Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

PAPERBACK
price:\$39.00

## Transitions to Alternative Transportation Technologies--A Focus on Hydrogen (2008) Board on Energy and Environmental Systems (BEES)

### Citation Manager

. "Appendix C Modeling a Hydrogen Transition." Transitions to Alternative Transportation Technologies--A Focus on Hydrogen. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008.

 Page 124

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.

Transitions to Alternative Transportation Technologies — A Focus on Hydrogen

Consider incremental costs for vehicles and H2 fuel separately:

Incremental vehicle cost (\$) = Σ Number of new HFCVs (i) × [first cost HFCV (i) − first cost reference vehicle (i)], i = 1 to the breakeven year

Incremental fuel cost (\$) = number of HFCVs in the fleet (i) × [fuel cost HFCV (i) − fuel cost reference vehicle (i)], i = 1 to the breakeven year

Adding up the infrastructure capital costs to the breakeven year gives an indication of cumulative costs to energy companies. These are the cumulative costs that would be borne by automakers or energy companies to reach breakeven.

#### Step 4:Estimating Policy Costs

• Vehicle subsidy is subtracted from vehicle first cost.

• Fuel subsidy is subtracted from fuel cost.

• Carbon tax is added to operating costs.

Cost for each vehicle becomes:

LCC (\$) = (vehicle first cost (\$) − ehicle subsidy (\$)) + Σ[(fuel costs − fuel subsidy) + O&M costs + carbon emissions × carbon tax)]

The cost of policies can be estimated over time, either to the breakeven year or to some set “policy horizon.”

The cost of a direct subsidy to energy providers (e.g., pay for 50 percent of cost of first stations) could be calculated in an analogous fashion.

#### Step 5:Estimating Savings in Oil Use and GHG emissions(Figures C.3 and C.4)

• Using a vehicle stock model, keep track of the number of HFCVs of each model year in the fleet.

• Each year, the H2 vehicles displace a certain amount of gasoline use (the gasoline that would have been used by reference gasoline cars, if the HFCVs had not been introduced).

• The HFCVs have certain well-to-wheels GHG emissions, depending on the assumed H2 supply options (which are estimated separately and input to the scenario). These emissions are lower than those of the reference gasoline vehicle, and GHG emission reductions can be estimated for each year.

FIGURE C.3 Oil saved per year with different scenarios compared to the reference case.

FIGURE C.4 Greenhouse gas emissions avoided compared to the reference case.

 Page 124
 Front Matter (R1-R15) Abstract (1-2) Summary (3-18) 1 Introduction (19-21) 2 Toward a Substantial and Durable Commitment: The Context of the Study (22-30) 3 Hydrogen Technology (31-43) 4 Alternative Technologies (44-64) 5 Role of the Stationary Electric Power Sector in a Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle Scenario (65-72) 6 Hydrogen and Alternative Technologies for Reduction of U.S. Oil Use and CO2 Emissions (73-92) 7 A Budget Roadmap (93-102) 8 Actions to Promote Hydrogen Vehicles (103-107) 9 Advantages and Disadvantages of a Transition to Hydrogen Vehicles in Accordance with the Time Lines Established by the Budget Roadmap (108-114) Appendix A Committee Biographical Information (115-119) Appendix B Presentations at Committee Meetings (120-120) Appendix C Modeling a Hydrogen Transition (121-124) Appendix D Acronyms and Abbreviations (125-126)