CONCLUSIONS

CONCLUSION: With appropriate policies or market conditions in place, potential synergies between the transportation sector and the electric power sector could accelerate the potential for reduced oil use and decreased CO2emissions as benefits from the use of hydrogen in both sectors. In the near term, electrolysis of water at refueling sites using off-peak power, and in the longer term (after 2025), cogeneration of low-carbon hydrogen and electricity in gasification-based energy plants, are potential options that offer additional synergies. See Chapter 5.


More specifically, in response to the three framing questions posed at the beginning of this chapter, the committee reached the following conclusions:

  1. In the near term (until 2020), existing electric power facilities (generation, transmission, substations, etc.) could produce hydrogen for transportation fuel purposes. In particular, small-scale electrolyzer plants, when successfully developed to meet more competitive cost and performance standards, at or near the points of distribution, could be important during the transition when the cost burdens of larger-scale reformation plants would be a potential barrier.

  2. In the longer term (2035), the successful demonstration of one or more technologies could result in the widespread deployment of “co-production plants.” One benefit from this approach would be the reduction in the use of natural gas that will increasingly have to be imported and is a source of greenhouse gases.

  3. Incentives are likely to be necessary for full involvement of electric power companies. Mechanisms such as production tax credits, rate adjustments, carbon credits, and so forth, would be options for near-term action.

  4. PEM fuel cell systems, whether for transportation or stationary systems, still require significant cost, reliability, and lifetime improvements to be truly competitive in the market. In many basic technology and product development issues, and basic manufacturing process development for the PEM stack, synergies between stationary electric power and transportation fuel cells might be realized.

  5. The introduction of high-temperature fuel cells (solid oxide fuel cells or molten carbonate fuel cells) does not enhance the production of hydrogen since one advantage of these technologies is their ability to use a variety of feedstocks with an internal reformer.

  6. Plug-in hybrid vehicles could help reduce reliance on imported oil (and natural gas). The reductions in overall CO2 production will be a function of the reliance on fossil fuels for electricity production and the success of CCS technologies. The introduction of PHEVs depends on the timely introduction of advanced batteries.

  7. The power industry could be of further assistance by providing a special electricity rate structure to support the early implementation of electrolysis. This is particularly important during the hydrogen market transition period. (See Chapter 3 for detailed discussions of the impact of the cost of electricity on the hydrogen production cost.) Utilities, working with their regulatory commissions could provide economic incentives to hydrogen producers to lessen the cost burden of the electrolysis process.

REFERENCES

Bereisa, J. 2007. Energy Diversity: The Time Is Now. Presentation to the committee, June 25.

DOE (Department of Energy). 2007. Fuel Cell Technology Challenges. Available at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/fuelcells/printable_versions/fc_challenges.html.

EIA (Energy Information Administration). 2006. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases. Available at http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/environment/057306.pdf.

EIA. 2007. Annual Energy Review. Available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/contents.html.

EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). 2007. Electrolyzer Competitive Benchmarking: Pathways to Electrolysis-Powered Hydrogen Fueling Stations. Palo Alto, Calif.: 1014877.

Kawai, T. 2007. Sustainable Mobility and the Development of Advanced Technology Vehicles. Presentation to the committee, June 26.

Kintner-Meyer, M., K. Schneider, and R. Pratt. 2006. Impacts Assessment of Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles on Electric Utilities and Regional U.S. Power Grids. Part 1: Technical Analysis. Richland, Wash: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Available at http://www.pnl.gov/energy/eed/etd/pdfs/phev_feasibility_analysis_combined.pdf. Accessed September 2008.

NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory). 2005. Cost Analysis of PEM Fuel Cell Systems for Transportation. NREL Subcontract Report NREL/SR-560-39104. December.

Pratt, R., M. Kintner-Meyer, K. Schneider, M. Scott, D. Elliott, and M. Warwick. 2007. Potential Impacts of High Penetration of Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles on the U.S. Power Grid. Richland, Wash.: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Available at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/avta/pdfs/phev/pratt_phev_workshop.pdf. Accessed June 2008.

Srivastava, R., N. Hutson, and F. Princiotta. 2005. Reduction of Mercury from Coal-fired Electric Utility Boilers. Presentation at the DOE/NETL Mercury Control Technology R&D Program Review, Pittsburgh, Pa., July 12, 2005.

Stone, H.J. 2005. Economic Analysis of Stationary PEM Fuel Cell Systems. Battelle Memorial Institute, Project ID # FC 48.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement