hydrogen transition modeling and analysis: hytrans v. 1

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORYU. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Hydrogen TransitionModeling and Analysis

HyTrans v. 1.0

David L. GreenePaul N. Leiby

ORNLDavid Bowman

EconotechElzbieta Tworek

Strata-G

May 26, 2005Arlington, Virginia Project # AN3

This presentation does not contain any proprietary or confidential information

2


We have been working on this challenging task for almost 1 ½ years.

BarriersTimeline

• Start: 10/1/2004• Finish: 10/31/2007• Status: 40% completed

• Transition Scenarios− “By 2007, identify and

evaluate transition scenarios, consistent with developing infrastructure and hydrogen resources, including an assessment of timing and sequencing issues.” p. 4-1

Budget Partners• FY04 - $540K• FY05 - $450K

• ANL – Pipelines & delivery• NREL & H2A – Production

& delivery• UC Davis - Expert review

3


HyTrans’ objective is to model the market transition to a H2 vehicle system in a way that is useful for R&D planning, cost-benefit analysis, policy analysis and envisioning.

• Integrates all main H2 market components− Hydrogen Production − Hydrogen Delivery− Vehicle Production− Consumer Choice − Hydrogen Use

• Determines a market equilibrium solution− Maximizes total consumption benefit minus production,

distribution, and other costs− Estimates amounts and timing of costs, benefits, levels of

investment and activity, production and consumption, key environmental impacts.

− Sensitive to technological goals and supporting policies.

4


Our method is economic modeling via non-linear optimization.

• Production pathways: cost functions• Vehicle production: cost functions• Consumer demand: NMNL• 3 fuel demand density regions• Key dynamic elements:

− Learning-by-doing− Technological change− Scale economies− Fuel availability− Diversity of vehicle choices

• Generalized Algebraic Modeling System

5


Hydrogen production cost functions derived from H2A and NAS 2004 have been incorporated.

H2 Production Costs: Biomass Gasification

$0.00

$0.50

$1.00

$1.50

$2.00

$2.50

0 300,000 600,000 900,000

Plant Scale kg/day

Uni

t Cos

t $/k

g

NAS

H2A

Feedstock price: $2/MMbtu LHV

6


A H2 Supply Pathway comprises three parts.

Delivery

Production ForecourtPipeline

Truck Compressed Gas

Truck Liquefied

Compression/Liquefaction+Storage+Dispensing+Transporting+Storage+Compression/Vaporization

Centralized SMR

Coal Gasification

Biomass, etc.Retailing ofCompressedGas

Forecourt SMRForecourt ElectrolysisMany Others…

(Store + Dispense)

7


Demand density affects the competitive positions of production/delivery pathways.

(H2 delivered to vehicle excl. taxes)

Delivered Unit Cost, Future Coal Gasification H2 demand density: 3,000 and 250,000 kg/sqkm/yr

$0

$1

$2

$3

0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000

Scale kg/day

Uni

t Cos

t $/k

g

Pipeline network,3000Tube Trailers,3000 Tube Trailers,250,000 CryogenicTrucks, 3000 CryogenicTrucks, 250,000 Pipeline network,250,000

8


Vehicle technologies improve by 3 mechanisms.

Learning & Unlearning w/ Stock on Road

Scale Economies with Elasticity of -0.5

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000

Annual Production

Pric

e

Scale w/ Annual Production/Plant

Tech Change w/ Passage of Time (Yr)

Retail Price =Scale × Learning × Tech Change

× Scenario Price

Effect of Technological Change on Incremental Prices Advanced Vehicle Technologies

DOE Freedom Car Goals Scenario

$0$2,000$4,000$6,000$8,000

$10,000$12,000$14,000$16,000$18,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

RPE

Future Gasoline FCV

Future Hydrogen FCV

Future Hydrogen HEV

Advanced Diesel HEV

Future Hydrogen SI ICE

Advanced Gasoline HEV

Advanced Diesel CI ICE

Advanced Gasoline SI ICE

Asymptotic Learning Model

$0$2,000$4,000$6,000$8,000

$10,000$12,000$14,000$16,000$18,000$20,000

0 10 20 30 40

Stock of Knowledge (millions)

Driv

e Tr

ain

Pric

e Gasoline FCVHydrogen FCVHydrogen SI ICEDiesel HEVDiesel CI ICEGasoline HEVGasoline SI ICE

9


We have completed a preliminary working version of HyTrans.

• Implemented and tested all major components in GAMS

• Translated H2A and NAS hydrogen production models into HyTrans equations

• Developed and implemented a temporary delivery model

• Developed, implemented and calibrated representations of technological change, learning-by-doing and scale economies.

• Produced preliminary, test transition scenario runs

10


The results I will present today are preliminary not definitive and should not be interpreted as conclusions about the hydrogen transition.

• HyTrans is still under development and review.

• Scenarios to be presented today do not reflect HFCIT program goals via H2A models (will soon).

• NAS production technologies used; results presented below based on restricted sets of production options.

• Geographical regions, several major improvements are needed.

• Results illustrate feasibility of optimization methodology, kinds of analyses that will be possible.

11


I will show some preliminary results from three scenarios.

• Based on AEO 2004 Reference Case & extrapolated.

• Two policy drivers− Vehicle subsidies− Fuel subsidies

• 1: DOE Freedom Car Goals Met• 2: Alternative Vehicle Technology Evolution• 3: Carbon Emissions Limitations• ALL scenarios here rely on NAS (2004) H2 production cost

estimates – H2A models will be incorporated in the near future.

12



DOE Freedom Car Goals Scenario

$0$2,000$4,000$6,000$8,000

$10,000$12,000$14,000$16,000$18,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

RPE

Future Gasoline FCV

Future Hydrogen FCV

Future Hydrogen HEV

Advanced Diesel HEV

Future Hydrogen SI ICE

Advanced Gasoline HEV

Advanced Diesel CI ICE

Advanced Gasoline SI ICE

SCENARIO 1The DOE Vehicle Technology Program Goals scenario anticipates rapid progress for all technologies.

Future FCV

Gasoline SI ICE

13


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Gasoline ICEDiesel ICEGasoline HybridDiesel HybridH2 Fuel CellGasoline Fuel CellH2 ICEH2 HybridTotal

Qua

ntity

(Mill

ions

of V

ehic

les)

Case: SH2VS00_V235DG_NOTB_CT00

Given no new policies, HyTrans sees a shift to gasoline hybrids in scenario 1.

Total Vehicle Stock

PRELIMINARYTotal Vehicles

Gasoline ICE

Gasoline HEV

14


A temporary H2-vehicle subsidy of $2,000 until 2030, and $0 afterwards produces a sustainable transition to

hydrogen-powered light-duty vehicles.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Gasoline ICEDiesel ICEGasoline HybridDiesel HybridH2 Fuel CellGasoline Fuel CellH2 ICEH2 HybridTotal

Qua

ntity

(Mill

ions

of V

ehic

les)

Case: SH2VS02Y30Zero_V235DG_VHFB_CT00

Total Vehicle Stock

PRELIMINARYAll Vehicles

Gasoline ICE

H2 FCV

15


The transition to H2 reduces vehicle fuel use in the face of steadily growing travel demand.

(Scenario 1: $2,000 H2 Vehicle Subsidy, $0 After 2030)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Gasoline

Diesel

H2: High Density

H2: Medium Density

H2: Low Density

H2: Total

TotalQua

ntity

(Bill

ions

of G

GE'

s per

Yea

r)


Light-Duty Vehicle Fuel Use

PRELIMINARY

Total Fuel

Gasoline

H2 fuel total

16


Delivered H2 costs fall over time with technological progress, scale economies and market share.

(Scenario 1: $2,000/H2-Veh Subsidy, $0 After 2030)

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

High DensityRegion

MediumDensity Region

Low DensityRegion

USA Region

H2

Prod

. Uni

t Cos

t by

Path

(ver

s. 2)

($/k

g)


H2 Average Unit Cost ($/kg) (excl. tax)

PRELIMINARY

Low Density Region

High Density Region

Medium Density

17


With centralized production, higher density regions start with truck and shift to pipeline as hydrogen’s market share grows.


H2 Delivery Modes: High Density Region

PRELIMINARY

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Coal Gasification.

by Pipelines

Tube Trucks

Cryogenic trucks

Tota

l H2

Prod

uctio

n (1

000

Kg

H2/

day)


PRELIMINARY

18


The low density (intercity) region relies on cryogenic-trucking throughout.


H2 Production by Path: Low Density Region

PRELIMINARY

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Central Coal Gasification

by PipelinesTube TrucksCryogenic trucks

Tota

l H2

Prod

uctio

n (1

000

Kg

H2/

day)


PRELIMINARY

19


SCENARIO 2We derived the Alternative Vehicle Technology Case from published studies. It is less favorable for some technologies, certainly for FCVs.


Alternative Assessments Scenario

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

RPE

Advanced Diesel CI ICEAdvanced Gasoline HEVAdvanced Diesel HEVFuture Hydrogen SI ICEFuture Hydrogen HEVFuture Gasoline FCVFuture Hydrogen FCVAdvanced Gasoline SI ICE

Future FCV

Gasoline SI ICE

20


Given the same fuel subsidy policy, the hydrogen transition occurs later in scenario 2.

(Scenarios 1 & 2: $0.90/GGE H2 Fuel Subsidy)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

DOE TechnologyGoals

AlternativeVehicleTechnologyAssumptions

Qua

ntity

(Mill

ions

of V

ehic

les)

Cases: SH2FS05_V235DG_NOTB_CT00 & SH2FS05_V235EP_NOTB_CT00

Total H2 FCV Vehicle Stock

Scenario 1

Freedom Car Goals

Scenario 2

Alternative Technology Evolution

PRELIMINARY

21


SCENARIO 3: Carbon emission LimitsHow do the vehicle technology program goals change the ability to reduce CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles?

• GREET 1.6 Supplemented by other sources (GREET update in Spring)

• Represent carbon limits in the form of carbon taxes (cap and trade)

• Add vehicle subsidies, as well• DOE Vehicle Technology Program Goals

22


Transition to H2 creates an opportunity for massive reductions in C emissions.

PRELIMINARY

CO2 Emissions from LDVs

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Bill

kg/

year Base Case

H Vehicle SubsidyNo CO2 ChargeH Vehicle Subsidy$40/t CO2

PRELIMINARY

23


HyTrans is making significant progress.

• Plausible answers to:− Is a stable transition achievable?− When? − How long will it take?

• Can begin to test key policies• Will be able to produce potentially useful

cost and benefit measures• Close to useful visions of the transition• Beginning to generate insights about R&D

goals− Good enough?− Effects of competing technologies

24


Several important deficiencies remain to be addressed in FY 2005.

• Size of the optimization problem, nonconvexitiesand resulting multiple equilibria are pushing the state of the art of nonlinear optimization software.− Test alternative global solvers (e.g., BARON)− Continue development of hybrid scenario/optimization

methods• Lack of geographic regions makes it difficult for

renewable H sources to penetrate the market.− Develop and implement representation of NEMS

regions in collaboration with Singh and Wood.• Representation of fuel availability needs

improvement− Intercity (Melaina methodology)− Variable station sizes

25


Future Work

• Remaining FY 2005− Report on sensitivity analysis: 6/30/2005− HyTrans documentation: 9/30/2005− Report on Plausible Hydrogen Transition

Scenarios, Policies, Costs and Benefits: 9/30/2005

• FY 2006− Linkages to Macro Model− Representation of regional differences

affecting choice of production technology


THANK YOU.

27


Presentations and papers

”Modeling the Demand for Hydrogen by Light-Duty Vehicles: HyTrans Methodolgy”, UC Davis Workshop on Hydrogen Demand Modeling, Institute for Transportation Studies, UC Davis, Davis, CA, June 21, 2004.

“HyTrans: a dynamic equilibrium model of market transitions to hydrogen”, presentation to the National Research Council Committee on Hydrogen, Washington DC, January 24, 2005

“Analyzing Transitions to Hydrogen Powered Vehicles with HyTrans, National Hydrogen Association Conference, Washington, DC, March 30, 2005.

“Modeling the Transition to Hydrogen: Early Experience with the HyTrans Model”, 13Th Annual EIA Midterm Energy Outlook and Modeling Conference, Washington, DC, April 12, 2005.

Draft Reports

` “HyTrans Hydrogen Transition Model: Building Version 1,” Draft report, Center for Transportation Analysis, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, March.

“Incorporating H2A Production, Delivery and Forecourt Models into HyTrans”, draft report, National Center for Transportation Research, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, December 20, 2005.

“Initial Hydrogen Transition Scenarios Developed Using the HyTrans Model”, Progress Report, National Transportation Research Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, March 29, 2005.

hydrogen transition modeling and analysis: hytrans v. 1

Documents