HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

1

NEW YORK

Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Development Plan – “Roadmap” Collaborative

Participants

New Energy New York /

Energy & Environmental Technology Application Center (E2TAC)

Pradeep Halder – Program Director

Emily Behnke – Program Assistant Director

Project Management and Plan Development

Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster:

Joel M. Rinebold – Program Director

Paul Aresta – Project Manager

Alexander C. Barton – Energy Specialist

Adam J. Brzozowski – Energy Specialist

Thomas Wolak – Energy Intern

Nathan Bruce – GIS Mapping Intern

Agencies

United States Department of Energy

United States Small Business Administration

NYC skyline – “Midtown Manhattan Skyline”, RFC Graphics, 2010, September, 2011,

http://www.pbase.com/rfcd100/image/121260213/large

Time square – “Time Square at Dusk”, Randy Kosek, 2010, September, 2011,

http://www.360cities.net/map#lat=40.75916&lng=-73.98505&name=times-square-at-dusk&zoom=20

Coca-Cola fuel cell – “Coca-Cola Refreshments in Elmsford, NY”, UTC Power, September 2011,

http://www.utcpower.com/files/FL0120_Stationary_Fuel_Cells.pdf

GM – “Chevrolet Equinox Fuel Cell Vehicles Picture”, General Motors Corporation, September, 2011,

http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/equinox-fuel-cell/photos/chevrolet_equinox-fuel-cell_group_ns_31710.html

Forklift refueling –“H2 Fueling”, Plug Power, September, 2011,

http://www.plugpower.com/Solutions/Technology/FeaturesBenefits.aspx

Forklifts – “Fuel Cell Forklifts”, Plug Power, September, 2011, http://www.plugpower.com/AboutUs.aspx

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

2

NEW YORK

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

There is the potential to generate approximately 3.89 million megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity

annually from hydrogen and fuel cell technologies at potential host sites in the State of New York,

through the development of 494 – 659 megawatts (MW) of fuel cell generation capacity. The state and

federal government have incentives to facilitate the development and use of renewable energy. The

decision on whether or not to deploy hydrogen or fuel cell technology at a given location depends largely

on the economic value, compared to other conventional or alternative/renewable technologies.

Consequently, while many sites may be technically viable for the application of fuel cell technology, this

plan provides focus for fuel cell applications that are both technically and economically viable.

Favorable locations for the development of renewable energy generation through fuel cell technology

include energy intensive commercial buildings (education, food sales, food services, inpatient healthcare,

lodging, and public order and safety), energy intensive industries, wastewater treatment plants, landfills,

wireless telecommunications sites, federal/state-owned buildings, and airport facilities with a substantial

amount of air traffic.

Currently, New York has more than 180 companies that are part of the growing hydrogen and fuel cell

industry supply chain in the Northeast region. Based on a recent study, these companies making up the

New York hydrogen and fuel cell industry are estimated to have realized approximately $292 million in

revenue and investment, contributed over $18 million in state and local tax revenue, and generated

over $166 million in gross state product from their participation in this regional energy cluster in 2010.

Eight of these companies are original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of hydrogen and/or fuel

cell systems, and were responsible for supplying 808 direct jobs and $119 million in direct revenue

and investment in 2010.

Hydrogen and fuel cell projects are becoming increasingly popular throughout the Northeast region.

These technologies are viable solutions that can meet the demand for renewable energy in New York. In

addition, the deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell technology would reduce the dependence on oil,

improve environmental performance, and increase the number of jobs within the state. This plan provides

links to relevant information to help assess, plan, and initiate hydrogen or fuel cell projects to help meet

the energy, economic, and environmental goals of the State.

Developing policies and incentives that support hydrogen and fuel cell technology will increase

deployment at sites that would benefit from on-site generation. Increased demand for hydrogen and fuel

cell technology will increase production and create jobs throughout the supply. As deployment increases,

manufacturing costs will decline and hydrogen and fuel cell technology will be in a position to then

compete in a global market without incentives. These policies and incentives can be coordinated

regionally to maintain the regional economic cluster as a global exporter for long-term growth and

economic development.

