co2-lean hydrogen export from norway to germany
TRANSCRIPT
CO2-lean hydrogen export from Norway to Germany
H2ExpoCongress Center Hamburg
22-23 October 2008
Christoph StillerUlrich Bünger
NTNUKari Aamodt Espegren
IFE
Steffen Møller-HolstAnn Mari Svensson
SINTEF
Partners:
OutlineNorway’s situationExport of CO2-lean hydrogen to central Europe
– Key assumptions and potentials– Energy export chains– Energy, GHG emissions, and cost results– Uncertainties and qualitative factors– Conclusions
Hydrogen use in Norway– Today– Ambitions– Tomorrow
Courtesy: RCN
Norway - facts you may not know
Electricity> 99% from hydropowerHuge wind resourcesRobust and flexible grid forintegration of renewablepower
Oil and Natural GasWorld’s 3rd largest exporterof NG and 5th largest of oilAlmost no NG infrastructurePotential for CO2 storage in North Sea bed
TransportationEurope’s lowest share of publictransportHigh taxation of cars and fuelStrong shipping/marinesegment
Topology & Population17,000 km coastline12 inhabitants per km2
World‘s 2nd highest GDP per capita
Courtesy: RCN
TWh/
year
-
500
1 000
1 500
2 000
2 500
3 000
Production Energy use
Bioenergy
Hydro- and windpower
Natural gas
Oil
Other use
Electricity
Transportation
Norway - an energy nation…….
Trond Moengen, June 2004
OutlineNorway’s situationExport of CO2-lean hydrogen to central Europe
– Key assumptions and potentials– Energy export chains– Energy, GHG emissions, and cost results– Uncertainties and qualitative factors– Conclusions
Hydrogen use in Norway– Today– Ambitions– Tomorrow
Key assumptionsCompare the export of different feedstock (NG; renewable electricity) from different locations (southern Norway; northern Norway) with the export of hydrogen generated from the feedstock with respect to specific energy use, GHG emissions, and costsLarge-scale production facilities and energy delivery (>1 GW H2; may supply H2 to >1 million vehicles)
– Assuming H2 is used as transportation fuel at large scale (timeframe 2020-30)
End product: H2-delivered to distribution terminal in Hamburg (representing central Europe):
Chains from Northern Norway - LH2, Chains from Southern Norway - CGH2 (20 MPa)
All chains CO2-lean (SMR w/ 85% CO2 capture and storage)Technology data based on HyWays, CONCAWE-EUCAR-JRC, Euro-Quebec-Hydro-H2-Pilot Project (maritime LH2-transport)All calculations carried out using E3database (LBST)
Purpose:Compare energyexport optionswith respect to
Energy efficiencyEmissions andCosts
NG (Snøhvit) current production 57 TWh/a Onshore Wind (Finnmark)
Technical potential 163 TWh/a
NG (e.g. Troll/Kårstø)Current production 300 GWh/a (Troll)
Offshore Wind (Rogaland)Technical potential 4-40 TWh/a
Hamburg
2400
km
600 km
Destination
NG (e.g. Kårstø)
Offshore Wind (Rogaland)
NG (Snøhvit)
Onshore Wind (Finnmark)
NG/H2 pipeline
LH2
LNG
LH2
NaturalNatural gasgas
SMR
GT
SMR
GT
LH2
Energy sources in the North - H2-delivery Hamburg
ElectricityElectricityHydrogenHydrogen
COCO22
GH2
SMR
Energy sources in the South - H2-delivery Hamburg
EOR
NaturalNatural gasgasElectricityElectricityHydrogenHydrogen
COCO22
SMR
Primary energy use per kWh H2 delivered to HH
NG => CGH2, NG-Pipe
NG => CGH2, H2-Pipe
Wind offsh. => CGH2, HVDC
Wind offsh. => CGH2, H2-Pipe
NG => LH2, LNG-Ship
NG => LH2, LH2-Ship
Wind onsh. => LH2, HVDC
Wind onsh. => LH2, LH2-Ship
Feedstock production Feedstock transport H2 production H2 liquefactionH2 transport H2 compression H2 energy content
0 0.5 1 1.5 2Primary energy use (kWh/kWh H2)
liquefaction
NG lique-faction
HVDC losses
Lower flow velocityfor H2 pipe
⇒ Hydrogen export chains more or equally efficient as feedstock export
GHG emissions of hydrogen delivered to HH
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
NG => CGH2, NG-Pipe
NG => CGH2, H2-Pipe
Wind offsh. => CGH2, HVDC
Wind offsh. => CGH2, H2-Pipe
NG => LH2, LNG-Ship
NG => LH2, LH2-Ship
Wind onsh. => LH2, HVDC
Wind onsh. => LH2, LH2-Ship
Reference-onsite SMR (w/o CCS)
CO2 equivalent emissions (g/kWh H2)
NG/LNG production Transport NG SMR (85% CO2 captured)Electricity for liquefaction Auxiliary grid electricity Reference
NG production; emissionsfrom 85% CCSNG lique-
faction
Compression to 20 MPa
NG compression
⇒ All chains reduce GHG emissions significantly against reference
Costs of export equipment (w/o primary energy)
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
NG => CGH2, NG-Pipe
NG => CGH2, H2-Pipe
Wind offsh. => CGH2, HVDC
Wind offsh. => CGH2, H2-Pipe
NG => LH2, LNG-Ship
NG => LH2, LH2-Ship
Wind onsh. => LH2, HVDC
Wind onsh. => LH2, LH2-Ship
Capital and O&M Costs (€/kWh H2) (Feedstock not included)
Feedstock transport H2 production H2 liquefaction
H2 transport CO2 burden (50 €/t)
HVDC highestinvestment
H2 pipe more expensive than NG pipe but still no major cost
⇒ Highest uncertainties for LH2 ship and long HVDC
Specific costs of hydrogen delivered to Hamburg over cost of feedstock
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07
Feedstock cost (€/kWh) Norway
Prod
uct c
ost (
€/kW
h) G
erm
any 1a - NG => CGH2, NG-Pipe
1b - NG => CGH2, H2-Pipe2a - Wind offsh. => CGH2, HVDC2b - Wind offsh. => CGH2, H2-Pipe3a - NG => LH2, LNG-Ship3b - NG => LH2, LH2-Ship4a - Wind onsh. => LH2, HVDC4b - Wind onsh. => LH2, LH2-Ship1a - NG, NG-Pipe2a - Wind offsh., HVDC3a - NG, LNG-Ship4a - Wind onsh. HVDC
