An Energy Evolution:Alternative Fueled Vehicle Comparisons · powered SUVs, pick-up trucks or vans) Sources: Argonne National Laboratory GREET 1.8a, AEO 2009 & NHA models-0.5 1.0

An Energy Evolution:Alternative Fueled Vehicle

ComparisonsPresented to the DOE EERE Office

July 26, 2010Presented by Patrick Serfass, VP, National Hydrogen

AssociationPrepared by C. E. (Sandy) Thomas, Ph.D., ex-President

H2Gen Innovations, Inc.Alexandria, Virginia

and Director, National Hydrogen Association

www.CleanCarOptions.com

http://www.cleancaroptions.com/�

2

Outline

• Main Results from 100-year simulation– Greenhouse Gas Emissions– Oil consumption

• Battery vs. Fuel Cell system comparison• Capital investments (industry & Government)

required for:– Hydrogen infrastructure– Electrical charging infrastructure

• Government Incentives required for:– BEVs– FCEVs

• Natural Gas Vehicle Comparisons

3

NHA Task Force Leader–Frank Novachek (Xcel Energy)Participating Organizations:

• ARES Corp.• BP• Canadian Hydrogen

Energy Company • General Atomics • General Motors• H2Gen Innovations• ISE Corporation

• National Renewable Energy Laboratory

• Plug Power, LLC• Praxair• Sentech• University of Montana• Shell Hydrogen• Xcel Energy

This presentation does not necessarily represent the views or individual commitments of individual members of the National Hydrogen Association. Some sections of this presentation, without the NHA logo, include work not yet reviewed by the NHA.

NHA Disclaimer:

4

Two key options for reducing petroleum dependence and CO2 pollution:

Use oil, but less of itSwitch to lower carbon or carbon-free

fuels

Electricity Hydrogen

5

What is best for society?• Hybrid electric

vehicles? (HEVs)• Plug-in hybrids?

(PHEVs)• Biofuels?• Fuel cell electric

vehicles? (FCEVs)• Battery Electric

Vehicles (BEVs)

… .or all of the above!

• Hydrogen ICE hybrids? (H2 ICE HEVs)

• Natural Gas Vehicles? (NGVs)

6

Renewable Fuels

What fuels?

• Gasoline?

• Ethanol/Biofuels?

• Hydrogen?

• Diesel?

• Natural Gas?

• Electricity?

7

How do we choose?

National Hydrogen Association Process:• Develop 100-year vehicle simulation

computer program• Use only peer-reviewed data• Compare all alternative vehicle/fuel

combinations over the century in terms of four societal attributes

8

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions• Oil Consumption• Urban Air Pollution

Total Societal Costs

Simulation Outputs:

9

Key Assumptions

• Assume success for all options– Technical success– All Vehicles are affordable

• Assume stringent climate change constraints– Hydrogen production becomes green over time– Electricity production becomes green over time

10

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle(& BEV, H2 ICE HEV)

Scenario Market Shares

(50% Market Share Potential by 2035)

Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Graphs'; ED 30 2/16 /2009

Percentage of New Car Sales

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

GasolineICVs

(All-electric CD Mode for PHEVs)

GasolineHEVs

Fuel Cell Hybrid Electric Vehicle

(FCEV)

GasolinePHEVs

EthanolPHEVs

11

Fuel Cell Vehicle Market Penetration(Compared to 2008 National Research Council/ National Academy of Engineering Hydrogen Report & Oak Ridge Hydrogen Report)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

NRC Case 1aAccelerated FCVOak Ridge FCV #3

Oak Ridge FCV #1

NRC Case 1 FCV

NHA H2 FCV

NRC Case 1b PartialSuccess FCV

Market Share of New Car Sales PrimaryNRC Case

NHACase

12

Greening of the Grid

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

California/WECC Electricity Consumption Scaled to US (Billion kWh/year)

Renewables

Nuclear

Coal

Coal with CCS

Natural Gas

H2 Story: GHG.XLS, Tab 'Climate Change Projections'; U422;4/20/2008

Carbon Constrained Case

NG CC

Added Capacity for Gasoline Plug-in Hybrids

PHEV Off-Peak

13

Revised Grid Mix after DOE inputs

H2 Gen: GHG.XLS, Tab 'Climate Change Projections'; U421;3/18/2010

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

West Coast (WECC) Electricity Consumption Scaled to US (Billion kWh/year)

Renewables

Nuclear

Coal

Coal with CCS

Carbon Constrained CaseAdded Capacity for

Gasoline Plug-in Hybrids

PHEV Off-Peak

Natural GasCombined Cycle

Natural GasCombustion Turbine

14

Greening of Hydrogen

NG = Natural gas

SMR = steam methane reformer (hydrogen from natural gas)

CCS = carbon capture and storage

IGCC = integrated (coal) gasification combined cycle

Summary Greet 1.8a.XLS; Tab 'Fuel TS'; G 81 5/30 /2008

Hydrogen Production Sources

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Central Electrolysis(Renewable &

Nuclear)

NG atFueling Station

Coal IGCC + CCS

Ethanol at Fueling Station

Natural Gas SMR + CCS

BiomassGasification

15

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Greenhouse Gas Pollution (Billion/ tonnes CO2-equivalent/year)

1990 Baseline Transportation Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions

Target: 80% Below 1990

Levels

1990 GHG Level for LDVs

16

GHG Reference Case:100% Gasoline Cars

Sources: Argonne National Laboratory GREET 1.8a & AEO 2010 Projections for VMT thru 2035

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100


1990 GHG

GHG Goal : 80% below 1990 Pollution

100% GasolineVehicles

17

GHG Base Case: GasolineHybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs)

Sources: Argonne National Laboratory GREET 1.8a, AEO 2009 & NHA models

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100


1990 GHG

GHG Goal: 80% below 1990 Pollution

Base Case:Gasoline Hybrid

Scenario


18

GHG: Gasoline Plug-in Hybrids(PHEVs limited to 75% due to availability of charging outlets)


-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100


1990 GHG


Gasoline Plug-In Hybrid Scenario


Scenario


19

GHG: Ethanol Plug-In Hybrids(90 Billion gallons/year* Cellulosic Ethanol & 75% PHEV limit)

*Sandia-Livermore estimates 90 B gallons/yr potential; NRC uses 60 B gallons/yr maximum

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100


1990 GHG


Biofuel Plug-In Hybrid Scenario



Scenario


20

GHG: Battery Electric Vehicles(BEVs)- Passenger Vehicles only (no Battery-

powered SUVs, pick-up trucks or vans)


-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100


1990 GHG





Scenario


BEV (Cars only) Scenario

21

GHG: Battery Electric Vehicles(BEVs)- Including Battery-powered SUVs, pick-

up trucks or vans)


-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100


1990 GHG





Scenario


Battery Electric Vehicle Scenario

(with SUVs, LD Trucks&Vans)


22

GHG: Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Scenario


-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100


1990 GHG


Fuel Cell ElectricVehicle Scenario




Scenario


Battery Electric Vehicle Scenario


23

Oil Consumption (US)


-

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

Oil Consumption (Billion barrels/year)

