Regional Supply of Hydrogen

Michael Penev, Chad Hunter

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

June 14, 2018

DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program 

2018 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting

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

Project ID # SA063 
NREL | 2

Overview

Timeline Barriers

Start: October, 2016

End: September, 2018*

* Annual direction determined by DOE

4.2 Technical Approach: 

Infrastructure Analysis

4.5 A. Future Market Behavior:

Scenarios to understand vehicle-fuel interactions

4.5 E. Unplanned Studies and Analysis

Response to H2USA public-private partnership and 

infrastructure deployment goals 

Budget Partners

FY18 Planned DOE Funding: $55K

Funds Received to Date: $180K

External References

• Oil & Gas Journal

• H2A

• HDSAM

Planned Reviewers

• H2USA working group members

• California Energy Commission

• Academic experts

• Fuel Pathways and Integration Tech Team (FPITT)
NREL | 3

Regional Supply analysis enables forecast of 

competitive retail price and availability of fuel

Analysis forecasts near- to long-term 

hydrogen supply chains

Additional pathways and market 

competition dynamics are extensions 

of existing SERA analysis framework

Analysis 

Framework

• Cost estimation

• Competitive market

analysis

• Cost optimization

• Data:

• Oil & Gas Journal

• AEO Outlook

Models & Tools

• SERA

• H2A

• HDSAM

Studies & 

Analysis • Capacity expansion

• Transition analysis

Outputs & 

Deliverables

• Annual report

• Inputs to working

groups

H2FAST

• H2@Scale

• Additional external

reviewers

• H2@Scale

• Fuel Cell

Technologies Office

• H2USA

Acronyms

SERA: Scenario Evaluation and Regionalization Analysis 

H2FAST: Hydrogen Financial Analysis Scenario Tool

HDSAM: H2A Delivery Scenario Analysis Model

H2@Scale: Hydrogen at Scale

Relevance/Impact 1

H2@Scale synergy: This light duty vehicle market analysis project helped 

develop the same modeling tools and analysis framework used by H2@Scale
NREL | 4

Analysis of production expansion dynamics 

forecasts infrastructure equipment and finances

Objectives

– Evaluate existing hydrogen production capacity

and hypothetical excess capacity

– Forecast production capacity expansion

requirements for growing FCEV market demand

– Simulate regional supply chain network dynamics

– Incorporate market competition considerations

Impacts on FCTO barriers during reporting period

– Enhanced analysis of future hydrogen production and retail fueling market

behavior (Barrier A)

– Provide timely analytical capabilities to FCTO (Barrier E)

Relevance/Impact 2

Forecasting incorporates updated and comprehensive 

supply chain pathways technology competition
NREL | 5

Supply-Chain Analysis Using the SERA Model

• The Scenario Evaluation and Regionalization Analysis (SERA) modeling

framework develops optimized hydrogen supply networks in response to

FCEV hydrogen demands

• Accounts for the geography of energy resource availability, extraction and

conversion costs, transmission and distribution costs, and retail station

network costs

• Competes multiple supply-chain technologies to identify least-cost supply

options both temporally and spatially

Approach 1

Delivery Costs 

(HDSAM)

Production Costs 

(H2A)

Dispensed 

Hydrogen Cost

Hydrogen Demand 

(H2USA LDV)

Resource Prices

(AEO)

Supply-Chain 

Construction Needs

Scenarios

Material and Cash 

Flows

SERA

Infrastructure 

Optimization
NREL | 6

Demand: Light Duty FCEV Hydrogen Demand 

Based on H2USA Analysis

Light-duty fuel-cell vehicle hydrogen demand growth based on 

H2USA National Scenarios Report

Approach 2

National Hydrogen Scenarios Report: http://h2usa.org/sites/default/files/H2USA_LRWG_NationalScenarios2017.pdf

