forecourt as a liquid and dispensed as a gas for 5,000 psi 

fills. For the future (2030) case, hydrogen is assumed to be received at the forecourt as gaseous hydrogen at 250 psi by pipeline 

and dispensed for 5,000 psi fills. The cost of dispensing is included in the delivery cost. 

15. Current (2005) electrolyzer uses 53.4 kWh of electricity per kg of hydrogen generated. Future (2030) electrolyzer uses 44.5 kWh/ 

kg. The LHV electrolyzer efficiencies for the current (2005) and future (2030) cases are 64% and 76%, respectively. 

16. Installed electrolyzer capital cost for 2005 and 2030 cases is $800/kW and $180/kW, respectively. 

17. Efficiency results are presented in terms of lower heating value (LHV) of hydrogen. 

18. Cost of hydrogen is the minimum required to obtain a 10% internal rate of return after taxes on the capital investment. 

19. The data relevant to the Centralized Hydrogen Production from Wind technology diagram above are provided in the table below. 

B- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure B-4. Centralized Hydrogen Production from Biomass Gasification 

Biomass-derived hydrogen is another low-CO2 impact process for the production of hydrogen. Biomass (wood, 

agricultural residues, or energy crops) absorbs as much CO2

 from the atmosphere during growth as is released 

during the conversion to hydrogen. In this diagram, we show the CO2 being recycled by photosynthesis into 

additional biomass. It would be possible to capture and sequester the CO2

 from the PSA unit resulting in a 

hydrogen process with net negative CO2

 emissions. The petroleum energy use and the CO2 emissions from this 

process are associated with operations related to growing the biomass and making it available to the hydrogen 

process, production electricity use, and hydrogen delivery. 

This analysis is based on the best available technology in the laboratory. Currently, it has not been validated 

through demonstration. 

Notes: Centralized Hydrogen Production from Biomass Gasification 

1. Source: Well-to-wheels energy, petroleum, and greenhouse gas emissions information from the Argonne National Laboratory 

GREET model, Version 1.7. Well-to-wheels values represent primary fuel production, electricity production, hydrogen production, 

and hydrogen delivery. Fossil resource exploration and equipment manufacture are not included. 

2. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for 

the current (2005) case are from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the H2A model, Version 1.0.9, for a Central 

Biomass production facility with a capacity of 155,000 kg/day. 

3. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for the 

future (2030) case are from the H2A model cases modified to reflect the Hydrogen Program 2015 cost goals as of November 

2005. 

4. Basis is 1 kg of hydrogen, dispensed from filling station for 5,000 psi fills. A kg of hydrogen contains approximately the same 

amount of energy as one gallon of gasoline, or one gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge). 

Hydrogen Posture Plan B-0 
5. Diagram is for future (2030) case, showing feedstock and energy consumption levels required to meet technology cost goals. 

Flows in diagram represent direct energy and emissions between production and dispensing, and are not based on well-to-wheels 

calculations. 

6. The petroleum use and resultant GHG emissions are associated with growing the biomass, and the grid electricity for delivery. 

Fossil-based power plants generating grid electricity for the future (2030) case are assumed to sequester carbon emissions at a 

rate of 85%. 

7. Biomass is assumed to be woody biomass, most likely obtained from a residue source (e.g., urban trimmings) or energy crops. 

8. The hydrogen delivery in the current (2005) case assumes liquid hydrogen delivery by truck from a central plant located 76 miles 

from the forecourt station. Liquefier efficiency is 77.4%. Truck fuel consumption is 6 mi/gallon. Data were obtained from the H2A 

Delivery Scenario Model and GREET. The future (2030) case assumes hydrogen pipeline delivery over 76 miles. Delivery costs 

include necessary compression and/or liquefaction equipment. 

9. Cost of hydrogen delivery for the current (2005) and future (2030) cases is assumed to be $3.50/kg and $1.00/kg, respectively. 