Fuel Cell EV, H2 ICE HEV

& BEV Scenarios

GasolinePlug-in Hybrid Scenario

Biofuel Plug-in Hybrid Scenario


Scenario


Non-OPEC-only Oil

American-only Oil


24

PHEVs enter 5 years before FCEVs

Graphs for Simultaneous Story.XLS;' WS 'Expanded Oil'; N 63 3/1 /2010

-

10,000,000

20,000,000

30,000,000

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Vehicles On the Road

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles

Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles

PHEVs in FCEV Scenario

25

Despite their earlier entry, PHEVs cut GHGs less than FCEVs by 2030

PHEVs cut GHGs by 2% in 2030 compared to HEVs-only; While FCEVs cut GHGs by 8.8% relative to HEVs; or 4.3 times greater reduction in 2030

Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Graphs'; AD 346 7/20 /2010

1.3

1.4

1.4

1.5

1.5

1.6

1.6

2020 2030

100% GasolineICEVs

Greenhouse Gas Pollution (Light duty vehicles only) (Billion/ tonnes CO2-equivalent/year)

FCEV Scenario

Ethanol PHEVScenario

Base Case:Gasoline HEV

Scenario

Full BEVScenario

Gasoline PHEV Scenario


26

PHEV GHGs (Kromer & Heywood, MIT, May 2007)

NG

“Clean Grid” = 50% nuclear + renewables; 15% advanced NG CC & 35% advanced coal

27

Despite their earlier entry, PHEVs cut oil consumption less

than FCEVs or BEVs

PHEVs cut oil consumption by 6.3% compared to HEVs-only, While FCEVs cut GHGs by 14.7% relative to HEVs; or 2.3 times greater reduction in 2030

Graphs for Simultaneous Story.XLS;' WS 'Expanded Oil'; NP 36 3/1 /2010

2.6

2.8

3.0

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030


Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle

Scenario

GasolinePlug-in Hybrid Scenario

PHEVBiofuel Plug-in

Hybrid Scenario


Scenario


FCEV or BEVScenarios

28

Urban Air Pollution Costs

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 FCEV Scenario




Scenario

100% GasolineICVs

US Urban Air Pollution Costs ($Billions/year)

H2 ICE HEVScenario

BEVScenario

PM Cost from Brake & Tire Wear


29

Societal Costs(of greenhouse gases, oil imports and urban air

pollution)

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Total Societal Costs ($Billion/year)


Ethanol Plug-in Hybrid Scenario

Gasoline Plug-in Hybrid Scenario

PHEV


Scenario

100% GasolineICEVs

H2 ICE HEVScenario

BEVScenario

PM-10 PM-2.5 SOx VOC CO NOx CO2 Costs of Pollution: 1,608 118,552 21,873 7,510 1,677 13,297 25 to 50

($/metric tonne) Crude Oil Economic Cost $60/bbl H2 Energy Story.XLS; Tab 'Annual Sales';FD 26 7/19 /2010

(See Int. J. of hydrogen Energy, 34, 9274-9296, 2009).

30

Summary Greet 1.8a.XLS; Tab 'Summary'; AG 200 3/14 /2009

-

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

FCEV H2 ICE HEV BEV EtOH PHEV GasolinePHEV

GasolineHEV

Near-TermMid-TermFar-Term

Total Societal Cost Reduction Factor per Vehicle (Relative to gasoline ICEV)

Societal Cost Reduction Factors

Near-term = now to 2020; Mid-term = 2021 to 2050; Far-Term = 2051 to 2100

31

Primary Conclusion

• Achieving GHG and Oil reduction targets will require all-electric vehicles

• Three choices:– Battery EVs– Fuel Cell EVs

• Next slides will compare:– Weight– Volume– Greenhouse Gases– Cost

Batteries AND Fuel Cells

32

Outline






33

Specific Energy Comparison

H2Gen: Wt_Vol_Cost.XLS; Tab 'Battery'; S60 - 7 / 14 / 2010

0

100

200

300

400

500

Pb-A NiMH Lithium-Ion

USABCGoal

35 MPa 70 MPa

Useful Specific Energy(Wh/kg)

H2 Tank, Battery &Fuel Cell SystemBatteries

Note: The Chevy Volt Li-ion battery has 44.1 kWh/kg of useful specific energy. (although PHEVs require much less energy than BEVs…see slide 35)

34

Vehicle CharacteristicsGlider: Ford AIV (Aluminum Intensive Vehicle) SableCurb Weight (kg) 1269Cross Section (m2) 2.127Drag Coefficient 0.33Rolling Resistance 0.0092Acceleration Seconds: Power (kW): FC

0 to 60 mph 10 77.9 59.6 kW5 to 20 mph 1.9 71.9 Battery40 to 60 mph 7 76 18.3 kW55 to 65 mph 6 62.3

Regen/Peak Power (Li-Ion) Battery CharacteristicsSpecific Power (W/kg) 500Specific Energy (Wh/kg) 25Power Density (W/liter) 200RT Battery Efficiency 84.60%Energy Capacity (kWh) 0.917Useable Energy (kWh) 0.776

Regen Braking Recovery 70%Regen Braking Energy (FUDS) 0.399 kWhRegen Braking Energy (HYWY)) 0.107 kWh

Fuel Cell System Characteristics DOE 2015 GoalsFC Specific Power (W/kg) 0.94 2.0FC Power Density (W/liter) 1.91 2.0FC Peak Power (kW) 59.6 80

Vehicles/Batteries/Battery & H2Tank Wt_Vol_Cost.XLS; Tab 'Spec shart'; G34 - 7 / 14 / 2010

(See Next Chart)

Vehicle & Battery Characteristics

On 1.25X EPA combined cycle

35

Battery Power vs. Energy Trade-off

Ref: Kromer, Matthew & J.B. Heywood, “Electric Powertrains: Opportunities and Challenges in the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet,” Sloan Automotive Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Publication Number LFEE 2007-03 RP, May 2007

Assumed Li-Ion Regen Braking Battery for FCEV

36

FC & H2 weight & volume

Vehicles/Batteries/Battery & H2Tank Wt_Vol_Cost.XLS; Tab 'H2 Stroage'; AD66 - 7 / 14 / 2010

H2 Tank67%

FC System8%

Pk Pwr Batt.25%

FC System Volume

Vehicles/Batteries/Battery & H2Tank Wt Vol Cost XLS; Tab 'H2 Stroage'; AD83 - 7 / 14 / 2010

H2 Tank46%

FC System34%

Pk Pwr Batt.20%

FC System Mass

Stored Hydrogen (kg) 5.13 for 350 miles rangeH2 Energy (kWh) 170.90Average FC Eff. Over cycle 54% (1.25X accelerated EPA Combined Cycle)

FC output Energy (kWh) 92.3 System AttributesRegen Battery Total Total Energy Specific

Volume Wgt Weight Volume Weight Volume Weight Volume Weight Density Energyliters % kg liters kg liters kg liters kg Wh/l Wh/kg248.5 5.94% 86.2 31.2 63.4 94.43 37.77 374.2 187.4 246.6 492.5162.4 4.76% 107.7 31.2 63.4 94.43 37.77 288.1 208.9 320.4 441.8

Vehicles/Batteries/Battery & H2Tank Wt_Vol_Cost.XLS; Tab 'H2 Stroage'; X20 - 7 / 15 / 2010

FC SystemH2 Storage

37

Batteries Weigh Morethan Fuel Cells

(Effects of mass compounding, equal performance)

BPEV.XLS; 'Compound' AF142 3/14 /2009

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Range (miles)

Vehicle Test Weight (kg)