Market Influence Urban Markets State Success National Expansion

Dominant market drivers

Support at local and municipal 

levels combined with strong 

early adopter demand

ZEV mandate and other state 

market support mechanisms

Combination of strong local, 

state, and national market 

support mechanisms

Coordination and planning

Investments focused on most 

promising metropolitan 

markets

Strong coordination across ZEV 

mandate states

Strong coordination and 

planning across all regions

Consumer adoption

High concentrations of early 

adopters guide market 

development

FCEV adoption primarily driven 

by ZEV mandate

Adoption moves quickly from 

concentrated early adopters 

and ZEV mandate states to 

broad megaregion markets

HRS network expansion

Gradual expansion from 

promising urban markets to 

nearby cities

Focus on ZEV mandate states, 

with gradual expansion into 

additional markets

Strong stakeholder planning 

and coordination reduces 

investment risks, allowing 

rapid network expansion

FCEV sales per year (millions) and total urban area market share (%) in 2050

United States 3.1 M (23%) 5.0 M (35%) 8.9 M (59%)

California (CA) 1.0 M (49%) 1.3 M (64%) 1.7 M (84%)

Other ZEV States (ZEV) 0.9 M (26%) 1.9 M (56%) 1.9 M (57%)

Rest of Country (ROC) 1.2 M (10%) 1.9 M (14%) 5.3 M (41%)
NREL | 7

Demand: National Light-Duty FCEV Sales For 

Each H2USA Scenario

Approach 3

National Hydrogen Scenarios Report:

http://h2usa.org/sites/default/files/H2USA_LRWG_NationalScenarios2017.pdf

State Success (B) scenario is 

used as base case scenario

National Expansion (C)

State Success (B)

Urban Markets (A)

Total U.S. LDV Sales
NREL | 8

Supply: Production (H2A) and Delivery (HDSAM) 

Technologies Integrated into SERA for Competitive Analysis

Approach 4

Pathways are competed with geographic consideration of resources 

availability, prices, and outlook of hydrogen demand growth
NREL | 9

Supply: Proposing a New, Hydrogen Delivery 

Pathway (H2Grid) To Compete In SERA

Historic precedence: town-gas infrastructure started with local pipeline delivery, 

followed by external city supply of natural gas delivered above usage pressure

Similar Staged 

Progression

• Local units

• Distribution

network

• Transmission

from remote

production

facilities

Approach 5 Conventional Natural Gas System H2Grid Approach
NREL | 10

Supply: The H2Grid Approach and Benefits

H2Grid Approach:

- Production, storage, and compression in semi-central

- High pressure (1,000 bar) local delivery pipeline

- Interconnected grid of hydrogen pipelines and refueling stations

- Cooling and dispensing at forecourt

H2Grid Benefits:

- Enhanced retail station adoption:

- Lower upfront station cost

- Reduced station operating complexity

- Smaller retail footprint:

- No on-site storage or compressors (reduced set-back distances)

- Cheaper compression:

- Large, central compressor is much cheaper than many smaller compressors

- Lower operating cost as larger compressors are more efficient

- Improved compressor oversight and reliability

- Improved network reliability:

- Interconnected grid and production sites provide mutual redundancy

- Back-to-back fueling improved due to high-pressure storage in pipes and at production site

- No reliance on discrete delivery units, traffic issues, offload limits

- Improved safety

- No on-road exposure, truck filling, or off-loading

Approach 6
NREL | 11

Existing Hydrogen Production Capacity Compiled 

and Integrated into SERA Model

Accomplishments 1

Existing hydrogen production plants were incorporated into SERA
NREL | 12

SERA Results: Production Capacity Expansion 

by 2018 (Scenario B: State Success)

Few new production plants are built by 2018 due to low, 

localized demand and available supply from existing plants

Accomplishments 2
NREL | 13

By 2021, production capacity expansion needs are estimated to 

be in New York, Washington DC, Los Angeles, and Bay Area

Accomplishments 3

SERA Results: Production Capacity Expansion 

by 2021 (Scenario B: State Success)

New Plants Built

New Plants Built
NREL | 14

By 2026, second tier of expansion is expected in Seattle, 

Boston. Capacity growth in CA and North-East continues

Accomplishments 4

SERA Results: Production Capacity Expansion 

by 2026 (Scenario B: State Success)