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

3

NEW YORK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................2

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................5

DRIVERS............................................................................................................................................6

ECONOMIC IMPACT ...........................................................................................................................8

POTENTIAL STATIONARY TARGETS ...................................................................................................9

Education ............................................................................................................................................ 11

Food Sales ........................................................................................................................................... 12

Food Service ....................................................................................................................................... 12

Inpatient Healthcare ............................................................................................................................ 13

Lodging ............................................................................................................................................... 14

Public Order and Safety ...................................................................................................................... 14

Energy Intensive Industries ..................................................................................................................... 15

Government Owned Buildings................................................................................................................ 16

Wireless Telecommunication Sites ......................................................................................................... 16

Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) ................................................................................................ 17

Airports ................................................................................................................................................... 18

Military ................................................................................................................................................... 19

POTENTIAL TRANSPORTATION TARGETS ......................................................................................... 21

Alternative Fueling Stations................................................................................................................ 22

Bus Transit .......................................................................................................................................... 23

Material Handling ............................................................................................................................... 23

Ground Support Equipment ................................................................................................................ 24

Ports .................................................................................................................................................... 24

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 25

APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 27

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

4

NEW YORK

Index of Tables

Table 1 - New York Economic Data 2011 .................................................................................................... 8

Table 2 - Education Data Breakdown ......................................................................................................... 12

Table 3 - Food Sales Data Breakdown........................................................................................................ 12

Table 4 - Food Services Data Breakdown .................................................................................................. 13

Table 5 -Inpatient Healthcare Data Breakdown .......................................................................................... 13

Table 6 - Lodging Data Breakdown ............................................................................................................ 14

Table 7 - Public Order and Safety Data Breakdown ................................................................................... 15

Table 8 - 2002 Data for the Energy Intensive Industry by Sector .............................................................. 16

Table 9 - Energy Intensive Industry Data Breakdown ................................................................................ 16

Table 10 - Government Owned Building Data Breakdown ........................................................................ 16

Table 11 - Wireless Telecommunications Data Breakdown ....................................................................... 17

Table 12 - Wireless Telecommunication Date Breakdown ........................................................................ 17

Table 13 -Landfill Data Breakdown ........................................................................................................... 18

Table 14 – New York Top Airports' Enplanement Count........................................................................... 19

Table 15 - Airport Data Breakdown ........................................................................................................... 19

Table 16 - Military Data Breakdown .......................................................................................................... 20

Table 17 - Average Energy Efficiency of Conventional and Fuel Cell Vehicles (mpge) ........................... 21

Table 18- Ports Data Breakdown ................................................................................................................ 24

Table 19 –Summary of Potential Fuel Cell Applications ........................................................................... 25

Index of Figures

Figure 1 - Energy Consumption by Sector .................................................................................................... 9

Figure 2 - Electric Power Generation by Primary Energy Source ................................................................ 9

Figure 3 - New York Electrical Consumption per Sector ........................................................................... 11

Figure 4 - U.S. Lodging, Energy Consumption .......................................................................................... 14

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

5

NEW YORK

INTRODUCTION

A Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Industry Development Plan was created for each state in the Northeast region

(New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maine, and New

Jersey), with support from the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE), to increase awareness

and facilitate the deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell technology. The intent of this guidance document

is to make available information regarding the economic value and deployment opportunities for

hydrogen and fuel cell technology.1

A fuel cell is a device that uses hydrogen (or a hydrogen-rich fuel such as natural gas) and oxygen to

create an electric current. The amount of power produced by a fuel cell depends on several factors,

including fuel cell type, stack size, operating temperature, and the pressure at which the gases are

supplied to the cell. Fuel cells are classified primarily by the type of electrolyte they employ, which

determines the type of chemical reactions that take place in the cell, the temperature range in which the

cell operates, the fuel required, and other factors. These characteristics, in turn, affect the applications for

which these cells are most suitable. There are several types of fuel cells currently in use or under

development, each with its own advantages, limitations, and potential applications. These technologies

and applications are identified in Appendix VII.