PbA Battery EV

Li-Ion Battery EV

NiMH Battery EV


Structural weight addition: 15%

38

Useful Energy Density

Battery & H2 Tank Wt_Vol_Cost.XLS; Tab 'Battery'; S36 - 7 / 15 / 2010

0

100

200

300

Pb-A NiMH Lithium-Ion

USABCGoal

35 MPa 70 MPa

Useful Energy Density (Wh/liter)

H2 Tank, Battery & Fuel Cell SystemBatteries

39

Batteries also take upmore space:

DOE Storage Goal: 2.7 kWh/Liter BPEV.XLS; 'Compound' AF114 3/14 /2009

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400Range (miles)

Energy Storage System Volume(liters)

PbA Battery

NiMH Battery

Li-Ion Battery

Fuel Cell +Hydrogen Tanks

(5,000 psi)

(10,000 psi)

DOE H2 Storage Goal

40H2Gen: BPEV.XLS; WS 'Compound' AF169 3/14 /2009

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Range (miles)

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (CO2 -equivalent grams/mile)

PbA Battery EV

Li-Ion Battery EV

NiMH Battery EV


BEVs will initially have more Greenhouse Gases than FCEVs*

*Assumes hydrogen made on-site from natural gas, and average marginal US electrical grid mix for charging EV batteries in 2020

Conventional Gasoline Vehicle

41Ref: Kromer & Heywood, "Electric Powertrains: Opportunities & Challenges in the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet Report # LFEE 2007-03RP, MIT, May, 2007, Table 53 Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'AFV Cost'; N 26 3/15 /2009

$- $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000

BEV

PHEV-60

PHEV-30

FCEV

PHEV-10

HEV

Incremental Cost Compared to Advanced ICEV in 2030

...and BEVs are projected to cost more than FCEVs by MIT (2030)

Note: FCEV has 350 miles range; BEV has 200 miles range

42

Comparison of MIT Cost Assumptions & Old DOE Goals*

If the 2015 DOE goals were met, then the incremental cost for fuel cell electric vehicles would decrease from $3,600 estimated by MIT down to $840.

DTI estimates $39.45/kW using 2015 technology in mass production

*DOE cost targets are currently being revised

DOE DTI DOE MIT2010 2015 2015 2030

Fuel Cell System Cost $/kW 45 39.45 30 50Hydrogen Storage Cost $/kWh 4 15 2 15Hydrogen Storage Density kWh/L 0.9 0.8 1.3 0.8

Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'AFV Cost'; E 36 7/20 /2010

43

Ref: Kromer & Heywood, "Electric Powertrains: Opportunities & Challenges in the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet Report # LFEE 2007-03RP, MIT, May, 2007, Table 53

Story Economics.XLS; Tab 'Vehicle Cost Deltas'; M 81 7/20 /2010

$- $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000

BEV-200

PHEV-60

PHEV-30

FCEV-350

PHEV-10

HEV

Incremental Cost compared to Advanced ICV in 2030

AFV incremental cost estimates for 300 miles range (FCEV still at 350

miles range)

BEV cost at 200 miles range

BEV cost at 300 miles range

FCEV cost at $50/kW

(MIT=2030)

FCEV cost at $39.45/kW (DTI=2015)

(H2 Storage at $15/kWh)

Incremental cost of a FCEV-350 is slightly less than that of a PHEV-10 with the new DTI FC system cost estimate ($2,967/kW vs $3,000/kW!!)

44

Fueling Time Analogy

• Pumping 14 gallons of gasoline in 3 minutes is equivalent to 10 Megawatts of power

• The average hydrogen power flow in more than 14,000 FCEV fueling events monitored by NREL was 1.61 MW

• A home 120V/20A circuit has a maximum power rating of 1.9 kW, which is 5,200 times slower than pumping gasoline and 850 times slower than pumping hydrogen

45

Ratio of Fueling Powers

Conclusion: it is easier, faster and more efficientto transfer molecules of gasoline or molecules of hydrogen than to move electrons though wires and terminals with finite resistance

Fuel Power Flow (kW)

Ratio Gasoline to alternatives

Ratio Hydrogen to Alternatives

Gasoline 10 MW 10000H2 1.61 MW 1610 6 1 120V/20A circuit kW 1.9 5,263 847 240V/40A circuit kW 7.7 1,299 209

Graphs for Simultaneous Story.XLS;' WS 'Fuel Savings'; BV 62 3/1 /2010

46

Fuel Cell Advantagesover Batteries:

• Less weight (56%)*

• Less space in vehicle (56%)*

• Lower greenhouse gases** (44%)

• A FCEV with 350 miles range has lower estimated mass production cost [$6,600 (MIT) to $7,380 (DTI)] than a BEV with 200 miles range.

• Shorter refuel time

Longer Range

*at 300 miles range

**for average marginal US grid mix

47

Outline






48

Previous Hydrogen Infrastructure Cost Estimates

• 2008 NRC Report: $8 billion (assuming that the government pays 100% of the distributed hydrogen infrastructure cost)

• This model: assume that industry pays for 70% of infrastructure, making a reasonable*return on investment by selling hydrogen.

• Initial Government investments reduced by assuming low-cost mobile refuelers and liquid hydrogen stations instead of on-site reformers or electrolyzers (see next slide)

*Required hurdle rate IRR starts at 25%, dropping to 20% and then 15% as risk is reduced over time.

49

Hydrogen Cost vs. Station Capital Cost

Sources: JX Weinert & TE Lipman, Institute for Transportation Studies (2006), U of California at Davis, USDOE’s H2A Model, & SFA Pacific

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; F 27 4/26 /2010

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Hydrogen Cost ($/kg)

Station Installed Capital Cost (US$Millions)

On-Site SMRs

LH2

Mobile Refuelers

Install Mobile Refuelers and liquid hydrogen stations to minimize initial capital investments

50

Hydrogen Infrastructure Investments

Total Government investment of $29 Billion through 2056 (10% NPV of $2.1 Billion) compared to $8Billion by NRC though 2024 ($1.06 Billion in this model through 2024)

NPV @10% Discount:Total Government H2 Investments 29,313.0 2,124.1$ Million

Total IndustryH2 Investments 51,623.03 4,150.8$ MillionTotal H2 Investments 80,936.04 Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; AS 214 5/4 /2010

0.00100.00200.00300.00400.00500.00600.00700.00800.00900.00

1000.00

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Industry H2 Investments

Government H2 Investments

Annual Capital Expenditures for H2 Infrastructure(US$Millions)

51

US Government Subsidies for Ethanol vs Required Hydrogen

infrastructure investments

US Ethanol target is 36 billion gallons by 2022, or $16 Billion/year at 45 cents/gal (vs 51 cents/gallon now) [Maximum Govt. H2 investment is $1.4 Billion/year]

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; AL 294 4/28 /2010

0

10

20

30

2002 2012 2022 2032 2042 2052

Annual Ethanol Subsidies compared to annual H2 Infrastructure investments (US$ Billions/year)

Government Ethanol Subsidies

Government H2 Infrastructure Investments

52

Industry annual Investments small compared to existing US gasoline & Diesel infrastructure

annual expenditures

(Source for gasoline & Diesel infrastructure costs: Oil & Gas Journal) [Maximum Government H2 Investment is $2.4 Billion/year in 2048]

Story Economics.XLS; Tab 'Web Graphs'; AB 314 7/19 /2010

-

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1980 2000 2020 2040 2060

Estimated Past USIndustry Expenditures on US Gasoline & Diesel INfrastructure

Required Hydrogen Infrastructure Investments

Capital Expenditures (US$ Billions)

53

Outline






54

Public Charging Infrastructure

• The Electrification Coalition recommends:– Two public outlets for each BEV initially– Decreasing to one public outlet for every

two BEVs over time.