Capacity Growth

Capacity Growth

New Plants Built
NREL | 15

By 2031, inland market growth ramps up in urban areas

Accomplishments 5

SERA Results: Production Capacity Expansion 

by 2031 (Scenario B: State Success)
NREL | 16

By 2036, hydrogen demand continues to ramp up, large new 

central SMRs are built in California and Northeast

Accomplishments 6

SERA Results: Production Capacity Expansion 

by 2036 (Scenario B: State Success)
NREL | 17

Accomplishments 7

In 2040, smaller urban areas begin to develop hydrogen 

demand and require small, local production facilities

SERA Results: Production Capacity Expansion 

by 2040 (Scenario B: State Success)
NREL | 18

New long distance transmission is sparse due to use of local 

existing hydrogen supply and high transmission costs

Accomplishments 8

SERA Results: Incremental Transmission by 

2040 (Scenario B: State Success)
NREL | 19

SERA Results: Required Infrastructure 

Investment By Supply-Chain Segment

Accomplishments 9

Above is projected distribution of capital expenditure, maintenance (non-energy OPEX), and transmission. 

Note that transmission expenditures have been levelized for modelling purposes.

Infrastructure investment precedes demand growth trajectory. Capital investment 

periodicity of 5 years is an artifact of modelling 5-year outlook for investment horizon.

PRELIMINARY RESULTS
NREL | 20

SERA Results: Hydrogen Profited Cost For 

Each Light-Duty FCEV Demand Scenario

• Spikes in H2 cost are artifact of non-levelized cost used in algorithm along with 5-year capital project 

outlook criteria. 

• Scenario C has slightly lower cost due to economies of scale. Scenario C also has more rural lowdensity markets, which produce upward pressure on H2 price.

Accomplishments 10

PRELIMINARY RESULTS
NREL | 21

SERA Results: State Success (B) Production, 

Transmission, and Dispensing Technologies

Production Mix Accomplishments 11

Long-Distance Transmission Mix

SMR dominates 

through 2040

Pipeline transmission

has highest economic 

prevalence

Early delivery trucks 

are replaced by 

pipeline and onsite 

SMR production

PRELIMINARY RESULTS

PRELIMINARY RESULTS

PRELIMINARY RESULTS

Delivery & Dispensing Mix
NREL | 22

SERA Results: H2Grid Build-Out In

Los Angeles in 2038

Accomplishments 12

H2Grid economically outcompetes other supply chain 

pathways in major urban areas.

PRELIMINARY RESULTS
NREL | 23

New York

Los Angeles

Chicago

Miami

Philadelphia

Dallas

Houston

Washington

Atlanta

Boston

Detroit

Phoenix

San Francisco

Seattle

San Diego

Minneapolis

Tampa

Denver

Baltimore

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Percent of stations on H2 grid

SERA Results: Percent of Stations Connected to 

the H2Grid (Scenario B: State Success)

Major urban areas show significant economic advantage from H2Grid past 2030 

• Hydrogen demand grows significantly

• Distance between refueling stations shrinks

Accomplishments 13

PRELIMINARY RESULTS
NREL | 24

Collaboration

• H2@Scale

– Modelling framework was developed for this project and H2@Scale. 

Demand scenarios are also shared between these projects.

• Argonne National Laboratory 

– HDSAM and H2A Delivery Components Model

• California Energy Commission

– Leveraging development of SERA analysis capabilities and real-world data 

updates resulting from support provided to annual CEC/CARB Joint Agency 

Reports (CEC-funded project)

• Industry Feedback

– CA utility*

– Industrial gas company*

Collaboration

* Permission has not been obtained to disclose specific contact at this time
NREL | 25

Remaining Challenges and Barriers

Regional Supply-Chain Analysis

• Use non-levelized costs for transmission/delivery technologies (in progress) (

(e.g. truck delivery infrastructure may serve market for ~2-3 years, but needs 20

years for business case payback)

• Market competition should be addressed to balance economies of scale and

competitive landscape (e.g. How many companies operate in proximity to

produce competitive pricing)

• Detailed local station placement SERA model needs to be combined with

regional supply-chain optimization SERA model to better understand the

interface between regional and local supply-chain optimization

• Available capacity and price from existing hydrogen production plants is

uncertain and requires sensitivity analysis to determine its impact on supplychain build-out