Fuel cells have the potential to replace the internal combustion engine (ICE) in vehicles and provide

power for stationary and portable power applications. Fuel cells are in commercial service as distributed

power plants in stationary applications throughout the world, providing thermal energy and electricity to

power homes and businesses. Fuel cells are also used in transportation applications, such as automobiles,

trucks, buses, and other equipment. Fuel cells for portable applications, which are currently in

development, can provide power for laptop computers and cell phones.

Fuel cells are cleaner and more efficient than traditional combustion-based engines and power plants;

therefore, less energy is needed to provide the same amount of power. Typically, stationary fuel cell

power plants are fueled with natural gas or other hydrogen rich fuel. Natural gas is widely available

throughout the northeast, is relatively inexpensive, and is primarily a domestic energy supply.

Consequently, natural gas shows the greatest potential to serve as a transitional fuel for the near future

hydrogen economy. 2

Stationary fuel cells use a fuel reformer to convert the natural gas to near pure

hydrogen for the fuel cell stack. Because hydrogen can be produced using a wide variety of resources

found here in the U.S., including natural gas, biomass material, and through electrolysis using electricity

produced from indigenous sources, energy produced from a fuel cell can be considered renewable and

will reduce dependence on imported fuel. 3,4

When pure hydrogen is used to power a fuel cell, the only

by-products are water and heat—no pollutants or greenhouse gases (GHG) are produced.

1 Key stakeholders are identified in Appendix III

2 EIA,”Commercial Sector Energy Price Estimates, 2009”,

http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/hf.jsp?incfile=sep_sum/html/sum_pr_com.html, August 2011 3 Electrolysis is the process of using an electric current to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. 4 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/education/, August 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

6

NEW YORK

DRIVERS

The Northeast hydrogen and fuel cell industry, while still emerging, currently has an economic impact of

over $1 Billion of total revenue and investment. New York has eight original equipment manufacturers

(OEM) of hydrogen/fuel cell systems, giving the state a significant direct economic impact, in addition to

benefiting from secondary impacts of indirect and induced employment and revenue.5 Furthermore, New

York has a definitive and attractive economic development opportunity to greatly increase its economic

participation in the hydrogen and fuel cell industry within the Northeast region and worldwide. An

economic “SWOT” assessment for New York is provided in Appendix VIII.

Industries in the Northeast, including those in New York, are facing increased pressure to reduce costs,

fuel consumption, and emissions that may be contributing to climate change. Currently, New York’s

businesses pay $0.146 per kWh for electricity on average; this is the fourth highest cost of electricity in

the U.S.6 New York’s has major load centers, the high cost of electricity, concerns over regional air

quality, available federal tax incentives, and legislative mandates in New York and neighboring states

have resulted in renewed interest in the development of efficient renewable energy. Incentives designed

to assist individuals and organizations in energy conservation and the development of renewable energy

are currently offered within the state. Appendix IV contains outlines of New York’s incentives and

renewable energy programs. Some specific factors that are driving the market for hydrogen and fuel cell

technology in New York include the following:

The New York Public Service Commission (PSC) adopted a Renewable Portfolio Standard

(RPS) in September 2004 and issued implementation rules in April 2005. As originally designed,

New York's RPS had a renewables target of 25 percent of state electricity consumption by 2013,

but was expanded in January 2010 to 30 percent by 2015 by order of the PSC. Of this 30 percent,

approximately 20.7 percent of the target will be derived from existing renewable energy facilities

and one percent (1 percent) of the target is expected to be met through voluntary green power

sales in 2015. – promotes stationary power and transportation applications.

