Conference on the Future of Energy in Enlarged Europe Warsaw , 7 – 8 th October 2004

Conference on the Future of Energy in Enlarged EuropeWarsaw , 7 – 8 th October 2004

Round Table : Hydrogen Energy Technology / Economy

« The New Fuels and their Future / WtW approach »

EUCAR

The Well – to – Wheel Approach :

This approach considers not only the GHGs produced when a fuel is used in the Vehicle ( Tank to Wheel – TtW ), but also the GHGs emitted in the Fuel production and distribution ( Well to Tank – WtT ).

Focusing on the GHGs emissions produced by the fuel consumed by a Vehicle can give a misleading impression on the true GHG impact of the Propulsion System / Fuel combinaison, …




Well – to – Tank

Emphasis on the Hydrogen Production Pathways




Coal (EU mix) Production and EU mix typical Gasification + Pipeline, 50 kmconditioning CO shift + compression

NG (piped) Production and Pipeline into EU NG gridconditioning EU-mix

4000 km

7000 km Reforming (on-site) Compression

Reforming (central) Road or pipeline50 km+ compression

NG (remote) Production and Liquefaction Shipping (LNG)conditioning

Wood waste Collection Road, 50 km Small scale gasif. Pipeline, 10 km+ CO shift + compression

Road, 50 km Large scale gasif.+ Shipping CO shift

Pipeline, 50 kmFarmed wood Growing Road, 50 km + compression

Harvesting + Shipping

Compressed Hydrogen Pathways * Excluding Electricity ( Electrolysis )




Liquified Hydrogen Pathways

NG (piped) Production and Pipeline into EU Reforming Road, 300 kmconditioning (central)

+ H2 Liquefaction

NG (remote) Production and Reforming Shipping Road, 500 km

conditioning + H2 liquefaction (LH2)

NG (remote) Production and Liquefaction Shipping (LNG) Reforming (central) Road, 500 kmconditioning + H2 liquefaction

* Excluding Electricity ( Electrolysis )




Coal (EU mix) Production and Typical of EU mix IGCC MV gridconditioning

NG (piped) Production and Pipeline into EU CCGT MV gridconditioning

NG (remote) Liquifaction Shipping (LNG) CCGT MV grid

EU fuel mix EU mix typical MV grid

Wind Wind turbine MV gridOn/offshore

Electricity Electrolysis Pipeline(grid) (central) Compression

Electrolysis Compression(on-site)

Electricity Electrolysis Road, 300 km(grid) (central)

+ H2 Liquefaction

Electricity Production Pathways

Electricity toHydrogen Pathways

IGCC Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle / CCGT : Combined Cycle Gas Turbine

Hydrogen Pathways Summary

Electrolysis must be the “last resort”