H2Grid Approach

• H2Grid is overly conservative ($2M/mile is used as a pipeline cost floor

throughout all US cities but should have regional dependence)

• H2Grid deployment offers individual station advantages, and may more

realistically lead station placement algorithms

Remaining Challenges
NREL | 26

Future Work

Regional Supply-Chain Analysis

• Produce considerations for infrastructure competitive time window (e.g. is

competitive timeframe for truck deliveries sufficient to recover additional

investments)

• Perform economic estimate of retail fuel cost with adjusted financial

assumptions (Debt / Equity, Interest rates, Tax rates, Return on equity)

• Complete sensitivity analysis around existing hydrogen plant supply

availability and selling price

• Incorporate electrolysis at central electricity production facilities (lower cost

power than AEO industrial prices)

H2Grid Approach

• Integrate H2Grid build-out algorithm coupled with station placement logic

with the regional supply-chain optimization

• Developed more detailed pipeline cost geographic dependency to better

account for urban / rural hydrogen grid penetration

Future Work

Any proposed future work is subject to change based on 

funding level
NREL | 27

Summary

Relevance

• Analysis of 2018-2040 timeframe supply chain competitiveness

• Forecast infrastructure extent and investment for 3,000 urban areas

Approach

• Prime SERA model with existing 28,000 tonnes/day US and Canada production capacity

• Regionally disaggregate three national light duty market demand scenarios

• Perform competitive optimization modelling for all H2A and HDSAM pathways

Accomplishments and Progress

• Updated and augment all H2A and HDSAM supply chain pathways for consideration

• Introduced H2Grid high-pressure hydrogen delivery pathway

• Hydrogen profited cost was computed at ~$10/kg in 2018 and $5.50 in 2040

• Determined likely locations of incremental infrastructure needs between 2018 and 2040

• Quantified investment and operating expenses by technology and supply chain class

• Found large economic driver for H2Grid distribution starting in 2030

Collaboration

• H2@Scale project team; Argonne National Laboratory; California Energy Commission

Proposed Future Research

• Improve H2Grid build-out algorithm

• Incorporate projections of non light duty market hydrogen demands (H2@Scale)

• Align cost of capital and financing to current industry reported status

• Develop scenarios using central electrolysis using central power production prices
NREL | 28

Accomplishments and Progress: Responses to 

Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer Comment: The team is using the Hydrogen Analysis 

(H2A) model to project the price. H2A generates a levelized cost 

and not a price. The price is set by the market. The team should 

use a levelized cost range in its analysis to compensate. 

Response: SERA uses capital and operating specifications from 

H2A cases. It competes technology options to yield lowest cost 

supply chains. It aggregates total regional expenses and applies a 

10% profit margin on capital. As such, it simulates a minimum 

required selling price which reflects a competitive market. As 

competing goods are alternative fuel transportation, there is little 

room for any profit margins larger than ~10%.
NREL | 29

Accomplishments and Progress: Responses to 

Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer Comment: The team spent a lot of effort looking for 

hydrogen production numbers, when this information is available 

on the Hydrogen Analysis Resource Center (HyARC) website, 

which is now located on H2Tools.org. Other projects that were 

doing regional analysis used this data. 

Response: We have considered HyARC as well. It is a very good 

puclic resource. However we have found that the industry report 

published by IHS Chemical Economics Handbook has the most 

rigorously collected and regularly updated status information.
NREL | 30

Accomplishments and Progress: Responses to 

Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer Comment: The project approach is adequate. However, 

in the end, production networks will develop based on market 

conditions, including regulatory requirements, available 

incentives, and ease of permitting and resource availability, 

including land for pipelines. These considerations are not yet part 

of the model. 

Response: On the supply side, this modeling effort optimizes on 

economic drivers and projects direction of economic benefit. 

Hurdles such as regional permitting variations are indeed not 

considered explicitly but are rolled into overall costs of pipelines 

reported by past projects. On the demand side, regulatory and 

market conditions were considered when estimating light-duty 

FCEV adoption rates and subsequent hydrogen demand.
NREL | 31

Accomplishments and Progress: Responses to 

Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer Comment: Setting up an accurate model for distribution 

is a large and complex task, which was done well in this project. 

