us doe fuel cell technologies office and arpa-e...
Post on 19-Apr-2020
4 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
US DOE Fuel Cell Technologies Office and ARPA-E
Investments in Hydrogen Technology
Advancements
September 19, 2017
NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration
House Keeping
All participants are in “Listen-Only” mode. Select “Use
Mic & Speakers” to avoid toll charges and use your
computer’s VOIP capabilities. Or select “Use
Telephone” and enter your PIN onto your phone key
pad.
Submit your questions at any time by typing in the
Question Box and hitting Send.
This webinar is being recorded
You will find a recording of this webinar, as well as
previous NEESC webinars online at:
http://neesc.org/events/past-events/
NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration
About NEESC
The Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster (NEESC) is a
network of industry, academic, government and non-governmental
leaders working together to help businesses provide energy storage
solutions. The cluster is focused on businesses that provide the
innovative development, production, promotion and deployment of
hydrogen fuels and fuel cells to meet the pressing demand for energy
storage solutions.
The cluster spans an area in the northeastern United States from New
Jersey to Maine. Its formal organization is funded by the US Small
Business Administration’s Regional Cluster Initiative. NEESC is
administered by the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc.
(CCAT) and its local state partners:
NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration
Today’s Guest Speakers
NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration
Dr. Katherine Ayers, Vice President, Research and
Development, Proton OnSite
Dr. Madhav Acharya, Technology-to-Market Advisor,
Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E)
September 19, 2017 © 2017 Proton Energy Systems, Inc.
US DOE FCTO and ARPA–E Investments in Hydrogen Technology Advancements
Dr. Katherine AyersVice President, Research and Development
2
Outline
• Company and Technology Overview
• Importance of hydrogen• Materials and applied research• Realities of scale and product development
• Portfolio approach and federal funding
• Conclusions
3
Proton-Nel Overview
Manufacturer, packaged products, systems
Well established applications and markets
>3500 fielded units in 80 countries
Growing to address energy markets
ISO 9001:2008 certified; ~150 employees
Now the largest electrolysis company worldwide
PEM Electrolysis Cell
4
PEM application history: Why we are where we are
• Designed for life support in closed environments• Qualified for O2 generation in space and underwater
• Safer handling in confined spaces
• Optimized for high reliability; less for cost and efficiency• Shock and vibration mil specs; 50,000 hour life
• Internal $ focused on scale up
HOGEN® H
Series
HOGEN®
C SeriesHOGEN®
S Series
HOGEN®
GCM Series
5
Environmental Impact
• Only 4% of H2 globally is from non-fossil sources
• Renewable hydrogen needed for decarbonization
• Example: Ammonia is largest energy consumer and GHG emitter, largely due to reforming step
6
How do we enable more renewable hydrogen penetration?
• Electrolysis reaching relevant scale• Multiple companies concepting
multi-MW systems/plants• 1-2 MW stacks for PEM and KOH
• New technology development has a 20 year time frame
• 10 years: end of researchto developed product
• 10 years: market penetration
Need to leverage/improvewhat we have today
https://www.iea.org/media/workshops/2014/hydrogenroadmap/
13HydrogenicsRobertHarvey.pdf
Hydrogenics – 45 MW plant
(CO2 emissions)
Stolten, October 2014: “The Potential Role of Hydrogen Technology for Future Mobility. How Can this Improve Our Life?”