unless an uncontroversial renewable energy source can be used

Hydrogen WTT pathways

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

CH2, N

G 4

000

km, r

ef o

n-site

CH2, N

G 4

000

km,re

f cen

tral,

pipel

ine

CH2, L

NG, r

ef c

entra

l

CH2, fa

rmed

wood,

gas

ifier

on-s

ite

CH2, fa

rmed

wood,

gas

ifier

cen

tral

CH2, E

U-mix

ele

c, e

lect

roly

sis

on-s

ite

CH2, C

oal E

U-mix

, gas

ifier

LH2, N

G 400

0 km

, ref

cen

tral

LH2, re

f rem

ote

LH2, L

NG, r

ef c

entra

l

LH2, fa

rmed

wood, g

asifi

er c

entra

l

LH2, E

U-mix

ele

c, e

lect

roly

sis

cent

ral

LH2, N

G 400

0 km

, ele

ctro

lysi

s ce

ntra

l

Diese

l

CNG, 4

000

km

MJ

/MJ

Conditioning & distribution

Transformation near market

Transportation to market

Transformation at source

Production & conditioning at source

Hydrogen WTT pathways

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

CH2, N

G 4

000

km, r

ef o

n-site

CH2, N

G 4

000

km,re

f cen

tral,

pipel

ine

CH2, L

NG, r

ef c

entra

l

CH2, fa

rmed

wood,

gas

ifier

on-s

ite

CH2, fa

rmed

wood,

gas

ifier

cen

tral

CH2, E

U-mix

ele

c, e

lect

roly

sis

on-s

ite

CH2, C

oal E

U-mix

, gas

ifier

LH2, N

G 400

0 km

, ref

cen

tral

LH2, re

f rem

ote

LH2, L

NG, r

ef c

entra

l

LH2, fa

rmed

wood, g

asifi

er c

entra

l

LH2, E

U-mix

ele

c, e

lect

roly

sis

cent

ral

LH2, N

G 400

0 km

, ele

ctro

lysi

s ce

ntra

l

Diese

l

CNG, 4

000

km

g C

O2e

q/M

J

Conditioning & distribution

Transformation near market

Transportation to market

Transformation at source

Production & conditioning at source

Liquid H2 is more Energy and GHG intensive than Compressed H2




Tank – to – Wheel

Gasoline, Diesel, Natural Gas, Hydrogen

2002 : only Internal Combustion Engines2010 : include both I.C.E and Fuel Cells

as a Reference : « Virtual » Vehicle PISI 1,6 Gasoline




PISI PISI bi-fuel SIDI CIDI Hyb. SI Hyb. CI Hyb. FC FC

Gasoline X X X X

Diesel X X X

Natural Gas Dedicated X PISI

F-T Diesel X

L.H2 X PISI X X

C.G. H2 X PISI X X

Ethanol (X)

Methanol X

DME X X

LNG X

Naphta X

FAME X X

* additional fuels are under consideration : LPG, Bio-Gas

Tank-to-Wheel study : Compared G.H.G. emissions

Cold start on NEDC PISI 1,6 SIDI 1,6 DIESEL1,9 CNGBF 1,6 CNG2,0 CGH2 LH2CO2 (g/km) 166,2 155,3 135 129 130 0 0ENERGY EFF. (MJ/100km) 223,5 209 183 229 230 180 180MASS Consump. (kg/100km) 5,21 4,87 4,26 5,08 5,1 1,50 1,50FUEL Consump. (l /100km) 6,95 6,49 5,1 7,12 7,15 5,60 5,60

Other G.H.G. (g/km)Methane (g/kmCO2 eq.) 0,84 0,84 0,25 3,36 3,36N2O (g/km CO2 eq 0,93 0,93 3,1 0,93 0,93 0,93 0,93

GHG global g/km 168,0 157,0 137,9 133,3 133,8 0,9 0,90

0, 2

0, 4

0, 6

0, 8

1

1 , 2

0 1 2

P o w e r ( W )

STATE of t

he ART 2

002

Fuels / Vehicles G.H.G. (g/km CO2 eq.)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

PISI 1,6 SIDI 1,6 DIESEL1,9 CNGBF 1,6 CNG2,0 CGH2 LH 2

CO2 on the NEDC (g/km) cold Other GHG global g/km

Tank-to-Wheel study : Compared G.H.G. emissions

Cold start N.E.D.C. PISI 1,6 DIESEL1,9 CNG2,0 LH2 ICE CGH2 F.C. CGH2 Hyb. F.C.CO2 (g/km) 140 131 107 0 0 0ENERGY EFF. (MJ/100km) 190,0 179,1 190,8 168,1 94,0 84,0MASS Consump. (kg/100km) 4,43 4,17 4,23 1,40 0,78 0,70Cons. NEDC (l/100km) 2010 5,91 4,99 5,93 5,22 2,92 2,60Other G.H.G. (g/km)Methane (g/kmCO2 eq.) 0,42 0,21 0,84N2O (g/km CO2 eq 0,5 1,55 0,5 0,5GHG global g/km 140,5 133,0 108,8 0,5 0,0 0,0

0

0, 2

0, 4

0, 6

0, 8

1

1 , 2

0 1 2

P o w e r ( W )

0

0, 5

1

1 , 5

0 1 2

P o w e r ( W )

Foreca

st 20

10

Direct

H2

Fuel C

ells

020406080

100120140160

PISI 1

,6

DIESEL1,

9 DPF

CNG 20

LH2 IC

E

CGH2 F.C

.