10. For the current (2005) case, hydrogen is assumed to be received at the forecourt as a liquid and dispensed as a gas for 5,000 psi 

fills. For the future (2030) case, hydrogen is assumed to be received at the forecourt as gaseous hydrogen at 250 psi by pipeline 

and dispensed for 5,000 psi fills. The cost of these forecourt operations is included in the delivery cost. 

11. Efficiency results are presented in terms of lower heating value (LHV) of hydrogen. 

12. Future (2030) case assumes pipeline compressed gas delivery to the forecourt station. Pipeline energy use calculated using the 

H2A Delivery Models. 

13. The efficiency of the electric forecourt compressor, which raises the pressure of the gaseous hydrogen for 5,000 psi fills, is 94%. 

14. The operating capacity factor of the production plant is 90%. 

15. Electricity is consumed by the process for plant operations and delivery. Electricity prices are based on the 2015 projections for 

industrial-rate electricity by the DOE Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2005 High A case. Prices shown 

in table are in 2005 $. Electricity is inflated at 1.9%/year for the 40-year operating life of the plant. 

16. The levelized capital cost for the current (2005) and future (2030) cases are $0.49/kg hydrogen and $0.47/kg of hydrogen; capital 

cost estimate increases because of increased contingency to account for uncertainty in project projections and technology in the 

2030 timeframe. 

17. Cost of hydrogen is the minimum required to obtain a 10% internal rate of return after taxes on the capital investment. 

18. The data relevant to the Centralized Hydrogen Production from Biomass Gasification technology diagram above are provided in the 

table below. 

B- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure B-5. Centralized Hydrogen Production from Coal Gasification with Sequestration 

The figure below represents a process for hydrogen production from coal that uses gasification/reforming 

technology with hot-gas cleanup, a water-gas shift process, and carbon dioxide sequestration. The hydrogen 

produced is separated at low pressure (~300 psi) and compressed before delivery to the hydrogen distribution 

system. Oxygen is used so that a concentrated stream of carbon dioxide is produced for sequestration. The 

petroleum energy use and the CO2

 emissions from this process are associated with the inability to sequester all 

of the CO2

 produced in the gasification process, the inefficiency of the sequestration process, and the energy 

needed for hydrogen liquefaction/pipeline compression, delivery, and compression of the hydrogen at the 

forecourt. 

This analysis is based on the best available technology in the laboratory. Currently, it has not been validated 

through demonstration. 

Notes: Centralized Hydrogen Production from Coal Gasification with Sequestration 

1. Source: Well-to-wheels energy, petroleum, and greenhouse gas emissions information from the Argonne National Laboratory 

GREET model, Version 1.7. Well-to-wheels values represent primary fuel production, electricity production, hydrogen production, 

and hydrogen delivery. Fossil resource exploration and equipment manufacture are not included. 

2. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for 

the current (2005) case are from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the H2A model, Version 1.0.9, Central Coal 

Gasification plant with a capacity of 308,000 kg/day. 

3. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values for the 

future (2030) case are from the Central Coal Gasification H2A model case, Version 1.0.9. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan B-2 
4. Basis is 1 kg of hydrogen, dispensed from filling station for 5,000 psi fills. A kg of hydrogen contains approximately the same 

amount of energy as one gallon of gasoline, or one gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge). 

5. Diagram is for future (2030) case, showing feedstock and energy consumption levels required to meet technology cost goals. 

Flows in diagram represent direct energy and emissions between production and dispensing, and are not based on well-to-wheels 

calculations. 

6. The petroleum use and resultant GHG emissions are associated with the grid electricity for delivery, as well as CO2

 that could 

not be captured and sequestered. 85% of the plant CO2

 is assumed to be captured and sequestered. CO2 separation and 

sequestration costs are $15/metric tonne of carbon. 

7. Fossil-based power plants generating grid electricity for the future (2030) case are assumed to sequester carbon emissions at a 

rate of 85%. 

8. Production plant electricity requirements for the future (2030) case are met through internally-generated power. 

9. The hydrogen delivery in the current (2005) case assumes liquid hydrogen delivery by truck from a central plant located 76 miles 

from the forecourt station. Liquefier efficiency is 77.4%. Truck fuel consumption is 6 mi/gallon. Data were obtained from the H2A 

Delivery Scenario Model and GREET. The future (2030) case assumes hydrogen pipeline delivery over 76 miles. Delivery costs 

include necessary compression and/or liquefaction equipment. 