Source: The Electrification Coalition Roadmap http://www.electrificationcoalition.org/

http://www.electrificationcoalition.org/�

55

Members of the Electrification Coalition

• AeroVironment• GridPoint• NRG Energy• Coda Automotive• PG&E• Rockwood Holdings• Nissan• Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers• Coulomb Technologies• Johnson Controls• Bright Automotive• FedEx• A123 Systems

Ref: The Electrification Coalition Roadmap http://www.electrificationcoalition.org/

http://www.electrificationcoalition.org/�

56

BEV outlet Cost Estimates

Electrification Coalition Roadmap request for government funding: $120 billion over 8 years or $15 billion per year to install public charging stations

(Coulomb Technologies estimate based on installing 4,600 “Free” Type 2 public outlets for $37 million)

Electricfication Coalition

Idaho National Laboratory

Coulomb Technologies

Type I residential 120-Volt EVSE $833 to $878Type 2 Residiental 220-Volt EVSE $500 to $2,500 $1,520 to $2,146

Type 2 Public 220-Volt EVSE $2,000 to $3,000 $1,853 8,043$ Type 3 public fast charger $15,000 to $50,000

Story Economics=lite-mobile &42:42LH2.XLS; Tab 'EV Cost Graphs'; G 42 7/19 /2010

57

Quick Steady-State per vehicle infrastructure Cost estimates:

• Electrical charging outlets (one outlet required for each PHEV or BEV with 6 to 8 hour charging times, or $1,853 to $8,043 per BEV.

• Hydrogen fueling stations:• According to the DOE’s H2A model, a 1,500

kg/day on-site SMR system will cost approximately $3.2 million.– But each station can support approximately 2,013

FCEVs* or an average cost of $1,391 per FCEV.* Assuming 13,000 miles/year; 68.3 miles/kg & 70% average SMR station capacity factor

58

Steady-State (mature market) fuel infrastructure cost per vehicle

Story Economics=lite-mobile &42:42LH2.XLS; Tab 'EV Cost Graphs'; G 75 7/19 /2010

$-$1,000$2,000$3,000$4,000$5,000$6,000$7,000$8,000$9,000

Electric charginginfrastructure-Current

cost

Electric charginginfrastructure future

Low cost

Hydrogen Infrastructure

Steady-State fuel infrastructure cost ($ per vehicle)

59

Transition costs

• Eventual fuel infrastructure cost per vehicle favors on-site hydrogen production, but what about the transition?

• What are the investment costs to get from here to there?

60

Electric charging infrastructure• We assume that the same electrical

outlet financial characteristics as for the hydrogen infrastructure:– Governments pay 30% of the installation

costs– Industry pays 70% and borrows at 8%

interest and makes an adequate ROI selling electricity* to PHEV and BEV owners.*Technically private industry cannot “sell” electricity, so they would have to charge a fee to provide the charging infrastructure.

61

Public charging station investments required to meet Electrification Coalition goals

(US$ Billions) NPV (10%)Total Industry Public Charging Investments 107$ Billion 6.21

Total Government Public Charging Investments 42$ Billion $2.60Total Public Charging Investments 148$ Billion 8.81

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; AG 171 4/27 /2010

0.00200.00400.00600.00800.00

1000.001200.001400.001600.001800.002000.00

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Government Public Charging Investments

Industry Public Charging Investments

Annual Capital Expenditures for Public Charging Outlets(US$Millions)

62

Government incentives compared to projected Ethanol

subsidies

Ethanol goal: 36 billion gallons by 2022 X 45 cents/gal = $16.2 billion/year

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; AL 256 7/19 /2010

0

5

2002 2012 2022 2032 2042 2052

Annual Ethanol Subsidies compared to annual public outlet investments (US$ Billions/year)

Government Ethanol Subsidies

Government Public outlet investments

Government Hydrogen Investments

63

Industry Public Charging Station Annual Investments compared to past gasoline & Diesel Infrastructure annual investments

Story Economics.XLS; Tab 'Web Graphs'; AB 336 5/9 /2010

-5

101520253035404550

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

Estimated Past USIndustry Expenditures on US Gasoline & Diesel INfrastructure

Required Hydrogen Infrastructure Investments

Capital Expenditures (US$ Billions)

Required Industry Public Charging Outlet Investments

64

Summary Comparison of Hydrogen infrastructure costs & Public outlet

costs through 2056

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; I317 5/6 /2010

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Industry Totals

Government Totals

Industry NPV

Government NPV

H2 StationsPublic Outlets

Capital Costs (US$Billions)

Public charging outlet investments are 2 to 2.6 times more than hydrogen infrastructure investments

65

Outline






66

Alternative Vehicles

• Government Subsidies required for– FCEVs– BEVs

67

Government subsidies can be reduced if driver’s pay a premium

and account for fuel savings

The $40 billion in government subsidies estimated by the NRC could be reduced below $38 Billion ($9.1 Billion NPV) if drivers paid a $3,000 premium and accounted for at least two year’s fuel savings

Graphs for Simultaneous Story.XLS;' WS 'AFV Subsidies'; M 21 7/21 /2010

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Years of Fuel Savings Accounted for

Government Subsidies Required for FCEVs (US$Billions) [Drivers pay $3,000 Premium]

FCEV Subsidies Required

68

Under the same conditions, the subsidiesfor BEVs would exceed $400 billion unless drivers accounted for 4 or more years of

fuel savings:

Graphs for Simultaneous Story.XLS;' WS 'AFV Subsidies'; M 38 7/21 /2010

0

200

400

600

800

1000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Years of Fuel Savings accounted for

Government Subsidies Required (US$Billions)

FCEV Subsidies Required

BEV Subsidies Required

[Drivers pay $3,000 Premium]

69

Societal Costs(of greenhouse gases, oil imports and urban air

pollution)

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Total Societal Costs ($Billion/year)


Ethanol Plug-in Hybrid Scenario

Gasoline Plug-in Hybrid Scenario

PHEV


Scenario

100% GasolineICEVs

H2 ICE HEVScenario

BEVScenario

70

Societal Costs & Benefits

Hydrogen & FCEVs have 1.2 times greater benefit/cost ratio than electricity & BEVs

NPV (10%) of Govt Incentives 2011-2058

10% NPV of Societal Savings 2011-2100 Ratio Benefits/Costs

FCEV 2.1 Billion $1.240 Trillion 590,476BEV** 2.6 Billion $1.235 Trillion 475,000

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; F 70 7/22 /2010

71

Outline






72

Energy Efficiency

73

Natural Gas Utilization

• New natural gas reserves in shale formations are welcomed, but which is better?– To make hydrogen from natural gas for

FCEVs, or– To make electricity for BEVs?

74

Natural Gas: Battery EVs via Electricity?Or Fuel Cell EVs via Hydrogen?