7

New York is one of the states in the ten-state region that is part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas

Initiative (RGGI), the nation’s first mandatory market-based program to reduce emissions of

carbon dioxide (CO2). RGGI's goals are to stabilize and cap emissions at 188 million tons

annually from 2009-2014 and to reduce CO2-emissions by 2.5 percent per year from 2015-2018.8

– promotes stationary power and transportation applications.

New York Governor George Pataki signed Executive Order No. 111 to promote “Green and

Clean” State Buildings and Vehicles on June 10, 2001. The Renewable- Power Procurement component (which recognizes fuel cells and fuel cells using renewable fuels) of this order

5 There are now nine total OEMs in New York, however data within this plan reflects the eight OEMs originally used within the

model. Nine OEMs will increase the impact of the cluster and will be used when the model is run for the next year. 6 EIA, Average Retail Price of Electricity to Ultimate Customers by End-Use Sector, by State,

http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html 7 DSIRE, “Renewable Portfolio Standards,”

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=NY03R&re=1&ee=1, September, 2011 8 Seacoastonline.come, “RGGI: Quietly setting a standard”,

http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090920/NEWS/909200341/-1/NEWSMAP, September 20, 2009

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

7

NEW YORK

commits the state government to purchase a portion of its electric power from renewable energy

resources – promotes stationary power applications.9

Net Metering is available on a first-come, first-served basis to customers of the state's major

investor-owned utilities, subject to technology, system size and aggregate capacity limitations –

promotes stationary power applications.10

The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) administers

the Clean Fueled Bus Program, which provides funds to New York state and local transit

agencies, municipalities, and schools for up to 100 percent of the incremental cost of purchasing

new alternative fuel buses and associated infrastructure – promotes transportation applications.11

Through NYSERDA, financial incentives are available to support the installation and operation

of continuous duty fuel cell systems in New York State, with up to $1 million available for fuel

cell systems rated larger than 25 kW and $50,000 available for fuel cell systems rated at 25 kW or

less. Funding is on a first-come, first-served basis until December 31, 2015, or until all funding

has been fully committed.12

– promotes stationary power applications.

NYSERDA administers the New York State Clean Cities Challenge, which awards funds to New

York Clean Cities Coalition members that acquire alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) or install AFV

fueling or charging infrastructure. Funds are awarded on a competitive basis and may be used to

cost-share up to 75 percent of the proposed project, including the incremental cost of purchasing

AFVs, fueling and charging equipment installation costs, and the incremental costs associated

with bulk alternative fuel purchases – promotes transportation applications.13

NYSERDA manages the New York State Clean Cities Sharing Network (Network), which

provides technical, policy, and program information about AFVs, including information about tax

incentives, fueling stations, case studies, and contact information for the Clean Cities program

and other industry leaders. The Network also organizes and sponsors technical workshops –

promotes transportation applications.14

9 DSIRE, “New York – Renewable Procurement Policy”,

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=NY08R&re=1&ee=1, September, 2011 10

DSIRE, “New York – Net Metering,”

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=NY05R&re=1&ee=1, September, 2011 11

EERE, “Alternative Fuel Bus and Infrastructure Funding”, http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/law/NY/5318, September,

2011 12

NYSERDA, “RPS Customer-sited tier fuel cell program”, http://www.nyserda.org/funding/2157pon.asp, November, 2011 13

EERE, “Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Funding ”,

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/law/NY/5321, September 10, 2011 14

EERE, “Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Technical Assistance ”, http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/law/NY/5322,

September, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

8

NEW YORK

ECONOMIC IMPACT

The hydrogen and fuel cell industry has direct, indirect, and induced impacts on local and regional

economies. 15

A new hydrogen and/or fuel cell project directly affects the area’s economy through the

purchase of goods and services, generation of land use revenue, taxes or payments in lieu of taxes, and

employment. Secondary effects include both indirect and induced economic effects resulting from the

circulation of the initial spending through the local economy, economic diversification, changes in

property values, and the use of indigenous resources.