10. Cost of hydrogen delivery for the current (2005) and future (2030) cases is assumed to be $3.50/kg and $1.00/kg, respectively. 

11. For the current (2005) case, hydrogen is assumed to be received at the forecourt as a liquid and dispensed as a gas for 5,000 psi 

fills. For the future (2030) case, hydrogen is assumed to be received at the forecourt as gaseous hydrogen at 250 psi by pipeline 

and dispensed for 5,000 psi fills. The cost of the forecourt operations is included in the delivery cost. 

12. Efficiency results are presented in terms of lower heating value (LHV) of hydrogen. 

13. Future (2030) case assumes pipeline compressed gas delivery to the forecourt station. Pipeline energy use calculated using the 

H2A Delivery Models. 

14. The efficiency of the electric forecourt compressor, which raises the pressure of the gaseous hydrogen for 5,000 psi fills, is 94%. 

15. The operating capacity factor of the production plant is 90%. 

16. Coal feedstock prices are based on the 2015 projections for electric utility steam coal by the DOE Energy Information 

Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2005 High A case. Prices shown in table are in 2005 $. Feedstock is inflated at 1.9%/year 

for the 40-year operating life of the plant. 

17. Electricity is consumed by the process for compression and plant operations. Electricity prices are based on the 2015 projections 

for industrial-rate electricity by the DOE Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2005 High A case. Prices 

shown in table are in 2005 $. Electricity is inflated at 1.9%/year for the 40-year operating life of the plant. 

18. The levelized capital costs for the current (2005) and future (2030) cases are $1.00/kg hydrogen and $0.67/kg of hydrogen, 

respectively. 

19. Cost of hydrogen is the minimum required to obtain a 10% internal rate of return after taxes on the capital investment. 

20. The data relevant to the Centralized Hydrogen Production from Coal Gasification with Sequestration technology diagram above are 

provided in the table below. 

B-3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Figure B-6. Centralized Hydrogen Production from Nuclear Sulfur-Iodine Process 

The figure below represents a process for hydrogen production from nuclear energy that utilizes the sulfur-iodine 

thermochemical water splitting process. In this configuration, the high temperature heat from the advanced 

nuclear reactors is used as the energy source for the sulfur-iodine thermochemical process to produce hydrogen 

from water. The produced hydrogen is scrubbed of impurities at low pressure and is compressed to deliver 

the hydrogen to the distribution system. The petroleum energy use and CO2

 emissions from this process are 

associated with the electricity needed to operate the process as well as the energy needed for hydrogen delivery. 

Only a future case is shown because this technology is in a relatively early stage of development. 

This analysis is based on the best available technology in the laboratory. Currently, it has not been validated 

through demonstration. 

Notes: Centralized Hydrogen Production from Nuclear Sulfur-Iodine Process 

1. Source: Well-to-wheels energy, petroleum, and greenhouse gas emissions information from the Argonne National Laboratory 

GREET model, Version 1.7. Well-to-wheels values represent primary fuel production, electricity production, hydrogen production, 

and hydrogen delivery. Fossil resource exploration and equipment manufacture are not included. 

2. Source: Cost, resource requirements, energy requirements, all fuel and feedstock energy contents, and efficiency values from the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the H2A model, Version 1.0.9 for a Central Nuclear Sulfur-Iodine Thermo-chemical 

plant with the capacity of 768,000 kg/day. 

3. Basis is 1 kg of hydrogen, dispensed from filling station for 5,000 psi fills. A kg of hydrogen contains approximately the same 

amount of energy as one gallon of gasoline, or one gallon of gasoline equivalent (gge). 

4. Diagram is for future (2030) case. Flows in diagram represent direct energy and emissions between production and dispensing, 

and are not based on well-to-wheels calculations. 

5. The petroleum use and resultant GHG emissions are associated with the grid electricity for the production process and hydrogen 

delivery. 