The project shows the stress points geographically as hydrogen 

needs increase based on current production. One aspect that was 

not that clear was how “emerging” technologies were simulated 

at a centralized scale, given the huge extrapolations that would be 

required. 

Response: The modeling effort includes technologies which are 

high technology readiness level (TRL) and have peer-reviewed 

H2A case-studies. As such, speculation of emerging technologies 

is not part of this analysis. It would be straightforward to add in 

potential emerging technologies for other case-studies outside of 

this project scope.
NREL | 32

Accomplishments and Progress: Responses to 

Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer Comment: The first and second objectives have not been 

met, and no information was presented to cover these topics. Nothing 

was seen in the presentation about calculating hypothetical excess 

capacity, which would have been interesting to review. Further, there 

was no information about how capacity expansion would happen to 

meet a growing demand for FCEVs. 

Response: The team looked at multiple means of obtaining excess 

capacity estimates. This included inquiries to industry, as well as 

industry monitors. The conclusion of this effort was that surplus 

capacity is not information in the public realm. It is highly competitively 

sensitive information and no organization would disclose it. For this 

analysis, a constant percentage of underutilization was assumed for 

each plant and that excess supply was available for use. A sensitivity 

analysis will be completed around this value to understand its 

importance in hydrogen supply-chain evolution. 
NREL | 33

Accomplishments and Progress: Responses to 

Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer Comment: The team can give good information. The 

team seems to be California-specific, with both the California 

Energy Commission (CEC) and the California Air Resources Board 

(CARB). Representatives from the Northeast would have been 

good. 

Response: Northeast stakeholders have been consulted as NREL 

participates in H2USA working groups. This analysis does not take 

special consideration for any state. It uses physical and economic 

data layers to arrive at regional results. The underlying analysis 

request is national scenarios. While CA has leadership status in 

infrastructure roll-out there are no special considerations for 

trends and economic impacts for the state. 
NREL | 34

Accomplishments and Progress: Responses to 

Previous Year Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer Comment: The integration of the Hydrogen Regional 

Sustainability (HyReS) project, as well as the further opportunities 

with H2@ Scale, are very appropriate for the continuation of this 

work. 

Response: It is indeed the case that HyReS and H2@Scale analysis 

activities leverage this work and the SERA model. The team crossinforms analysis to the above-mentioned projects.
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

www.nrel.gov 

NREL/PR-5400-71566

Thank You
Technical Back-Up Slides
NREL | 38

SERA Model Computational Data Flow

Source:

H2A

HDSAM

EIA 

(and Billion Ton Study)

H2USA and H2@Scale

H2USA

Geospatial

Analysis
NREL | 39

Transmission Pathway Comparison

Transmission costs of the primary component technologies in the SERA model assuming a 

transmission distance of 100km.

Truck delivery is well suited to small capacities and pipeline for high capacity transmission.
NREL | 40

Intra-City Distribution Pathway Comparison

(no-terminal, or forecourt considerations)

Delivery costs ($/kg) as a function of capacity for each delivery technology and refueling 

station type assuming a 5 km delivery distance (transmission costs not included)

Within conventional pathways above, LH2 distribution outcompetes other modes.
NREL | 41

H2A Cost Basis by Central H2 Production

(Current Tech. Basis)
NREL | 42

H2A Cost Basis by Central H2 Production 

(Future Tech. Basis)
NREL | 43

Pipeline Sizing for Hydrogen Grid

14000

H2-01 1042

13125

1042

H2-02

13125

PKFLOW1 208

13125

834

H2-03

12532

834

H2-04

12532

PKFLOW2 208

12532

626

H2-05

12185

626

H2-06

12185

PKFLOW3 208

12185

418

H2-07

12026

418

H2-08

12026

PKFLOW4 208

12026

210

H2-09

11986

PKFLOW5 210

PIPE1

STATION1

PIPE2

STATION2 STATION3 STATION4

PIPE3 PIPE4 PIPE5

 