7
Platform Iterations: Electrolysis• 4 major platform changes over ~5 orders of magnitude• New technology has to go through similar progression
Existing PEM Electrolysis Designs
(4 active area platforms) Future Platforms:
SMR Scale
Nascent
Technolo
gy
8
Reliability and manufacturing
• Scale up is capital intensive; need reliability and market• Underutilization of equipment, high scrap, warranty exposure
• Test component fabrication ≠ manufacturing• 25 cm2 test cell vs. >1 million cm2 (4 MW, ~1500 kg/day)
• Transition from lab to assembly floor requires different mind-set
• Need error-proof instructions• Criteria for acceptability
10 years of fielded
cells: 95% still
operational
9
NSF, DOE-BES ARPA- E, USDA DOE-EERE, NASA DoD (Navy, Air Force, Army)
Collaboration and Roadmap Strategy• Clearly define long and short term directed research pathways
• Match with agency strategy and mission
Page 9
Adv. Materials Proof of Concept Applied R&D Deployable Prototypes
High Risk Development Stage/Risk Level High Fidelity
• Leverage key competencies of partners to extend technology
• National Labs, universities, and companies as collaborators
• Internal funding to take materials and manufacturing science to product
10
Opportunities for improvement: Implemented vs. possible
Internal $’s focused
on scale up
Where
we are
Where we
could be 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1999 2015 2016
Act
ive
area
sca
le (
m2
)
% o
f b
ase
line
(qu
anti
ty/t
hic
knes
s/co
st)
Year
Stack Progression
bipolar assembly bipolar assembly - actual
membrane membrane - actual
catalyst loading catalyst loading - actual
scale (active area)
11
R&D program portfolio: 2 case studies
• Many interacting pieces
• Small parts funded under different programs
Bipolar plate MEA
• All pieces funded together
• Able to complete full development cycle
12
Bipolar plate case study - FCTO
•Evaluated and selected manufacturing techniques
•Prototyped parts and alternate coating: improved resistance to environment and lower cost
•Stack design and analysis for strength and fluid flow
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0 100 200 300 400 500
Hyd
roge
n U
pta
ke v
s. B
ase
line
Time (h)
Baseline
Post Annealed
NitridedCoated
Accelerated embrittlement study
Computational fluid dynamics
Finite element analysis &
ORNL
Commercial stack,
40% cost reduction
13
Implementation Timeline
• Bipolar plate project initiated 2009
• Subscale components and materials development: 2010-2011
• Analysis and scale up, larger active area: 2012-13
• Proton internal funding: full scale stack and system prototyping and validation: 2014-2015
• First commercial systems 2016, sited in 2017
14
Catalyst Loading Reduction – FCTO, AMO
Page 14
3M NSTFCore shell catalystsSpray deposition - UConn
• Several methods show
promise for 10x reductions500 hours operation at
<0.1 mg/cm2 loading
Brookhaven
15
Electrode integration
3M NSTF
Core shell catalystsCathode GDL w/w/out MPL
• Need to consider impact of other cell components
• Many materials optimized for fuel cell vs. electrolyzer• Wetproofing, gas vs. liquid flow
• Manufacturing maturity needs to catch up for electrolysis• Fuel cell has demonstrated continuous processes vs. batch
Anode GDL concept, DLR
16
ARPA-E Experience
• Seeds new technology and provides pathway for reduction of high risk elements
• Rigorous program management and milestones
• Proton has successfully obtained non-ARPA-E follow on funding (including EERE-FCTO)
• Transitioning learnings to existing products along the way
• Currently involved in several programs, leading one
17
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Baseline Cathode FF
Anode FF + MEA
Labor Alkaline Baseline
Alkaline FF + MEA
Alkaline Labor
% B
asel
ine
Materials only
Materials and labor
Projected PEM progression
PEM
Projected PEM progression
PEM Alkaline
Electrolysis Example: AEM: A Long Term Option?
• Need new pathways to achieve ultimate capital cost reductions
• Anion exchange membrane provides potential lower cost Flow fields have as much or greater impact than catalyst
Less mature but gaining in understanding and stability
Potential to move to new cost curve
Capex vs. Opex scenario trade: H2@Scale
18
AEM technology status – DOE, ARPA-E
• Higher currents and more stable voltages
• Lower platinum group metal content
• Still require low differential pressure and carbonate for stability
2014
2016
2017
Performance/reliability has continued to improve
LANL, Sandia, Northeastern
IIT, Georgia Tech, Pajarito,
U. New Mexico, Penn
State, Northeastern
19
Synergistic Technologies
Grid or
Renewable
Power Input
Concept
Stack & System
Scale-up
Electrochemical Conversion of N2 to Ammonia
Carbon Dioxide Pumping/Compression/Conversion