New York is home to approximately 180 companies that are part of the growing hydrogen and fuel cell

industry supply chain in the Northeast region. Appendices V and VI list the hydrogen and fuel cell

supply chain companies and OEMs in New York. Realizing over $292 million in revenue and investment

from their participation in this regional cluster in 2010, these companies include manufacturing, parts

distributing, supplying of industrial gas, engineering based research and development (R&D), coating

applications, managing of venture capital funds, etc. 16

Furthermore, the hydrogen and fuel cell industry is

estimated to have contributed over $18 million in state and local tax revenue, and over $166 million in

gross state product. Table 1 shows New York’s impact in the Northeast region’s hydrogen and fuel cell

industry as of April 2011.

Table 1 - New York Economic Data 2011

New York Economic Data

Supply Chain Members 182

Direct Rev ($M) 119.13

Direct Jobs 808

Direct Labor Income ($M) 65.4

Indirect Rev ($M) 78.34

Indirect Jobs 330

Indirect Labor Income ($M) 27.2

Induced Revenue ($M) 93.07

Induced Jobs 583

Induced Labor Income ($M) 32.6

Total Revenue ($M) 290.53

Total Jobs 1,721

Total Labor Income ($M) 125.23

In addition, there are over 118,000 people employed across 3,500 companies within the Northeast

registered as part of the motor vehicle industry. Approximately 54,280 of these individuals and 1,470 of

these companies are located in New York. If newer/emerging hydrogen and fuel cell technology were to

gain momentum within the transportation sector, the estimated employment rate for the hydrogen and fuel

cell industry could grow significantly in the region.17

15

Indirect impacts are the estimated output (i.e., revenue), employment and labor income in other business (i.e., not-OEMs) that

are associated with the purchases made by hydrogen and fuel cell OEMs, as well as other companies in the sector’s supply chain.

Induced impacts are the estimated output, employment and labor income in other businesses (i.e., non-OEMs) that are associated

with the purchases by workers related to the hydrogen and fuel cell industry. 16

Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster Supply Chain Database Search, http://neesc.org/resources/?type=1,

September, 2011 17 NAICS Codes: Motor Vehicle – 33611, Motor Vehicle Parts – 3363

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

9

NEW YORK

POTENTIAL STATIONARY TARGETS

In 2009, New York consumed the equivalent of 1,118.8 million megawatt-hours of energy amongst the

transportation, residential, industrial, and commercial sectors.18

Electricity consumption in New York

was approximately 140 million MWh, and is forecasted to grow at a rate of 0.83 percent annually over the

next decade. 19;20

Figure 1 illustrates the percent of total energy consumed by each sector in New York.

A more detailed breakout of energy use is provided in Appendix II.

This demand relies on both in-state resources and imports of power over the region’s transmission system

to serve electricity to customers. Net electrical demand in New York was approximately 16,000 MW in

2009 and is projected to increase by approximately 800 MW by 2015. The state’s overall electric demand

is forecasted to grow at a rate of 0.83 percent annually over the next decade. Demand for new electric

capacity as well as a replacement of older less efficient base-load generation facilities is expected. 21 As

shown in Figure 2, natural gas was the second most used energy source for electricity consumed in New

York for 2009.22

18

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), “State Energy Data System”,

“http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/hf.jsp?incfile=sep_sum/html/rank_use.html”, August 2011 19

EIA, “Electric Power Annual 2009 – State Data Tables”, www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sprdshts.html, January, 2011 20

ISO New York, “2011 ICAP – RLGF Summary”,

http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/committees/bic_icapwg_lftf/meeting_materials/2010-12-09/2011_ICAP_-

_RLGF_Summary_V3.pdf, December 9, 2010 21 ISO New York, “Power Trends 2011”,

http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/newsroom/power_trends/Power_Trends_2011.pdf, January, 2011 22 EIA, “New York Electricity Profile 2010”, http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/new_york.html, October, 2011