400

H2-01 1042

360

1042

H2-02

360

PKFLOW1 208

360

834

H2-03

331

834

H2-04

331

PKFLOW2 208

331

626

H2-05

314

626

H2-06

314

PKFLOW3 208

314

418

H2-07

306

418

H2-08

306

PKFLOW4 208

306

210

H2-09

303

PKFLOW5 210

PIPE1

STATION1

PIPE2

STATION2 STATION3 STATION4

PIPE3 PIPE4 PIPE5

Pressure (psia)

Mass Flow Rate (kg/hr)

1000

H2-01 1042

960

1042

H2-02

960

PKFLOW1 208

960

834

H2-03

934

834

H2-04

934

PKFLOW2 208

934

626

H2-05

919

626

H2-06

919

PKFLOW3 208

919

418

H2-07

911

418

H2-08

911

PKFLOW4 208

911

210

H2-09

909

PKFLOW5 210

PIPE1

STATION1

PIPE2

STATION2 STATION3 STATION4

PIPE3 PIPE4 PIPE5

 

ASPEN modeling of hydrogen pipeline sizing for: (A) 400 psi pipeline inlet pressure 

(flow is from left to right), (B) 1,000 psi pipeline inlet, and (C) 14,000 psi pipeline 

inlet. Pipeline inner diameter corresponding with A, B, C scenarios is 3.6 in, 3.0 in, 

and 1.0 in, respectively.

A

B

C
NREL | 44

Pipeline Cost Sources 

(Oil & Gas Journal, HDSAM)

 $-

 $2

 $4

 $6

 $8

 $10

 $12

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

O&GJ individual projects

O&GJ lenght-weighted average

HDSAM distribution (Urban)

HDSAM transmission (rural)

Pipeline outer diameter (in)

Pipeline cost(Millions 2016$/mile)

Price floor for pipeline cost of $2M/mile was used 

based on industry feedback in context of high density 

urban settings.
45

Semi-Central techno-economics benchmark

 $-

 $1,000

 $2,000

 $3,000

 $4,000

 $5,000

 $6,000

 $7,000

 $8,000

 $9,000

 $10,000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Individual projects cost per mile

Average cost for reported diameter

Pipeline outer diameter (in)

Pipeline cost (Thousands 2016$/mile)

1321 pipeline projects

1991 through 2016

Reported in Oil & Gas Journal

Examples use 6in pipe = $800K/mile

Pipe diameter scoping parameters:

- 25,000 kg/day flow capacity

- 2 mile length

- Inlet pressure 400 psig

- Pressure drop 100 psig

- Steel: A106 grade B (35,000 psi yield strength)

Estimates:

- pipe inner diameter = 2.6 in

- wall thickness = 0.1 in (3x safety factor)

- H2 stored in 2 mile pipe = 30 kg

- Pipeline material weight 2 miles = 18,000 lb 2.8 inch

Take away:

Anticipated requirement: 900 psi, 3”OD

Adopt conservative cost estimate of $800K/mile 

for 6” OD pipe

2.6 inch
46

Centralized Dispensing-Level Compression

Pipe diameter scoping parameters:

- 25,000 kg/day flow capacity

- 2 mile length

- Inlet pressure 13,750 psig

- Delivery pressure 12,000 psig

- Steel: A106 grade B (35,000 psi yield strength)

Estimates:

- pipe inner diameter = 0.94 in

- wall thickness = 0.55 in (3x safety factor)

- H2 stored in 2 mile pipe = 70 kg

- Pipeline material weight 2 miles = 93,000 lb

Other benefits:

- economies of scale for compressor 

- central compressor is much cheaper than many smaller compressors

- improved compressor oversight and reliability

- greatly improved back-to-back fill capability

- retail footprint minimized (can site on small urban retail sites)

- no on-site storage

- no storage set-back distances

- no compressor

- no maintenance access setbacks

2.1 inch

Take away: Centralizing compression can 

provide significant performance, siting, and 

economic benefits.