High Pressure Oxygen and Hydrogen Generation
Flow Batteries
20
Hydrogen-Iron Flow Battery• Flow batteries: very similar to electrolyzers
• Hydrogen-based systems: common parts
• Hydrogen provides flexibility (electrical or chemical feedsource)
Flow battery
Electrolyzer
Energy
storage
H2 use
Common hydrogen
electrode
21
Other ARPA-E Program Roles
• Reversible hydrogen catalyst – no precious metals• Electrode development and benchmarking
• Anion exchange membranes (IONICS program)• Characterization of device relevant parameters
• Carbon dioxide conversion to fuels (REFUEL program)• Cell stack and system integration
• Distributed ammonia production (REFUEL program)• Gap analysis for renewable hydrogen component
Provide early material access to us and perspective to partners on critical considerations
22
Benefits of Advanced Technologies
• Pathway to “technology after next” concepts
• Solve fundamental problems
• Develop capabilities
• Ability to leverage learnings in existing products
Related Technologies
Fundamental Research
End Goal
Building Blocks
Tailored Materials
Characterization Tools
Mechanistic Understanding
Integration
Electrode Development
Cell DesignDevice
ConfigurationOperating Conditions
Systems, Codes and Standards
DFT and Synthesis
Catalyst Structure
Porous Layers
Polymer Design
CoatingsMulti-scaleModeling
23
Conclusions
• The road to product and scale is long• Scientific and engineering challenges in complex mixtures
• Understanding both fundamental and applied perspectives accelerates technical progress
• Long term research guides short term improvements while existing technology provides stepping stones and infrastructure for new technology
• Collaborations and synergies need to be cultivated
ARPA-E Funding to Advance
Hydrogen Technology
NEESC Webinar
September 19, 2017
Madhav AcharyaTechnology to Market Advisor
A Brief History of ARPA-E
In 2007, The National Academies recommended Congress establish an
Advanced Research Projects Agency within the U.S. Department of Energy
1
…“The new agency proposed herein [ARPA-E] is patterned after
that model [of DARPA] and would sponsor creative, out-of-the-box,
transformational, generic energy research in those areas where
industry by itself cannot or will not undertake such sponsorship,
where risks and potential payoffs are high, and where success
could provide dramatic benefits for the nation.”…
2007America COMPETES Act Signed
2011 2012 2013 20142010
1
37
712
1620
23
ProgramsTo Date
Awards Announced
2015
32
$275 Million
(FY2012)
$280 Million
(FY2015)
500+
2016
39
$400M
(Recovery Act)
$180M
(FY11)
$251M
(FY13)
$280M
(FY14)
$291M
(FY16)
2017
Coming
soon
$280M
(FY15)
$275M
(FY12)$306M
(FY17)
ARPA-E Mission
Mission: To overcome long-term and high-risk technological barriers in the
development of energy technologies
2
Means:
‣ Identify and promote revolutionary advances in fundamental and applied
sciences
‣ Translate scientific discoveries and cutting-edge inventions into technological
innovations
‣ Accelerate transformational technological advances in areas that industry by
itself is not likely to undertake because of technical and financial uncertainty
Where Do ARPA-E Programs Come From?
3
ARPA-E Program Directors
If it works…
will it matter?
CHARGES NODES
GENI
GRIDS
HEATS
IONICS GRID DATA
Breadth of Program Portfolio
4
ELECTRICITY
GENERATION
ALPHA
FOCUSREBELS
GENSETSMOSAIC
IMPACCT
SOLAR ADEPT
RANGE
AMPED BEESTELECTROFUELS
MOVE
REMOTE
PETRO
TERRATRANSNET
NEXTCAR REFUEL
GRID &
GRID STORAGE
TRANSPORTATION &
STORAGE
OPEN 2009, 2012, & 2015 Solicitations
Complement Focused Programs
Ac
tive
A
lum
ni
EFFICIENCY &
EMISSIONS
DELTA
SHIELD
METALS
MONITOR ARID
ROOTS
ADEPTBEETITREACT
PNDIODES
ENLITENED
SWITCHES
CIRCUITS
REFUEL Program: Genesis
5
Reduce GHG Emissions Integrate Renewable Energy
Can we store renewable energy in a
form that can also help reduce
transportation emissions?
Chemical Storage Has Several Advantages
• Very high energy
density (vs batteries)
• Long duration storage
(months years)
• Utilizes existing
infrastructure
• Flexibility in end use
6
Source: IEC Electrical Storage Whitepaper
Potential “Carbon Neutral” Liquid Fuels
Fuel B.p., deg C Wt. %
H
Energy
density,
kWh/L
E0, V , %
Synthetic gasoline 69-200 16.0 9.7 - -
Biodiesel 340-375 14.0 9.2 - -
Methanol 64.7 12.6 4.67 1.18 96.6
Dimethyl ether (DME) -24 13.1 5.36 1.21
Ethanol 78.4 12.0 6.30 1.15 97.0
Formic acid (88%) 100 3.4 2.10 1.45 105.6
Ammonia -33.3 17.8 4.32 1.17 88.7
Hydrazine hydrate 114 8.1 5.40 1.61 100.2
Liquid hydrogen -252.9 100 2.54 1.23 83.0
Compressed hydrogen (700 bar) gas 100 1.55 1.23 83.0
G.Soloveichik, Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2014, 5, 1399
7
How do we make these fuels?