Hydrogen Posture Plan B- 
6. Cost of hydrogen delivery is assumed to be $1.00/kg. Hydrogen is assumed to be received at the forecourt as gaseous hydrogen at 

250 psi by pipeline and dispensed for 5,000 psi fills. The cost of the forecourt operations is included in the delivery cost. 

7. Efficiency results are presented in terms of lower heating value (LHV) of hydrogen. 

8. Nuclear Fuel Cycle Cost of $9.3/MWh - based on U3O8 @ $38/lb, enriched @ $55/SWU (separative work unit). SWU and 

uranium prices are the levelized prices over 40 years assuming a 10% discount rate and a 10.2% capital recovery factor applied to 

data from EIA and extrapolated in the PNNL Mini-Cam model. See www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/forecast/projection.html 

for more information. 

9. Future (2030) case assumes pipeline compressed gas delivery to the forecourt station. Pipeline energy use calculated using the 

H2A Delivery Models. 

10. The efficiency of the electric forecourt compressor, which raises the pressure of the gaseous hydrogen for 5,000 psi fills, is 94%. 

11. The operating capacity factor of the production plant is 90%. 

12. Electricity is consumed by the process for compression and plant operations. Electricity price is based on the 2015 projection for 

industrial-rate electricity by the DOE Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2005 High A case. Price shown in 

the table is in 2005 $. Electricity is inflated at 1.9%/year for the 40-year operating life of the plant. 

13. The levelized capital cost $1.30/kg hydrogen. 

B-5 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan B- 
Appendix C. Hydrogen Fuel Initiative 

Budget: FY 04-FY 071 

Basic Research

Production and Delivery

Storage

Conversion (Fuel Cells)

Technology Validation

Manufacturing R&D

Safety, Codes and Standards6

Education

Systems Analysis

Congressionally

Directed Funds

TOTAL

Appropriation2

FY 2004

($000)

$0

$19,163

$13,628

$53,954

$15,648

$0

$6,310

$2,417

$1,429

$43, 967

$156,516

Appropriation3

FY 2005

($000)

$31,503

$29,183

$22,418

$55,759

$26,098

$6,350

$0

$3,157

$47,236

$0

$221,704

Appropriation4 Request5

FY 2006 FY 2007

($000) ($000)

$32,500

$48,534

$26,040

$33,336

$33,301

$6,006

$481

$4,787

$47,470

$0

$232,455

$0

$50,000

$79,120

$34,620

$57,075

$1,978

$39,566

$15,268

$1,978

$9,892

$289,497

1 U.S. Department of Energy (Hydrogen Program), “Record 5010: HFI Budget FY 2004-2007,” http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/ 

program_records.html. 

2 U.S. House, 108th Congress, 1st Session, H.R. 2754, Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 200 (Public Law 108-

137), retrieved February 3, 2006, from http://thomas.loc.gov; U.S. House, 108th Congress, 1st Session, H.R. 2691, Department of 

the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 200 (Public Law 108-108), retrieved February 3, 2006, from http://thomas. 

loc.gov; U.S. House, 108th Congress, 1st Session, H.R. 2673, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 200 (Public Law 108-199), retrieved April 6, 2006, from http://thomas.loc.gov. Numbers include a 2.8% reduction of the R&D budget, to be used for SBIR/STRR. 

This funding is managed separately, but remains focused on hydrogen activities consistent with the original appropriation. 

3 U.S. House, 108th Congress, 2nd Session, H.R. 4614, Committee Approval Report Making Appropriations for Energy and Water 

Development for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2005, and for Other Purposes, http://thomas.loc.gov; U.S. House, 108th 

Congress, 2nd Session, H.R. 4568, Committee Approval Report Making Appropriations for the Department of the Interior and 

Related Agencies for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2005, and for Other Purposes, http://thomas.loc.gov; U.S. House, 108th 

Congress, 2nd Session, H.R. 4818, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-447), retrieved April 6, 2006, from 

http://thomas.loc.gov; U.S. House, 109th Congress, 1st Session, House Report 1268, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 

for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005 (Public Law 109-13), retrieved April 6, 2006, from http://thomas. 

loc.gov. Numbers include a 2.8% reduction of the R&D budget, to be used for SBIR/STRR. This funding is managed separately, but 

remains focused on hydrogen activities consistent with the original appropriation. 