CGH2 Hyb

. F.C

.

CO2 on the NEDC (g/km) cold Other GHG global g/km




Well – to – Wheel

* Conventional Fuel ICE / Hydrogen ICE / Hydrogen FC




WTW, 2010 technologies, Hydrogen ICE

0

50

100

150

200250

300

350

400

450

g C

O2e

q/k

m

2000-2010 performance range

TTW

WTT

* Conventional Fossil Fuels / Hydrogen ( ICE )




* Conventional Fossil Fuels / Hydrogen ( Fuel Cell )

WTW, 2010 technologies, Hydrogen FC

0

50

100

150

200

250

Gas

olin

e PIS

I

Gas

olin

e SID

I

Diese

l CID

I dpf

Diese

l CID

I

CNG, 4

000

km

CH2, N

G 4

000

km, r

ef o

n-sit

e

CH2, N

G 4

000

km,re

f cen

tral,

pip.

..

CH2, L

NG, r

ef c

entra

l

CH2, fa

rmed

woo

d, g

asifie

r on-

site

CH2, fa

rmed

woo

d, g

asifie

r cen

tral

CH2, E

U-mix

elec

, ele

ctro

lysis

on...

CH2, C

oal E

U-mix,

gas

ifier

LH2,

NG

400

0 km

, ref

cen

tral

LH2,

ref r

emot

e

LH2,

LNG

, ref

cen

tral

LH2,

farm

ed w

ood,

gas

ifier c

entra

l

LH2,

NG

400

0 km

, ele

ctro

lysis

ce...

g C

O2e

q/k

m

2000-2010 performance range

TTW

WTT




Well – to – Wheel ( GHG global Impact )

Conventional Fuel ICE / Hydrogen ICE / Hydrogen FC

Strongly depending on the H2 production Pathways, the H2 fuelled Vehicles could offer attractive GHG figures




Well – to – Wheel ( GHG global Impact )

( continued, … )

Prior to enter into the Hydrogen era, there are many « BioMass to Liquid Fuel » pathways to develop in order to bring an « immediate » effect on the entire vehicle fleet, …

BtL : BioMass to Liquid Fuels ( like “SunDiesel” fuels ) are nowadays :

Intrinsically “Clean” : ( 0 sulfur, 0 aromatics )

Low polluting : particles HC CO- 25 % - 60 % - 90 %

* Usable directly in present « State-of-the-Art » vehicles : entire fleet, …

* Need NO specific distribution network (blend : 1 up to 100 %)

* Need NO specific technology to be developped

Will bring : - Immediate, global G.H.G. benefit, as soon as available - Durable and domestic sourcing ( biomass, residues and waste ) - Potential renewable hydrogen sourcing….







On an Environmental Point of View, and as far as the GHG impact of the

Road Transport Sector is concerned, the only valid approach is the

Global Well to Wheel Overview, as the only way to cover the complete chain :

** from the Fuel Production ( Well ) to the Fuel Consumption ( Wheel ), …

** just as an example, …, for a Std Diesel Passenger Car :

Cold NEDC ( CO2 eq. g/km ) Tank To Wheels Well To Wheels

Conv. Diesel ( ex crude ) 138 164

FAME ( Fatty Acid Methyl Ester ) 143 93BtL ( from Wood ) 138 17




Based onCrude Oil

Based onRen. Energy

Based on Nat. Gas

Based onBiomass

Cleanconventional

FuelsSulfur-free

Low Aromatics

Synthetic (GTL) Fuels

Low Emissions

Synthetic(BTL) Fuels

Low Emissions + Low in CO2

Hydrogen

Emission-free + CO2-free

ConventionalFuels

High in SulfurHigh Aromatics

a « Step by Step » Approach, … :

Conference on the Future of Energy in Enlarged Europe Warsaw , 7 – 8 th October 2004

Documents

Transcript of Conference on the Future of Energy in Enlarged Europe Warsaw , 7 – 8 th October 2004