Grid Charge eff = 94% Inverter/Motor = 86.7%Eff. = 32% Eff. = 92% Energy Eff. = 96% Discharge Eff.= 90% Gear Box = 91.5%

Natural Gas NG Turbine Transmission Req'd DC Rectifier Battery Bank Drive Train 3001.77 166.0 & Distribution 152.7 Energy to motor: Miles

MBTU kWh kWh 0.413 kWh/mile RangeBEV Weight = 2269 kg


Natural Gas NG Combined Transmission Req'd DC Rectifier Battery Bank Drive Train 3001.18 Cycle Turbine 166.0 & Distribution 152.7 Energy to motor: Miles

MBTU kWh kWh 0.413 kWh/mile Range

BEV Weight = 2269 kg

Inverter/Motor = 86.7%Eff. = 75% Eff. = 93% Hydrogen Energy Eff.= 51.8% Gear Box = 91.5%

Natural Gas Steam Methane H2 Compression Required Fuel Cell Drive Train 3000.81 Reformer 178.2 165.7 Energy to motor: Miles

MBTU kWh kWh 0.2861 kWh/mile RangeFCEV Weight = 1280 kg

Hydrogen Production Efficiency.XLS; Tab NG'; S 44 3/12 /2009

Battery Electric Vehicle



75
















76
















Natural gas will propel a vehicle between 2.19 and1.44 times farther if it is converted to hydrogen instead of electricity

77

Natural Gas Requiredfor Electric Vehicles

Hydrogen Production Efficiency.XLS; Tab NG per mile'; AM 32 3/12 /2009

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

0 100 200 300 400

Natural Gas Required (MBTU)

Vehicle Range (Miles)

Battery Electric Vehicle(Natural Gas Combustion Turbine)

Battery Electric Vehicle(Natural Gas Combined Cycle)

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle(Natural Gas Reformer)

78

Greenhouse Gases with Natural Gas Vehicles

Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Graphs'; BC 495 9/8 /2008

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Greenhouse Gas Pollution (Light duty vehicles only) (Billion metric tonnes CO2-equivalent/year)

1990 LDV GHG



FCV Scenario

NG PHEVScenario

Gasoline PHEVScenario


Scenario

100% GasolineICEVs

NG HEVScenario

NGVScenario

Based on old AEO 2008 data

79

Summary on Natural Gas Utilization

• Converting natural gas to hydrogen for FCEVs will increase NG VMTs by a factor between 1.4 and 2.2

• Natural gas used in a PHEV (most efficient) will not allow an 80% reduction in GHGs, while FCEVs can achieve that goal

80

Next Steps

• Fund next phase of vehicle market transformationprojects, including more hydrogen fueling stations ($45 Million suggested vs. $11 million DOE request for vehicle & infrastructure deployment & $13 million this year), since several auto companies are now projecting commercial introduction of FCEVs in the 2015-2017 time period.

• Continue development of fuel cell electric vehicles and hydrogen technologies

• Continue development of PHEVs and BEVs (we need all of the above, as indicated by auto OEMs)

81

82

Toyota View or Alternative Vehicle Space:

83

84

Or Combine all of the above, as Ford did with their PHEV-25 FCEV based on the Edge

SUV:

25 miles all-electric range and 223 miles total on 4.5 kg of hydrogen, “with frugal driving pushing that to almost 400 miles?!”

85

Thank You

• Contact Information:– Patrick Serfass, Vice President– National Hydrogen Association– 1211 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 600– Washington, DC.– [email protected]

C.E. (Sandy) Thomas, ex-President (ret.)H2Gen Innovations, Inc.Alexandria, Virginia 22304703-507/[email protected]– NHA Energy Evolution web page:– http://www.hydrogenassociation.org/general/evolution.asp– Simulation details at: http://www.cleancaroptions.com

mailto:[email protected]�

mailto:[email protected]�

http://www.hydrogenassociation.org/general/evolution.asp�

http://www.hydrogenassociation.org/general/evolution.asp�

86

Backup Slides

87

How much electricity would be used with PHEVs?

88

Example PHEV-40

• Driver lives 5 miles from work• Work week travel by electricity: 50 miles• Weekend travel: 200 miles to Grandma’s

house or 250 miles total travel:– First 40 miles on electricity (90 miles total on the

grid)– 160 miles on gasoline

• Total on electricity: 90 miles out of 250 or 36% from grid and 64% from gasoline or 1.9 times further on gasoline than electricity

89

Percent of Typical driving on electricity based on actual US

driver histories

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 20 40 60 80 100Plug-in Hybrid All-Electric Range (Miles)

Percentage of Miles Traveled Using Electricity instead of Gasoline

Upper Estimate

Lower Estimate51%

68%

Sources: SAEJ1711; EPRI 2001; Markel 2006; ORNL 2004

90

How Far We Travel

• Americans total 1.3 trillion person-miles of long distance travel a year on about 2.6 billion long distance trips.

• The median distances on these trips are: o Air - 2,068 miles o Bus - 287 miles o Personal vehicle - 194 miles o Train - 192 miles

Source:2001 National Household Travel Survey

91

Why We Travel

• 45 percent of daily trips are taken for shopping and errands • 27 percent of daily trips are social and recreational, such as visiting a friend • 15 percent of daily trips are taken for commuting

Source:2001 National Household Travel Survey

92

HGM 10000:Filling 100 cars or 15 busses/day

All-in life cycle costs today: Production: $3.26/kg*

* Natural gas = $8.00/MBTU

Production, compression & storage: $4.83/kg($2.04/gallon-range equivalent basis)

93

HGM 2000: Filling 20 cars or 3 busses / day

Natural Gas

Water

Instrument Air

Hydrogen,Up to 99.9999% pure

Electricity

CH4 + 2H2O ========> 4H2 + CO2

94

HGM-2000 Field Units

95

Battery goals vs current status

Current Status MIT Goal Improvement Factor Req’d

Specific energy

0.899 kWh/kg42.4 useful kWh & 47.6 kg

150 kWh/kg 1,688

Cost $1,000/kWh $270/kWh 3.7

Source Audi e-tron(Car & Driver, March 2010, pg 27

96

Battery goals vs current statusCurrent Status MIT Goal Improvement

Factor Req’dSpecific energy

0.0441 kWh/kg8 useful kWh & 181 kg

0.15 kWh/kg 3.4

Cost $1,000/kWh $270/kWh 3.7

Source Chevy Volt; Automobilemag.com January 2010

97

Urban Air Pollution withNatural Gas Vehicles

Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Graphs'; DF 102 9/8 /2008

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 FCV Scenario



Scenario

100% GasolineICEVs

US Urban Air Pollution Costs ($Billions/year)

PM Cost from Brake & Tire Wear

NG PHEVScenario

NG HEVScenario

NGVScenario

98

Grid GHGs Relative to 1990

GHG.XLS, Tab 'Climate Change Projections'; K421;3/28/2008

-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

% of Utility GHG above 1990 Levels

Business-as-usual;Extension of AEO 2008

US Projection based on California (WECC) Grid with Carbon Constraints

Business-as-usual;with PHEVs

WECC Grid with PHEVs

99

Diesel PHEV GHGs

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Greenhouse Gas Pollution (Light duty vehicles only) (Billion metric tonnes CO2-equivalent/year)

1990 LDV GHG


GHG Goal: 80% below 1990 Pollution FCV Scenario




Scenario

100% GasolineICEVs

Diesel PHEV Scenario


100

Diesel PHEV Oil Consumption

-

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100


FCV Scenario




Scenario

100% GasolineICEVs

Energy "Quasi-Independence"

H2 ICE HEV &BPEV Scenarios

Diesel PHEV Scenario


101

ICV fuel economy 25 mpgge

HEV mpg/ ICV mpg 1.45FCEV mpg/ ICV mpg 2.4 w/r to ICV: 1.72SMR HHV Efficiency 76% w/r to HEV 1.19

25 mpgge1 Gallon of Ethanol Conventional Car 25.0

(ICV)

36.25 mpgge1 Gallon of Ethanol Hybrid EV 36.25

(HEV)

HHV Efficiency = 76% 60 mpgge1 Gallon of Ethanol Steam Reformer H2 Fuel Cell HEV 45.6

(FCEV)0.48kg

Why hydrogen from ethanol.XLS; Tab 'Chart'; Q 31 2/24 /2009

FCEV GHG & Oil Reduction Factors

28.3

23.9

16.5

0 10 20 30

FCEVRange

HEVRange

ICVRange

Range (Miles)

Why Hydrogen from Ethanol?