4 U.S. House, 109th Congress, 1st Session, H.R. 2419, Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 200 (Public Law 109-

103), retrieved April 6, 2006, from http://thomas.loc.gov. Numbers include a 2.8% reduction of the R&D budget, to be used for 

SBIR/STRR. This funding is managed separately, but remains focused on hydrogen activities consistent with the original 

appropriation. 

5 U.S. DOE, Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation, http://www.mbe.doe.gov/budget. 

6 Includes funding for Department of Transportation. 

C- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Hydrogen Posture Plan C-2 
Appendix D. Glossary/Acronyms

Btu British thermal unit 

CFO DOE Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

CO2 Carbon dioxide 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation 

EE DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

EIA Energy Information Administration 

FCV Fuel cell vehicle 

FE DOE Office of Fossil Energy 

FY Fiscal year 

gge Gallons of gasoline equivalent 

gCO2e Grams of carbon dioxide equivalent 

GHG Greenhouse gas 

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act 

GWe Gigawatt-Electric 

GWth Gigawatt-Thermal 

HTAC Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee 

ICE Internal combustion engine 

ILC Implementation Liaison Committee (IPHE) 

IPHE International Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy 

JPY Japanese yen 

kg Kilogram 

kgCO2e Kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent 

kW Kilowatt 

kWh Kilowatt hour 

l Liter 

lb Pound 

LDV Light-duty vehicle 

LHV Lower heating value 

m Meter 

mbpd Million barrels per day 

METI Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (Japan) 

MMT Million metric tons 

MMTCE Million metric tons of carbon equivalent 

NAS National Academy of Sciences 

NE DOE Office of Nuclear Energy 

NEP National Energy Policy 

NHI Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative 

NOx Nitrogen oxides 

NRC National Research Council 

NSF National Science Foundation 

PEM Polymer electrolyte membrane 

PI DOE Office of Policy and International Affairs 

PSA Pressure swing absorption 

psi Pounds per square inch 

psig Pounds per square inch gauge 

R&D Research and development 

D- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
RD&D Research, development, and demonstration 