0.94 

inch
NREL | 47

Hydrogen Grid Distribution Pathway

Contour plot of lowest cost 

pathways for relatively low 

capacity (top) and high 

capacity (bottom) hydrogen 

supply-chain from the point 

of production to the retail 

station.

Short intra-urban supply 

chains are dominated by 

pipeline delivery 
NREL | 48

H2 Grid Projection Nationally
NREL | 49

LDV Hydrogen Demand Relative to Supply by 

Census Division

Approximate order of stress 

on regional capacities: 

• New England

• Middle Atlantic

• South Atlantic

• Pacific

PRELIMINARY 

RESULTS
NREL | 50

99.1% 99.5%

84.7%

99.2% 99.1%

0.9% 0.5% 15.3% 0.8% 0.9%

South West Northeast Midwest National

Liquid

Gaseous

Supply Constraints Relative to Product Phase Were 

Evaluated

East Coast likely to see first stresses in regional supply. 

Liquid H2 supply is limiting.
NREL | 51

 $-

 $5

 $10

 $15

 $20

 $25

 $30

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

B: all tech

All central

Central SMR

Central PEM

Dist SMR

Dist PEM

Analysis year

US non-levelized costof H2 / demand H2 ($/kg)

SERA Results: Hydrogen Profited Cost by 

Technology (diagnostic scenarios)

 $-

 $5

 $10

 $15

 $20

 $25

 $30

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

B: all tech

Pipe

GH2 Truck

LH2 Truck

LH2 Rail

Dist PEM

Dist SMR

H2 Grid

Analysis year

US non-levelized costof H2 / demand H2 ($/kg)

Scenarios reflect single pathways 

deployed through all the US. For 

example:

• All Central pathway allows model 

to build only central production. 

• Central coal allows only coal 

pathway use for H2 production

• All tech pathway allows all 

technologies to compete and 

yields lowest US market costs.

Note that single technology pathways 

individually yield higher cost than 

when utilizing technologies according 

to local conditions.

Production technology scenario 

variations on demand level B

Distribution technology scenario 

variations on demand level B

PRELIMINARY RESULTS

PRELIMINARY RESULTS
NREL | 52

Year

A: all 

tech

B: all 

tech

C: all 

tech

B: all 

tech

All 

central

Central 

SMR

Central 

PEM

Dist 

SMR

Dist 

PEM

B: all 

tech Pipe GH2 

Truck

LH2 

Truck

LH2 

Rail

Dist 

PEM

Dist 

SMR

H2 Grid

2016 $58 $7.16 >$100 $7.16 $7.16 $7.32 $9.99 >$100 $9.99 $7.16 >$100 $7.07 $9.99 $12.3 $9.99 >$100 >$100

2017 $13.1 $8.36 $18.0 $8.36 $8.36 $8.48 $10.8 $18.4 $10.8 $8.36 $24 $7.84 $10.8 $15.1 $10.8 $18.4 $38

2018 $11.6 $9.47 $14.2 $9.47 $9.47 $9.59 $11.0 $12.8 $11.0 $9.47 $17.2 $8.21 $11.0 $16.7 $11.0 $12.8 $39

2019 $11.0 $9.84 $9.91 $9.84 $10.1 $10.0 $15.9 $15.6 $15.9 $9.84 $18.2 $8.45 $15.9 $18.5 $15.9 $15.6 $39

2020 $10.4 $9.18 $8.62 $9.18 $9.37 $9.52 $20 $18.7 $20 $9.18 $17.5 $8.31 $20 $18.0 $20 $18.7 $35

2021 $10.3 $9.35 $9.25 $9.35 $8.56 $8.30 $8.57 $11.0 $8.57 $9.35 $9.97 $7.99 $8.51 $10.1 $8.57 $11.0 $9.54

2022 $8.49 $8.19 $8.15 $8.19 $7.89 $7.98 $8.58 $9.10 $8.58 $8.19 $9.52 $7.96 $8.04 $9.64 $8.58 $9.10 $8.78

2023 $7.38 $7.15 $7.16 $7.15 $7.24 $7.69 $8.61 $7.48 $8.61 $7.15 $9.15 $7.86 $7.77 $9.51 $8.61 $7.48 $8.09