Assumed German NG market price
Energy cost assumptions for this workBreak even range with today'sconventional fuels
Transmission to shore
NG pipeline and H2 pipeline similar
Wind-H2 pipeline slightly cheaper than HVDC
LNG cheaper than LH2-ship
Wind-LH2 ship significantlycheaper than long HVDC
⇒ All hydrogen options except wind-HVDC seem competitive with today’s conventional fuels (untaxed) on a per-km basis (grey shaded area)
⇒ Pipelines from south are inexpensive, but pipelines from North (distance x 4) would have significant recompression losses
Uncertainties / Qualitative factorsOption Use of Norwegian
expertiseFeedstock flexibility End-use flexibility Environmental impact/
land area use
1a - NG => CGH2, NG-Pipe
NG, pipeline only NG feedstock; pipeline may be convertible to hydrogen
direct use of NG (CO2!), stationary electricity or transportation H2
sea bed pipelines; compression station
1b - NG => CGH2, H2-Pipe
NG, pipeline, CCS piped H2 can come from any primary energy
stationary use inefficient; only transportation
sea bed pipelines; compression station
2a - Wind offsh. => CGH2, HVDC
few process steps in Norway
transmitted electricity can come from any primary energy
stationary electricity or transportation H2
sea bed cables; head stations
2b - Wind offsh. => CGH2, H2-Pipe
electrolysis, pipeline piped H2 can come from any primary energy
stationary use inefficient; only transportation
sea bed pipelines; compression station
3a - NG => LH2, LNG-Ship
NG, operation of process steps
only NG can be feedstock direct use of NG (CO2!), stationary electricity or transportation H2
few ship sailings; no sea bed/overhead installations
3b - NG => LH2, LH2-Ship
NG, CCS, operation of process steps
shipped LH2 can come from any primary energy
stationary use inefficient; only transportation
few ship sailings; no sea bed/overhead installations
4a - Wind onsh. => LH2, HVDC
few process steps in Norway
transmitted electricity can come from any primary energy
stationary electricity or transportation H2
sea bed cables; overhead lines; head stations; onshore wind
4b - Wind onsh. => LH2, LH2-Ship
electrolysis, operation of process steps
shipped LH2 can come from any primary energy
stationary use inefficient; only transportation
few ship sailings; no sea bed/overhead installations; onshore wind
⇒ Hydrogen pathways have higher feedstock flexibility but lower end-use flexibility⇒ Hydrogen pathways increase use of Norwegian industrial and R&D expertise
Conclusions
Norway’s large potential of stranded wind energy, NG, and CO2storage can be utilised by producing and exporting hydrogen Assuming a market for hydrogen as transportation fuel, export ofhydrogen (via pipeline or LH2-ship) appears economically interesting against HVDCExport of hydrogen from NG appears slightly more expensive than NG export, but more efficient (if hydrogen is the end product)Hydrogen export offers higher flexibility of feedstock and is compatible with Norway’s industrial and research expertise (offshore & process engineering, electrolysis)Feedstock export offers higher flexibility of end-use
⇒ Results used for the GermanHy study “Where will the hydrogen come from?”
OutlineNorway’s situationExport of CO2-lean hydrogen to central Europe
– Key assumptions and potentials– Energy export chains– Energy, GHG emissions, and cost results– Uncertainties and qualitative factors– Conclusions
Hydrogen use in Norway– Today– Ambitions– Tomorrow
Grenland
Stavanger
Hydrogen availability 2008
Source: HyNor
Norway’s ambitions to CO2 reduction
Source: The Norwegian Commission on Low Emissions [NOU 2006:18]
-75 % CO2 emissions in transportation required until 2050
Estimated share of vehicles (car pool)
0 %
20 %
40 %
60 %
80 %
100 %
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050Year
Car
poo
l HydrogenElectricHybridConventional
⇒ 100% hydrogen and electric cars among new sales by 2045⇒ Hydrogen and electricity purely from CO2-free and lean sources⇒ Also reductions in goods transport and maritime sector will be required
Hydrogen demandResults, regional deployment
Hydrogen demandResults, local deployment (example)
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2010
1,000 cars total 0.05% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2015
6,000 cars total 0.3% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2020
11,000 cars total 0.5% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2025
110,000 cars total 4.8% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2030
350,000 cars total 14.8% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2035
710,000 cars total 29.2% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2040
1,100,000 cars total 45.1% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2045
1,500,000 cars total 60.6% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
Hydrogen Demand and Supply - 2050
1,750,000 cars total 69.7% of fleet
ElectrolysisBy-productBiomass-to-H2NG-SMR
AcknowledgementThe NorWays project is co-funded by the participating industry:
and
We thank all project participants for their support in carrying out the present study.
http://www.ntnu.no/norways