SC DOE Office of Science 

SECA Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance 

SMR Steam methane reformer 

SOFC Solid oxide fuel cell 

SOx Sulfur oxide 

V Volt 

VHTR Very high temperature reactor 

VOC Volatile organic compound 

W Watt 

Hydrogen Posture Plan D-2 
wt Weight 

WTW Well-to-wheels 

Appendix E. Contacts, Resources, 

and Weblinks 

Hydrogen Coordination Group: Core Members

JoAnn Milliken, Acting DOE Hydrogen Program Manager and Chief Engineer 

Office of Hydrogen, Fuel Cells and Infrastructure Technologies 

DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

Email: joann.milliken@ee.doe.gov 

Phone: 202-586-2480 

C. Lowell Miller, Director 

Office of Sequestration, Hydrogen & Clean Coal Fuels 

DOE Office of Fossil Energy 

Email: lowell.miller@hq.doe.gov 

Phone: 301-903-9451 

Carl Sink 

Office of Advanced Nuclear Research 

DOE Office of Nuclear Energy 

Email: carl.sink@nuclear.energy.gov 

Phone: 301-903-5131 

Harriet Kung, Director 

Materials Sciences and Engineering Division 

Office of Basic Energy Sciences 

DOE Office of Science 

Email: harriet.kung@science.doe.gov 

Phone: 301-903-1330 

Patricia Breed, Program Analyst 

Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation 

DOE Office of Management, Budget, and Evaluation/CFO 

Email: patricia.breed@hq.doe.gov 

Phone: 202-586-2510 

Linda Lawson, Director 

Office of Safety, Energy, and Environment 

DOT Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy 

Email: Linda.Lawson@dot.gov 

Phone: 202-366-4835 

Carmen Difiglio, Director 

Office of Electricity Policy Analysis 

DOE Office of Policy and International Affairs 

Email: carmen.difiglio@hq.doe.gov 

Phone: 202-586-8436 

Michael Mills 

IPHE Representative - EERE Board of Directors 

DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

Email: michael.mills@ee.doe.gov 

E- Hydrogen Posture Plan 
Phone: 202-586-6653 

Hydrogen Coordination Group: Alternates 

Frederick Joseck, Technology Analyst 

Office of Hydrogen, Fuel Cells and Infrastructure Technologies 

DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

Email: fred.joseck@ee.doe.gov 

Phone: 202-586-7932 

William Fernald, General Engineer 

Office of Sequestration, Hydrogen & Clean Coal Fuels 

DOE Office of Fossil Energy 

Email: Wiliam.Fernald@hq.doe.gov 

Phone: 301-903-9448 

Jane Zhu, Program Manager 

Office of Basic Energy Sciences 

DOE Office of Science 

Email: jane.zhu@science.doe.gov 

Phone: 301-903-3811 

William Chernicoff 

Service and Operations Assessment Division 

DOT Research and Innovative Technology Administration 

Email: William.Chernicoff@dot.gov 

Phone: 202 366-4999 

Document Citations 

The DOE Hydrogen Program draws guidance and direction from a number of 

different policy and program planning instruments, as shown in Figure E-1. 

Citations for these documents are provided below. 

National Energy Policy 

May 2001 

www.whitehouse.gov/energy 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 

http://thomas.loc.gov 

The Department of Energy Strategic Plan: Protecting National, Energy, and 

Economic Security with Advanced Science and Technology and Ensuring 

Environmental Cleanup 

September 2003 

http://strategicplan.doe.gov/full.pdf 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Strategic Plan 

October 2002 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/office_eere/pdfs/fy02_strategic_plan.pdf 

A National Vision of America’s Transition to a Hydrogen Economy: To 2030 

and Beyond 

February 2002 

www.hydrogen.energy.gov 

National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap 

Hydrogen Posture Plan E-2 
Figure E-1. Hydrogen Fuel Initiative: Policy and RD&D Planning Documents 

November 2002 

www.hydrogen.energy.gov 

Fuel Cell Report to Congress 

February 2003 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/fc_report_congress_ 

feb2003.pdf 

Hydrogen, Fuel Cells & Infrastructure Technologies Program Multi-Year 

Research, Development and Demonstration Plan (Office of Energy Efficiency 

& Renewable Energy) 

February 2005 

www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/mypp/ 

Hydrogen from Coal Program Research, Development, and Demonstration 

Plan (Office of Fossil Energy)

June 2004 (Draft)

www.fe.doe.gov/programs/fuels/publications/programplans/2004/hydrogen_

external_061004.pdf

Nuclear Hydrogen R&D Plan (Office of Nuclear Energy, Science & Technology)

March 2004

www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/nuclear_energy_h2_plan.pdf

Basic Research Needs for the Hydrogen Economy (Office of Science) 

E-3 Hydrogen Posture Plan 
May 2003 

www.sc.doe.gov/bes/hydrogen.pdf 

Department of Energy FY 200 Budget Request 

www.mbe.doe.gov/budget/06budget/start.htm 

FY200 Energy and Water Appropriation 

http://thomas.loc.gov 

Web Sites of Relevant Organizations 

Office of Science and Technology Policy, Interagency Hydrogen and Fuel Cell 

Technical Task Force 

www.hydrogen.gov 

DOE Hydrogen Program 

www.hydrogen.energy.gov 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

www.eere.energy.gov 

Hydrogen, Fuel Cells and Infrastructure Technologies Program 

www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells 

FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies Program 

www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels 

Office of Fossil Energy 

www.fe.doe.gov 

Office of Nuclear Energy 

www.nuclear.gov 

Office of Science 

www.science.doe.gov 

Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance 

www.seca.doe.gov 

Department of Transportation 

www.dot.gov 

Hydrogen Posture Plan E-