102




(ICV)


(HEV)


(FCEV)0.48kg



28.3

23.9

16.5

0 10 20 30

FCEVRange

HEVRange

ICVRange

Range (Miles)


103




(ICV)


(HEV)


(FCEV)0.48kg



28.3

23.9

16.5

0 10 20 30

FCEVRange

HEVRange

ICVRange

Range (Miles)


104




(ICV)


(HEV)


(FCEV)0.48kg

Hydrogen Production Efficiency.XLS; Tab 'Chart'; Q 31 3/6 /2009

FCEV Range Increase Factors

28.3

23.9

16.5

0 10 20 30

FCEVRange

HEVRange

ICVRange

Range (Miles)


+ Zero Emissions

105

Consider Biomass FeedstockICV fuel economy 25 mpgge

HEV mpg/ ICV mpg 1.45FCEV mpg/ ICV mpg 2.4 w/r to ICV: 2.8Biomass Gasifier LHV Efficiency 49% w/r to HEV 1.9Ethanol Plant Productivity 90 gal EtOH/ton biomass

25 mpgge10 kg of biomass Ethanol Plant EtOH Conventional Car 25.0

(ICV)0.99 gallons

0.08 MBTU

36.25 mpggeHybrid EV 36.25

(HEV)

60 mpgge10 kg of biomass BCL* Indirect H2 Fuel Cell HEV #REF!

Gasifier (FCEV)0.77 kg

0.09 MBTU

BCL* = Battelle Columbus Laboratory Why hydrogen from ethanol.XLS; Tab 'Chart Biomass'; Q 32 2/24 /2009


45.4

23.7

16.3

0 10 20 30 40 50

FCEVRange

HEVRange

ICVRange

Range (Miles)

106

Better yet: Biomass GasificationICV fuel economy 25 mpgge



(ICV)0.99 gallons

0.08 MBTU


(HEV)



0.09 MBTU



45.4

23.7

16.3

0 10 20 30 40 50

FCEVRange

HEVRange

ICVRange

Range (Miles)

107

Better yet: Biomass GasificationICV fuel economy 25 mpgge



(ICV)0.99 gallons

0.08 MBTU


(HEV)



0.09 MBTU


FCEV Range Increase Factors

45.4

23.7

16.3

0 10 20 30 40 50

FCEVRange

HEVRange

ICVRange

Range (Miles)

108

Wind Electricity:BEV or FCEV?

Grid Charge eff = 94% Inverter/Motor = 86.7%

Wind AC Eff. = 92% Energy Eff. = 98% Eff. = 96% Discharge Eff.= 90% Gear Box = 91.5%

Turbine Electr. Transmission Req'd AC Outlet DC Rectifier Battery Bank Drive Train 250CF =39% 123.7 & Distribution 113.8 Circuit 111.5 107.0 Energy to motor: Miles$2000/kW kWh kWh kWh $90/kW kWh 0.363 kWh/mile Range


Home Outlet 8 hrs charging time

(Level I) Extra BEV Cost Total Extra Cost+ + =

H2 Inverter/Motor = 86.7%

Wind AC Eff. = 75% Energy Eff. = 95% Eff. = 93% Eff.= 51.8% Gear Box = 91.5%

Turbine Electr. Electrolyzer Req'd Compression Compression Fuel Cell Drive Train 250CF =39% 207.2 155.4 & Pipeline 147.6 & Storage 137.3 Energy to motor: Miles$2000/kW kWh $1100/kW kWh $2/kg kWh $2190/kg/day kWh 0.284 kWh/mile Range

83.5 kWh FCEV Weight = 1266 kg

Extra Wind Cost Extra Pipeline Compression & Storage Cost Extra FCEV Cost+ + $9 + + =


$14,359

$2,543Electrolyzer Cost

$1,399 $978 $2,776

Extra Energy:

$900

$7,705


$16,539

Total Extra Cost


14.2kW Rectifier

$1,280

109

Battery Power vs. Energy Trade-off

Ref: Kromer, Matthew & J.B. Heywood, “Electric Powertrains: Opportunities and Challenges in the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet,” Sloan Automotive Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Publication Number LFEE 2007-03 RP, May 2007

Assumed Li-Ion Battery

110

Gasoline Hybrid Scenario Market Shares


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

GasolineICEVs

Gasoline HEVs

(50% Market Share Potential by 2024)

111

112

Gasoline (& Diesel) Plug-In HybridScenario Market Shares


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

GasolineICEVs

Gasoline PHEV

Gasoline HEV

(50% market share potential by 2031; 75% plug-in potential limited by charging outlet availability; 12 to 52 mile all-electric range; 18% to 65% of VMT from grid)

113

Ethanol Plug-In HybridScenario Market Shares

[50% market share potential by 2031, 75% plug-in potential limited by charging outlet availability, 85 billion gallon/year ethanol production (vs. 7 B/yr now, 90 B/ gallon/yr potential projected by Sandia-Livermore, and 60 B gallon/yr limit used by NRC)]

Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Graphs'; ED 30 2/17 /2009


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

GasolineICVs

(All-electric CD Mode for PHEVs)

Ethanol Plug-in Hybrid

Gasoline Hybrid (HEV)

114Hydrogen Production Efficiency.XLS; Tab 'GREET'; J 53 3/6 /2009

3,224

1,016

548

110

21

- 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500

Gasoline CV

Cellulosic E-90CV

Cellulosic E-90HEV

Hydrogen fromEthanol FCEV

Hydrogen fromBiomass FCEV

Oil Consumption (Btu/mile)

Hydrogen from Ethanol & Biomass: Oil Consumption per mile Comparison

115

Both hydrogen & Electricity will cost less per mile than gasoline

Graphs for Simultaneous Story.XLS;' WS 'Fuel Savings'; BF 101 3/2 /2010

0.0

20.0

40.0

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

Fuel Cost(Cents/mile)

Gasoline

ElectricityHydrogen

SO drivers purchasing BEVs and FCEVS will pay more up front, but save money on fuel over the long-run

116

Hydrogen from Ethanol & Biomass: Greenhouse Gas per mile Comparisons

Hydrogen Production Efficiency.XLS; Tab 'GREET'; J 74 3/6 /2009

(1.1)

290

96

54

25

(50) - 50 100 150 200 250 300

Gasoline CV

Cellulosic E-90 CV

Cellulosic E-90HEV

Hydrogen fromEthanol FCEV

Hydrogen fromBiomass FCEV

Greenhouse Gas Pollution (grams/mile)

117

Conventional Gasoline Car

INTERNALGasoline COMBUSTION ENGINE

TRANSMISSION

118

Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV)

