Keith Wipke, NREL

Sig Gronich, DOE Headquarte

Doug Hooker, DOE Golden Fie

NHA Meeting, Hollywood, 

April 29, 2004

Hydrogen Technology Valida

“Learning Demonstrati

that Feeds the R&D Pro

NREL/PR-560-39982
Disclaimer and Government License

This work has been authored by Midwest Research Institute (MRI) under Contract No. DE-AC36Department of Energy (the “DOE”). The United States Government (the “Government”) retains athe work for publication, acknowledges that the Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrepublish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for Government puNeither MRI, the DOE, the Government, nor any other agency thereof, nor any of their employeeor implied, or assumes any liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulnesproduct, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe any privately owned ri

specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or othimply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Government or any agency thereof. authors and/or presenters expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of MRI, the agency thereof. 
Outline

• Technology Validation Strategy a• Role of Technology Validation in 

Hydrogen, Fuel Cells, & InfrastruTechnologies Program

• Competitive Solicitation Backgrou• Summary of Winners Announced • Data to Be Collected by Industry• Planned Data Analysis• Future Work
• To conduct learning demonstratio

emphasize co-developing hydroginfrastructure in parallel with hydcell-powered vehicles to allow a 

commercialization decision by 

– Test, demonstrate, and validate opt

system solutions

– Refocus Hydrogen R&D Program a

appropriate

Technology Validation St
Controlled Fleet Performan

(From solicitation RFP, Appen

• 2008 Performance Targets

– FC Stack Durability: 2000 hour– Vehicle Range: 250+ miles– H2 cost at station: $3.00/kg

• 2015 Performance Targets

– FC Stack Durability: 5000 hour– Vehicle Range: 300+ miles– H2 cost at station: $1.50/kg
Role of Technology Validation 

Hydrogen R&D Proce
• Five year project 2004 – 2009• Government/industry cost shared 

co-operative agreement

• $150M –$240M Government share subject 

to the appropriations process

– $190M announced this week

• Data from project to help refocus R&D 

projects

• 2 Generations of vehicles• Cold climates to be included by 2nd

generation

• Must include renewable feedstock for H2 

generation

• Codes, Standards and Education integral to 

the success of the project

• Stationary facilities that co-produce 

electricity and hydrogen are encouraged

Controlled H2 Fleet & Infra

Solicitation: General Info
Project Safety – Key Part o

• Solicitation bidders required to include 

proposal:

– Preliminary Failure Modes and Effects Ana

the project 

– Brief example of safety assessment– Detailed outline of Risk Mitigation Plan– Description of how safety performance will 

monitored

– Detailed outline for Communication Plan, in

reportable accidents, management responsindependent reviews

• Safety accounted for 20% of proposal 

score

• RFP included “Guidance for Safety Asp

Hydrogen Projects” for reference
• An automobile manufacturer and an 

company; 

• A hydrogen supplier;• A fuel cell supplier;• Utility and/or gas company • A fleet operator of vehicles (private, l

federal fleets);

• System and component suppliers;• Small businesses; • Universities, educational, and outrea

organizations; 

• State, local, and federal governments

The automobile manufacturer or the energy compan

Controlled H2 Fleet & Infras

Solicitation: Teamin
Successful Teams Anno

• DaimlerChrysler/BP• FC: Ballard• Stations in

– Los Angeles, CA– Detroit, MI– Sacramento, CA

• Ford Motor Co./BP• FC: Ballard• Stations in

– Detroit, MI– Orlando, FL– Sacramento, CA

• Texaco Energy 

Systems/Hyundai

• FC: UTC Fuel 

Cells

• Stations in 

– Chino, CA– Pomona, CA– UC Davis

• • • 

• General Moto• FC: GM• Stations in 

– Washington, 

Belvoir, VA

– Detroit, MI– New York, NY– Los Angeles, 
Data Collection

Details Specified in RFP Statement 

• 8 tables• Footnotes to 

clarify
• Vehicle Performance Measures

– Operations

• Fuel economy• Range• Vehicle refueling time

– Vehicle Fuel Cell Systems and Components

• Durability• Efficiency• H2 tank cycle life

– Performance

• Top speed, Acceleration• Gradeability• Minimum/maximum temperature• Cold drive-away• Emissions

– Safety

• Unplanned failures, • Fuel tank release,• Grounding, sensor, and passenger compartm

Performance Measure

Data Collected
• Infrastructure Performance Measures – Site

• Purity of hydrogen from storage tank

– Fueling System

• Durability• Hydrogen production and delivery, refueling ra

– Safety

• Release of hydrogen from fueling connector

• Fuel cell co-generation facility (Optional)

• Cost of co-generation• Fuel cell durability• Electrical efficiency of fuel cell

– Safety

• Electrical overload• Ground short• Alarms

Performance Measur

Data Collected
Data Analysis Approa

(Fuel Cell Vehicles)

A. Identify significant factors affect

performance from collected dat

B. Provide processed data for 

development/verification of codstandards 

C. Measure progress compared to 

technical targets (MYPP, solicit

D. Identify possible technical areas 

research within Program from retechnology gaps and research o
Compare Performance 

Against DOE Program 

Technical Targets

Re-Focus R&D as 

Appropriate

Results to 

Codes & 

Standards 

Groups

C

D

B

Summ

Tech

Performance A-C

FC Technology

Range of Performance for 

Various FC Technologies

Composite Results

Pf

Data Collected by 

Auto Teams

Dyno Fuel 

Economy

On-Road Fuel 

Economy

In-Use Data 

Acquisition 

System

Acceleration & 

Gradeability

Driving

Range

FC Component 

Efficiencies

Performance at 

multiple 

temperatures

Performance at 

multiple elevations Compare 

Results from 

Multiple 

Climates & 

Technologies

T

Performance

Technolog

Performance measures include 

vehicle fuel economy, driving rang

acceleration, gradeability, etc.

Overview of Technology Validati

Fuel Cell Vehicle Performance 

Firewall
Efficiency

A

Range of 

C

T

Te

Efficiency

Method 

C 

B

Overview of Technology V

Hydrogen Production An

Compare 

Results from 

Multiple Sites 

and Methods

Feedstock Purity

Ambient Temp

Efficiency

Efficiency

Detailed analyses of production data determine what factors affect productive efficiencies

Identify Factors 

Affecting 

Performance

50

60708090

100

J FMAMJ J A S ONDJ F MAMJ J A SOND

Production Month

Efficiency % (LHV) Total = 68% Reforming = 74% Purification = 78% Compression = 87%

Other = 99%

Storage = 98%

Efficiency of Production Components 

versus Technical Targets Team #1 – Method: NG ref

A

C

Map Performance 

Against Program 

Technical Targets

Firewall
Future Work

Controlled H2 Fleet & Infrastruc

• Remainder 2004

– Industry/government kick-off meetin– Discussions on data collection meth

and standards, and education

– Begin quarterly Validation Assessm

• 2005 and beyond

– Complete first generation vehicle & 

demonstration 

– Compare technical progress to prog– Actively feed findings from project b

program R&D activities (“learning de

– Implement second generation syste

2008 targets
Questions?

DELIVERY

FUEL CELLS

STORAGE

PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY VALIDATION

CODES & STANDARDS

SYSTEMS INTEGRATION / ANALYSES

SAFETY

EDUCATION

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT