NorWays. National Effort: Planning for introduction of H. - Providing decision support for introduction of Hydrogen in the Norwegian energy system

Transcription

1 National Effort: Planning for introduction of H NorWays 2 - Providing decision support for introduction of Hydrogen in the Norwegian energy system Duration Total Budget ~ 850 k Links to EU-project HyWays Partners:

2 Objectives NorWays Main objective: Provide decision support for introduction of Hydrogen as energy carrier in the Norwegian energy system Sub-topics of Norway: Hydrogen in the Norwegian Energy System Identify market segments and regions Regionalized models Suggesting viable pathways and providing well-founded recommendations Establishing a common arena for exchange of knowledge and experience with the aim of reaching consensus between Norwegian stakeholders Outcome: Roadmap Dissemination to authorities Technical papers

3 Methodology Processing of information: Technical, political, economic Analysis tools: Well-to-wheel MARKAL Regional level Infrastructure analysis Iterative procedure Implications for hydrogen? Early markets Suitable regions

4 The transportation sector Emissions from Transportation down by 78 %, 14,4 million tons CO 2 equ. within 2050 Low emission path: % reduction by 2050, Stabilize CO 2 at around 450 ppmv (ca 550 ppmv CO 2 equiv.), Temp increase ~3-4 o C Source: Commission of Low Emissions, 2006

5 Options for reduction of GHG emissions More environmentally friendly fuels and energy carriers, like electricity, biofuels and hydrogen More efficient vehicles Power trains with improved fuel/energy utilization (including also hybrid vehicles and all-electric cars) Reduced weight of vehicles Reduction of the transportation Reduction of transportation work in terms of person km, and ton km of transported goods Increased number of passengers per vehicle, public transport, car-pooling etc.

6 Alternative technologies and fuels for emission reduction Improved efficiency (Existing and new technology) Combustion Hybrid Batteries drive Fuel cells Hybrid vehicles ~ 40% improvement of fuel econonomy, city driving - US: 1% market share 2005 Toyota 61%, Honda 30%, Ford 5%, GM 4% Benefits, California (Air Resource Board): Federal Tax Deduction (US$ 2000) Clean Air Vehicle Stickers > 45 miles/gallon (CNG, H 2 og el-biler) Alternative fuels Ethanol Biodiesel Hydrogen NG/LNG LPG DME Hytan Hytan-fyllestasjon fyllestasjon, Malmø

7 Transportation Efficiency, tank-to-wheel, EDC 90 % 80 % Elektrisk motor 70 % 1liter petrol=100% Effektivitet Private car Driving 1997 (CCFA) 91% Idling 9% Total amount of Mechanical energy to heat energy 72% 19% Kinetic energy Friction 16% Heat loss 1% cooling system Loss, auxiliarie 47% Heat loss, 2% exhaust Loss, 25% Resistance breakin 11% 5% 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0 % Hybrid Bensinmotor Turtall Brenselcelle Dieselmotor

8 Hydrogen in the transportation sector: Vehicles Conventional internal combustion engines (ICEs) Otto engines (e.g., BMW, Ford) Wankel engine (Mazda) Hybrid vehicles (with ICEs converted to hydrogen) Hybridization with ICE as only power source (e.g., Toyota Prius) Plug-in hybrids (prototypes coming, e.g., Toyota, GM) Fuel cell vehicles Range extenders (e.g., Th!nk Hydrogen) For lease: NOK/month!! HYNOR Weak or no hybridisation (e.g., Opel Zafira HydroGen 3) Strong hybrids (e.g., Toyota FCV and Honda FCX) Toyota Prius Hydrogen Mazda RX8 BMW 7-series

9 Biofuels Could potentially contribute to significant GHG emission reductions 1st generation: bioethanol, biodiesel from plants 2nd generation: bioethanol, biodiesel, flexible raw material, incl. wood/waste wood/waste -> Norway Challenges: Competition with other applications Domestic utilization of biomass: Domestic biomass resources: ca 14 TWh/year used for buildings/industry (annual growth ~30 TWh/year) Ambitions for increased utilization: Source: Tijmensen et al, 14 TWh/year (Klimameldingen) 20 TWh/year (NVE) 8 TWh/year 25 TWh/year (optimists) Challenges: Not yet commercial Large scale production (2nd gen)