INTERNALGasoline COMBUSTION ENGINE ELECTRIC MOTOR

TRANSMISSIONELECTRIC GENERATOR

Regenerative BrakingELECTRIC GENERATOR BATTERY BANK

119

Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV)

INTERNALGasoline COMBUSTION ENGINE ELECTRIC MOTOR

TRANSMISSIONELECTRIC GENERATOR

Regenerative BrakingELECTRIC GENERATOR BATTERY BANK

Grid Electricity BATTERY CHARGER

120

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (FCEV)

Hydrogen FUEL CELL ELECTRIC MOTORTRANSMISSION

ELECTRIC GENERATOR

Electricity Regenerative BrakingBATTERY BANK

121

Plug-In Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle

Hydrogen FUEL CELL ELECTRIC MOTORTRANSMISSION

ELECTRIC GENERATOR

Electricity Regenerative BrakingBATTERY BANK


122

Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV)

ELECTRIC MOTORTRANSMISSION

ELECTRIC GENERATOR

Regenerative Braking


BATTERY BANK

123

DOE vs. NHA Grid Mixes(DOE Grid slightly “greener”)

GHG.XLS, Tab 'US Grid'; W115;2/4/2009

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

DOE NHA

Natural GasCCNatural GasGTCoal withCCSCoal

Nuclear

Renewables

US Average Grid Projections in 2100

124

DOE vs. NHA H2 Production(DOE H2 less green)

Summary Greet 1.8a.XLS; Tab 'Fuel TS'; W 65 2/16 /2009

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

DOE NHA

Central IGCC + CCS

Central SMR + CCS

NG at Forecourt

Biofuels at Forecourt

Biomass Gasification

Central Electrolysis(Renewable & Nuclear)

Hydrogen Production Sources in 2100

125

Number of Public Charging Outlets per BEV and Electricity price @ public outlet to make

>25% IRR

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives';AM 38 5/9 /2010

$0.00/kWh

$0.20/kWh

$0.40/kWh

$0.60/kWh

$0.80/kWh

$1.00/kWh

$1.20/kWh

$1.40/kWh

2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030-0.200.400.600.801.001.201.401.601.80

Electricty Price to Meet Hurdle Rates Rates & b f bli l BEV

# of Public Outlets per BEV

Public outlets/BEV

Electricity Price

126

Key Threat to Society:Oil Consumption

Energy Security Climate Change

127

Estimated Potential Distribution Transformer Risk of Failure Rates

from plugging in one PHEV

On-peak Off-peak On-peak Off-peak120V 7.8% 0.0% 5.9% 0.0%240V 53.0% 45.0% 66.0% 58.0%

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Transformers'; F 24 4/28 /2010

Feeder A Feeder B

Source: Maitra, A, Kook, K.S., Giumento, A, Taylor J, Brooks,D, Alexander M, Duvall M. "Evaluation of PEV Loading Characteristics on Hydro-Québec's Distribution System Operations," EVS24, Stravanger, Norway May 13-16 2009. (EPRI and Hydro-Québec Distribution) Note: these feeder circuits were heavily loaded before adding the load from one PHEV

128

Investments do NOT include Local Distribution Transformers

• EPRI analyzed 53 residential Neighborhoods• They estimated that plugging in one PHEV

during the day would overload36 of the 53 distribution transformers (68%), and plugging in just one PHEV at night would overload 5 of 53(9%)neighborhood transformers. [Each transformer serves 5 to 15 homes.]

• At a cost of $5,000 per transformer, the cost per PHEV or BEV would increase substantially

Source: The Electrification Roadmap, page 102

129

Target Hurdle Rates and Actual IRR’s for Public charging stations

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; U272 5/9 /2010

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030

Industry Hurdle Rate (15-year IRR) & Actual IRR for Public Charging Outlets

Actual IRR

Target IRR

130

FCEV & BEV costs vs. Production volume

Incremental Costs FCEV-350 BEV-200Single Vehicle 250,000$ 180,000$ 2020 (428,000 cars) 6,781$ 12,290$ 2030 (12 million cars) 4,348$ 10,691$ Mass Production 3,600$ 10,200$ Story Economics.XLS; Tab 'Static AFV'; AM 73 5/10 /2010

$-

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000

131

Industry IRR Hurdle rates & Actual IRRs for infrastructure

132

Daytime Chargingwill Require new

Generation Capacity

133

business case for Fleet owners: 15-year Net Present Value

(10% Discount Rate)

Graphs for Simultaneous Story.XLS;' WS 'Fuel Savings'; BZ 27 3/3 /2010

$37,267.84

$22,472.00

$23,966.39

$25,778.34

$26,414.70

$27,662.21

$27,428.23

$30,602.04

$39,174.79

$15,562.20

$0.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $15,000.00 $20,000.00 $25,000.00 $30,000.00 $35,000.00 $40,000.00 $45,000.00

FCEV-350

HEV

PHEV-10

PHEV-20

PHEV-30

PHEV-40

PHEV-60

BEV-200

BEV-100

BEV-300

134

AFV Cost & fuel economy data

ICV HEV PHEV-10 PHEV-20 PHEV-30 PHEV-40 PHEV-60 BEV-100 BEV-200 BEV-300 FCEV-350Vehicle mass kg 1284 1290 1296 1315 1338 1366 1434 2029 1377 1648 2214 1292All-electric range miles 10 20 30 40 60 100 200 300 350ICE Fuel Economy/ ICV fuel economy 1 1.544 1.54 1.527 1.515 1.492 1.463 2.4Gasoline energy-equivalent fuel empgge 25 38.6 38.5 38.2 37.9 37.3 36.6 60Fraction of VMT on electricity 13.3% 27.2% 38.4% 46.7% 54.9% 1.0 1.0 1.0Grid Electricity consumption in Al kWh/mile 0.356 0.358 0.362 0.366 0.377 0.368 0.410 0.497Gasoline Fuel Cost $/year 1,871$ 1,212$ 1,053$ 891$ 761$ 668$ 576$ Electricity Fuel Cost $/year 91$ 187$ 266$ 327$ 396$ 704$ 785$ 951$

Total Annual Fuel Cost $/year 1,871$ 1,212$ 1,144$ 1,078$ 1,027$ 995$ 973$ 704$ 785$ 951$ 685$ Annual Driver Savings in Fuel C$/year -$ 659$ 727$ 793$ 844$ 875$ 898$ 1,166$ 1,086$ 920$ 1,185$ Battery Mass Production Cost ($/kWh)Mass Production Incremental Price over ICV 0 2,126$ 8,388$ 9,728$ 11,414$ 13,809$ 15,995$ 12,243$ 20,889$ 38,731$ 19,866$ Mass Production Payback PeriodYears 798$ 798$ 798$ 798$ 798$ 798$ 798$ 798$

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'AFV Data'; O 18 3/15 /2010

135

Hydrogen Industry Cash Flow for 2017

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; Y69 3/15 /2010

($10.0)

($8.0)

($6.0)

($4.0)

($2.0)

$0.0

$2.0

$4.0

$6.0

$8.0

$10.0

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Cumulativecash flow

HydrogenRevenues

Annual CashFlow

TotalExpenses

2017 Hydrogen Equipment Cash Flow (US$ Millions)

136

Hydrogen Industry Cash Flow for 2017

($10.0)

($8.0)

($6.0)

($4.0)

($2.0)