8
N N H HO OO C O
Air: N2, O2, CO2 Water: H2, O2
N H
H
H C
H
H
H O H
x
C
H
H
H C
H
H
HO
AMMONIA
(M)ETHANOL DIMETHYL ETHER
REFUEL: Renewable energy storage and
delivery via carbon neutral liquid fuels
Direct use (blending) in
ICE vehicles (drop-in fuel)
Direct use in stationary
gensets
Medium to long term
energy storage
Seasonal energy storage
Air
Water
Hydrogen
generation for
fueling stations
Synthesis of liquid fuels Fuels transportation Application space
• Energy delivery from remote locations
• Energy delivery from stranded sources
• Energy storage and delivery combined
Energy storage comparison
30,000 gallon underground tank
contains 200 MWh (plus 600
MMBTU CHP heat
5 MWh A123 battery in Chile
1,000kg H2 Linde storage in Germany
=
40 x
or
Capital cost ~$100K
Capital cost $50,000 - 100,000K
10Liquid fuels provide smallest footprint and CAPEX
6 x
Energy transportation capacity and losses
5.5
3.5
1.5
0.7 0.1
OHVAC HVDC Truck Train Pipeline
Electricity Liquid ammonia
Energy transmission losses (% per 1000 km)
Energy transmission capacity
(at the same capital cost)
Power
line
Compr H2
(350 bar)Liquid
NH3
Capacity 1.2 GW 6.5GW 41GW
Protective
zone
50-70
m
10 m 10 m
D. Stolten (Institute of Electrochemical Process
Engineering), BASF Science Symposium, 2015
11
Liquid pipelines have highest capacity and efficiency
Overall energy efficiency (2,000 km)
12
Electricity Ammonia
55.3% 55.4%
38.1%
Electricity transportation is more efficient…if we can use it directly
0
20
40
60
80
100
0
20
40
60
80
100
Cost of energy storage and transportation
Case study
Solar PV array 500 MW
8 hrs active, storage capacity 50%
4 GWh electricity or 120,000 kg H2
or 860 ton NH3
Delivery from Utah to East Coast
(2000 miles)
Power line capital cost $16.2M/mile
DuraTrack™ PV array
13
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
1 2 3
Deliv
ery
co
st,
$/d
ay
Sto
rage
vo
lum
e, m
3
Storage volume and energy delivery cost(including storage)
Storage volume Daily delivery cost
Electricity Compr H2 Ammonia
Hydrogen fueling station cost breakdown
Hydrogen Station Compression, Storage,
and Dispensing Technical Status and Costs.
NREL report BK-6A10-58564, 2014Possibilities for cost reduction
Liquid fuels for H2 refueling
• Smaller storage CAPEX
and footprint
• Compressor downsizing
• Modular design for
increased reliability
Liquid fuels can enable H2 refueling stations
REFUEL Awardees
15
Chemtronergy
Total Funds Allocated: $ 33M
Summary‣ Liquid fuels are ideal candidates for long term energy storage and long
distance energy delivery from renewable intermittent sources
- high energy density
- infrastructure for storage and delivery technologies in place
- can be used in fuel cells and thermal engines
‣ Hydrogen rich liquid fuels may enable hydrogen fueling infrastructure
- inexpensive, compact and safe storage
- dehydrogenation methods known
‣ Technical (reaction rate, conversion efficiency, production down scaling),
economical (electricity and capital costs) and societal (policies and public
acceptance) challenges ahead
16
Questions
Alexander Barton
Energy Specialist
NEESC
abarton@neesc.org
Dr. Katherine Ayers
Vice President, R&D
Proton Onsite
kayers@protononsite.com
NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration
Dr. Madhav Acharya
Technology-to-Market Advisor
ARPA-E
Madhav.Acharya@hq.doe.gov
top related