10 Summary, alternative fuels and technology Biofuel, Hybrid, All-electric, Hydrogen Biofuel, Hybrid <10 ton, Hydrogen Biofuel, Hydrogen? Biofuel, Hybrid, All-electric/trolley, Hydrogen

11 Emissions from road transport Propulsion technology Vehicle Average age of wrecked cars (2006): 19.7 years Distribution [%] Ca 54% of person km on short trips (< 20 km) 25 % 20 % 15 % 10 % 5 % 0 % < 1 km km Source: TØI Fuel km km km Travel distance [km] Drive pattern km > 20 km Average number of persons in car Average number of persons per car decreases over time km 2-5 km 5-10 km km km Length of trip [km] km > 100 km

12 Scenarios for emission reduction Scenario A: conventional technologies Large scale, domestic production of biofuel, 20 TWh biomass, reserved for heavy duty vehicles: 2012: FT plant, synthetic diesel, 8TWh biomass 2016: Small scale ethanol production, 4 TWh biomass 2022: FT plant for synthetic diesel, 8TWh Growth in transport demand is assumed according to public forecasts. Maximum number of electric vehicles: 31 % of the car park, corresponding to 1 car for every household with 2 or more cars.

13 Scenario A Commission of Low Emissions - is it at all possible? Share of new cars Electric cars Hybrid cars Conv. cars Year

14 Scenario A Commission of Low Emissions - is it at all possible? 100 % Car pool 80 % 60 % 40 % Electric cars Hybrid vehicles (fossil) Conv. cars 20 % 0 % Year

15 Scenario A 14 Commission of Low Emissions - is it at all possible? Mt CO2 equiv pa Reference path Bio+hybrid+electric Low emission path Bio + Plug-in hybrid Year

16 Summary, results (scenario A) 62 % coverage of fuel for heavy duty vehicles from domestic biofuel (20 TWh) Corresponding emission reduction (biofuel) is 2.2 Mton CO 2 equiv per year 20 TWh biomass for residential heating replace 15 TWh of electricity, reduction of 12 Mton CO 2 equiv per year, electric vehicles (Scandinavia) Electric vehicles (31% of all cars), 24 % of the total vehicle km travelled, consumption of 2.2 TWh, emission reduction amounts to 2.2 Mton CO 2 equiv per year.

17 Scenario B: Extensive introduction of hydrogen In addition to the assumptions introduced for Scenario A, the following is assumed: Extensive introduction of hydrogen vehicles from In , all new cars purchased will be either hydrogen vehicles, or electric vehicles. => Zero emission road transportation in 2050.

18 Scenario B Commission of Low Emissions - is it at all possible? Share of new cars Hydrogen cars Electric cars Hybrid cars Conventional cars Year

19 Scenario B 100 % Commission of Low Emissions - is it at all possible? Car pool 80 % 60 % 40 % Hydrogen Electric Hybrid Conventional 20 % 0 % Year

20 Commission of Low Emissions - is it at all possible? Scenario B Mt CO2 equiv pa Reference path Bio+hybrid+el+H2 (ely) Bio+hybrid+el+H2(NG,CCS) Low emission path Other mobile sources Lack of biofuel for heavy vehicles Year

21 Further implications, Scenario B Introduction of hydrogen reduction of Mton CO 2 equiv Power for hydrogen to FC vehicles (2050) 12 TWh annually. NG to hydrogen (incl. CCS) for H2 ICE hybrid vehicles (2050) 17 TWh NG (LHV). By gasification of 20 TWh biomass to hydrogen reduction of 6.2 Mton CO 2 equiv per year in FC car 3.8 Mton CO 2 equiv per year in a ICE H2 hybrid vehicle

22 MARKAL: Energy demand - transport sector 6 TWh Ship Trucks Railway Machinery Fleet vehicles Car - urban Car - rural Bus - local Bus - long distance Oslo Telemark Rogaland

23 MARKAL:Modeling hydrogen infrastructure El Electrolysis Pre comb. plant El Heat Bio Biomass gasification Gas tank storage NatGas NatGas Prod of el + H2 SMR Gas tube trailer + Compression H2 Filling Station Transp. (ICE/FC) NatGas SMR w CO2 capture El Electrolysis H2 H2 as by-product NatGas SMR

24 MARKAL: Hydrogen production costs are in the range NOK/MWh (IEA: NOK/MWh) Local elec.rural -small ( ) Local electrolysis ( ) Reforming w CCS ( ) Reforming- small ( ) Reforming ( ) Central electrolysis (540) Central electrolysis ( ) Biomass gasification (341) Biomass gasifification (160) Hydrogen by-product Numbers in brackets are prices on raw materials (NOK/MWh for bio, NGS, el)

25 MARKAL: Modeling transport alternatives Urban areas Rural areas Diesel Gasoline E85 Diesel Hybrid Gasoline Hybrid E85 Hybrid Diesel Gasoline E85 Electric Plug-in hybrid Plug-in hybrid H2 ICE H2 FC NG ICE H2 Hybrid FC Hybrid NG Hybrid H2 ICE H2 FC NG ICE

26 Scenarios 1. BASE 2. No use of CNG in transport sector % reduction of CO 2 emission by No Hydrogen production from biomass gasification

27 MARKAL: Hydrogen production in Rogaland (TWh) TWh Local Electrolysis, rural Local Electrolysis Central Electrolysis H2 from biomass gasification, small 0 BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R

28 MARKAL: Fuel use in cars - Rogaland TWh Hydrogen, rural Hydrogen Natural Gas, rural Natural Gas Electricity Ethanol Gasoline+ethanol Gasoline Diesel BASE BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R

29 Infrastructure model Must answer several questions: Where to build what? How big, how much to invest? In which order? When to produce how much? What are the costs? Two models Detailed model of Telemark Coarse model of Norway

30 Infrastructure Models Common technology database (Production/Transport/Refuelling) Common demand allocation (Fueling station sharp) IØT (MN, AT) MILP model (global view, exact method) Perfect foresight NPV maximization Global optimum reached (optimality gap) EPT (CS) Sequential, heuristic model (trial and error method) Myopic (short-term optimization; greedy) Minimization of cost at each time step Global optimum probably not reached (but will reality reach it?) Benefit: Comparing results from different methods Where models agree: Robust results Where they are different: Due to myopic/perfect foresigh

31 geographic presentation

32 Forced conditions Municipalities (local traffic): 2010: Oslo 2015: Trondheim, Bergen, Stavanger 2025: Tromsø Roads (long-distance traffic): 2010: Oslo-Stavanger (HyNor project) 2025: Oslo-Bergen, Oslo-Trondheim, Bergen-Stavanger 2040: Trondheim-Tromsø

33 Local private H2 car penetration in supplied regions 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% Average Regions supplied from 2010 Regions supplied from 2015 Regions supplied from 2020 Regions supplied from 2025 Regions supplied from 2030 Regions supplied from 2035 Regions supplied from 2040 Regions supplied from 2045 Regions supplied from %

34 Base case 2030

35 Base case 2040

36 Base case 2050

37

38 Model formulation Capacitated facility location with local production transportation investments multiperiod Multi commodity flow (Gas, Elect., NG, Diesel) Computational demanding (mixed integer linear programming) data intensive: lot of input data, distances, technologies, available amount of raw materials, costs and prices lot of output data, demand for visualisation

39 MARKAL: Fuel use in cars - Oslo TWh Hydrogen Natural Gas Electricity Ethanol Gasoline+Etanol Gasoline Diesel 0 BASE BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R

40 MARKAL: Fuel use in cars - Telemark 1.2 TWh Hydrogen, rural Hydrogen Natural Gas, rural Natural Gas Electricity Ethanol Gasoline+Ethanol Gasoline Diesel 0 BASE BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG- TRAN CO2-R

41 2nd generation biodiesel Synthetic biodiesel: ca 40% conversion efficiency from wood Source: Concawe

42 MARKAL:Hydrogen production in Oslo (TWh) H2 from biomass gasification, small BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R NO_BIOH2 BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R NO_BIOH2 BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R NO_BIOH2 BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R NO_BIOH2 TWh

43 MARKAL: Hydrogen production in Telemark (TWh) TWh BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R BASE CNG-TRAN CO2-R Central Electrolysis H2 by-product from industry

44 Eletrolysis Bio gasification Bio gasification, CO-prod, H2 + El Reforming Reforming, small Reforming w CCS Eletrolysis Eletrolysis, small Reforming Reforming, small Hydrogen production investment cost Mill NOK/GW Central Local