$0.0

$2.0

$4.0

$6.0

$8.0

$10.0

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Cumulativecash flow

HydrogenRevenues

Annual CashFlow

TotalExpenses

2017 Hydrogen Equipment Cash Flow (US$ Millions)

137

Estimated Installed Cost for Hydrogen Fueling Stations

Single Quantity** 500 units*Mobile Refueler*** 100 kg/day 1,000,000$ 243,000$ LH2 Station 400 kg/day 1,682,000$ 1,071,000$ LH2 Station 1000 kg/day 2,053,000$ 1285000

* 500 quantity estimates from DOE H2A for LH2 Stations** Single quantity estimates extrapolated from DOE H2A model*** Mobile Refueler estimates from UC-Davis Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; F 56 4/26 /2010

DOE's H2A Model

138

On-site Hydrogen is Competitive with Gasoline

Based on 10% real, after-tax ROI with EIA 2010 Annual Energy Outlook fuel costs

Evaluation Year 2015

Hydrogen Production Capacity

Equipment Production Quantities

Production Cost

Compression & Storage

Cost

Total Cost ($/kg)

Relative to Hybrid Electric

Vehicle

Relative to Conventional

Car

Today HGM2k (20 cars/day) 115 kg/day > 10 5.32 3.15 8.46 $5.18/ggre $3.57/ggre



~4 Years HGM10k (100 cars/day) 578 kg/day > 200 2.77 1.65 4.42 $2.70/ggre $1.86/ggre

~6 Years (250 cars/day)

1,500 kg/day >500 2.12 1.05 3.17 $1.94/ggre $1.34/ggre

Assumptions: Annual Capital Recovery factor = 19.1%; Capacity Factor = 75%; Natural Gas = $6.44/MBTUElectricity = 5.93 cents/kWh; FCV fuel economy = 2.4 X ICEV; HEV fuel economy =1.45 X ICEVGasoline price = $3.17gallon in 2015 H2Gen:Markets4.XLS, Tab'H2 Cost Table' M23;3/16/2010

Hydrogen Cost From On-Site Steam Methane Reformer System ($/kg)

FCEV Hydrogen Cost per Mile Traveled ($/gallon of gasoline

equivalent, untaxed)

139


(Industry makes >25% IRR on all investments prior to 2015 and after 2022; No Government support required after 2023)

140


Total Government H2 Investments 506.05 Total INdustryH2 Investments 187,688.13

Total H2 Investments 188,194.18

0

200

400

600

800

1000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Industry H2 Investments

Government H2 Investments

Annual Capital Expenditures for H2 Infrastructure(US$Millions)

(Industry makes >25% IRR on all investments prior to 2016 and after 2020; No Government support required after 2018)

141

Industry annual Investments small compared to existing

gasoline & Diesel infrastructure annual expenditures

(Source for gasoline & Diesel infrastructure costs: Oil & Gas Journal)

Story Economics.XLS; Tab 'Web Graphs'; X 302 3/15 /2010

-

20

40

60

80

100

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Estimated Past US Capital Expenditures

on Gasoline & Diesel Infrastructure

Hydrogen Indusry

Infrastructure Investments

Public charging

Outlet Investments by industry

Infrastructure Investments(US$Billions)

142

Industry annual Investments small compared to existing

gasoline & Diesel infrastructure annual expenditures

-

10

20

30

4050

60

70

80

90

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Estimated Past US Capital Expenditures on Gasoline & Diesel Infrastructure

Hydrogen Indusry

Infrastructure Investments

Public charging

Outlet Investments by industry

(Source for gasoline & Diesel infrastructure costs: Oil & Gas Journal)

143

Alternative Vehicle Pay-Back Period

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'AFV Data'; O 36 3/2 /2010

2.94.14.6

6.05.6

6.8

3.39.4

21.83.0

0 5 10 15 20 25

HEV

PHEV-10

PHEV-20

PHEV-30

PHEV-40

PHEV-60

BEV-100

BEV-200

BEV-300

FCEV-350

Payback Period (Years)

144

Hydrogen Price to make 25% IRR on capex

Graphs for Story Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Govt Incentives'; K 30 3/18 /2010

$2.0/kg

$3.0/kg

$4.0/kg

$5.0/kg

$6.0/kg

$7.0/kg

$8.0/kg

2010 2015 2020 2025 20300%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Hydrogen Price ($/kg)

Fueling StationCapacity Factor

Hydrogen Price

Capacity Factor

145

Electricity price @ public outlet to make 25% IRR

$0.00/kWh$0.05/kWh

$0.10/kWh$0.15/kWh

$0.20/kWh$0.25/kWh

$0.30/kWh$0.35/kWh

$0.40/kWh$0.45/kWh

2016 2026-0.200.400.600.801.001.201.401.601.80

Electricty Price to Meet Hurdle Rates # of Public Outlets per BEV

Public outlets/BEV

Electricity Price

146

Capital & Installation Cost H2A Variances for natural gas reformer

(based on 1,500 kg/day systems in 500 production quantities)

H2A H2Gen - NHA DeltaSMR + PSA System FOB $1,172,478 1,365,476$ 192,998$

Installation CostsState Sales tax (5%) 58,624$ 68,274$ 9,650$ Unspecified (5%) 58,624$ -$ (58,624)$ Engineering Design 30,000$ -$ (30,000)$ Transportation & Insurance -$ 20,892$ 20,892$ On-Site Riggers -$ 16,200$ 16,200$ Site Preparation 74,344$ 81,993$ 7,649$ Utility Hook-ups -$ 26,714$ 26,714$ Permitting costs 30,000$ 30,000$ -$

Total Installation Costs 251,592$ 244,073$ (7,519)$ CSD 1,520,000$ 1,563,000$ 43,000$

Total Capital Costs 2,944,070$ 3,172,549$ 228,479$ Contingency % 10% 2%

Contingency* 294,407$ 63,451$ (230,956)$ Total Costs with Contingency 3,238,477$ 3,236,000$ (2,477)$

H2Gen: HGM Cost Scaling size and quantity.XLS; Tab 'H2A Comparison';E21 - 3 / 16 / 2010

147

Excerpt from Electrification Roadmap

• “Early battery GEVs (grid-enabled electric vehicles…PHEVs and BEVs) “will have limited range, take hours to charge and will add significantly to vehicle cost.”

148

Greenhouse Gas Pollution Comparisons (2050 & 2100) The best NG option, theNG PHEV cannot approach the 80% GHG reduction target, even by 2100:

GHG = greenhouse gases

FCEV = fuel cell hybrid electric vehicle

HEV = hybrid electric vehicle

PHEV = plug-in hybrid electric vehicle

NG = natural gas

NGV = natural gas vehicle

ICV = internal combustion engine vehicle

Based on AEO 2010 dataStory Simultaneous.XLS; Tab 'Graphs'; BJ 464 5/15 /2009

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00

Gasoline ICV

NGV

Gasoline HEV

Diesel HEV

NG HEV

Gasoline PHEV

Diesel PHEV

NG PHEV

Ethanol PHEV

BEV

H2 ICE HEV

FCEV

21002050

Greenhouse Gas Pollution (Billion metric tonnes CO2-equivalent/year)

60% Below 1990 Level80% Below 1990 Level

1990 GHG Level

Documents

An Energy Evolution:Alternative Fueled Vehicle Comparisons · powered SUVs, pick-up trucks or vans) Sources: Argonne National Laboratory GREET 1.8a, AEO 2009 & NHA models-0.5 1.0