2024 $6.64 $6.34 $6.33 $6.34 $6.79 $7.71 $8.69 $6.29 $8.69 $6.34 $8.95 $7.85 $7.62 $9.81 $8.69 $6.29 $7.48

2025 $6.12 $5.83 $5.88 $5.83 $6.76 $8.07 $9.63 $5.54 $9.63 $5.83 $9.54 $8.05 $7.65 $10.8 $9.63 $5.54 $7.99

2026 $7.66 $7.46 $7.58 $7.46 $6.38 $7.29 $8.06 $9.58 $8.14 $7.46 $8.47 $8.51 $8.34 $8.61 $8.14 $9.58 $7.45

2027 $6.79 $6.71 $6.80 $6.71 $6.13 $7.13 $8.08 $7.93 $8.14 $6.71 $8.19 $8.65 $8.49 $8.78 $8.14 $7.93 $6.99

2028 $6.62 $6.17 $6.28 $6.17 $5.97 $7.34 $8.53 $6.76 $8.57 $6.17 $8.41 $9.03 $8.62 $8.58 $8.57 $6.76 $7.08

2029 $6.53 $5.77 $6.10 $5.77 $5.83 $7.75 $9.46 $5.85 $9.45 $5.77 $8.97 $9.81 $8.75 $8.53 $9.45 $5.85 $7.46

2030 $6.44 $5.67 $6.04 $5.67 $6.02 $8.33 $10.5 $5.14 $10.4 $5.67 $9.60 $10.5 $8.85 $8.60 $10.4 $5.14 $7.98

2031 $6.56 $6.77 $6.68 $6.77 $6.17 $6.81 $8.56 $8.47 $8.90 $6.77 $7.60 $7.40 $8.63 $8.28 $8.90 $8.47 $6.38

2032 $6.25 $6.65 $6.43 $6.65 $6.39 $6.66 $8.80 $7.17 $9.87 $6.65 $7.30 $7.09 $8.63 $7.94 $9.87 $7.17 $6.64

2033 $6.20 $6.56 $6.31 $6.56 $6.59 $6.53 $9.12 $6.19 $10.9 $6.56 $7.09 $6.84 $8.45 $7.66 $10.9 $6.19 $6.86

2034 $6.14 $6.47 $6.26 $6.47 $6.73 $6.43 $10.3 $5.46 $12.1 $6.47 $7.00 $6.66 $8.37 $7.50 $12.1 $5.46 $7.03

2035 $6.07 $6.41 $6.21 $6.41 $6.89 $6.37 $11.8 $4.92 $13.3 $6.41 $6.95 $6.55 $8.34 $7.45 $13.3 $4.92 $7.15

2036 $6.09 $6.08 $6.01 $6.08 $5.71 $6.31 $9.05 $7.17 $9.27 $6.08 $6.86 $6.89 $13.5 $7.44 $9.27 $7.17 $5.79

2037 $5.83 $5.81 $5.76 $5.81 $5.55 $6.16 $10.4 $6.35 $10.1 $5.81 $6.70 $6.71 $13.2 $7.22 $10.1 $6.35 $5.64

2038 $5.67 $5.59 $5.56 $5.59 $5.43 $6.05 $12.1 $5.72 $11.0 $5.59 $6.59 $6.57 $13.0 $7.06 $11.0 $5.72 $5.56

2039 $5.56 $5.45 $5.39 $5.45 $5.35 $5.97 $14.1 $5.22 $12.1 $5.45 $6.52 $6.46 $12.8 $6.95 $12.1 $5.22 $5.56

2040 $5.46 $5.36 $5.25 $5.36 $5.29 $5.90 $16.1 $4.83 $13.2 $5.36 $6.49 $6.37 $12.6 $6.87 $13.2 $4.83 $5.67

Demand scenario Production scenario Delivery scenario

Tabulated Hydrogen Profited Cost vs. Demand, 

Technology and Delivery Scenarios (diagnostic scenarios)

Note: Distributed SMR shows small advantage in some years, as emerging low-density come 

online. This technology is however outcompeted by other pathways after an introductory period.

PRELIMINARY RESULTS