Figure 1 - Energy Consumption by

Sector

Figure 2 - Electric Power Generation

by Primary Energy Source

Residential

29%

Commercial

32%

Industrial

10%

Transportatio

n

29%

Coal

9.9%

Petroleum

1.5%

Natural Gas

35.6%

Nuclear

30.5%

Hydroelectric

18.5%

Other

Renewables

3.5%

Other

0.6%

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

10

NEW YORK

Fuel cell systems have many advantages over other conventional technologies, including:

High fuel-to-electricity efficiency (> 40 percent) utilizing hydrocarbon fuels;

Overall system efficiency of 85 to 93 percent;

Reduction of noise pollution;

Reduction of air pollution;

Often do not require new transmission;

Siting is not controversial; and

If near point of use, waste heat can be captured and used. Combined heat and power (CHP)

systems are more efficient and can reduce facility energy costs over applications that use separate

heat and central station power systems.23

Fuel cells can be deployed as a CHP technology that provides both power and thermal energy, and can

nearly double energy efficiency at a customer site, typically from 35 to 50 percent. The value of CHP

includes reduced transmission and distribution costs, reduced fuel use and associated emissions.24

Based

on the targets identified within this plan, there is the potential to develop at least approximately 494 MWs

of stationary fuel cell generation capacity in New York, which would provide the following benefits,

annually:

Production of approximately 3.89 million MWh of electricity

Production of approximately 10.49 million MMBTUs of thermal energy

Reduction of CO2 emissions of approximately 1.40 million (electric generation only)25

For the purpose of this plan, potential applications have been explored with a focus on fuel cells that have

a capacity between 300 kW to 400 kW. However, smaller fuel cells are potentially viable for specific

applications. Facilities that have electrical and thermal requirements that closely match the output of the

fuel cells potentially provide the best opportunity for the application of a fuel cell. Facilities that may be

good candidates for the application of a fuel cell include commercial buildings with potentially high

electricity consumption, selected government buildings, public works facilities, and energy intensive

industries.

Commercial building types with high electricity consumption have been identified as potential locations

for on-site generation and CHP application based on data from the Energy Information Administration’s

(EIA) Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). These selected building types

making up the CBECS subcategory within the commercial industry include:

Education

Food Sales

Food Services

Inpatient Healthcare

Lodging

Public Order & Safety26

23 FuelCell2000, “Fuel Cell Basics”, www.fuelcells.org/basics/apps.html, July, 2011 24 “Distributed Generation Market Potential: 2004 Update Connecticut and Southwest Connecticut”, ISE, Joel M. Rinebold,

ECSU, March 15, 2004 25 Replacement of conventional fossil fuel generating capacity with methane fuel cells could reduce carbon dioxide (CO2)

emissions by between approximately 100 and 600 lb/MWh: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), eGRID2010 Version

1.1 Year 2007 GHG Annual Output Emission Rates, Annual non-baseload output emission rates (NPCC New England); FuelCell

Energy, DFC 300 Product sheet, http://www.fuelcellenergy.com/files/FCE%20300%20Product%20Sheet-lo-rez%20FINAL.pdf;

UTC Power, PureCell Model 400 System Performance Characteristics, http://www.utcpower.com/products/purecell400

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

11

NEW YORK

The commercial building types identified above represent top principal building activity classifications

that reported the highest value for electricity consumption on a per building basis and have a potentially

high load factor for the application of CHP. Appendix II further defines New York’s estimated electrical

consumption per each sector. As illustrated in Figure 3, these selected building types within the

commercial sector are estimated to account for approximately 18 percent of New York’s total electrical

consumption. Graphical representations of potential targets identified are depicted in Appendix I.

Figure 3 – New York Electrical Consumption per Sector

Education

There are approximately 1,990 non-public schools and 5,001 public schools (327 of which are considered

high schools with 100 or more students enrolled) in New York.27,28

High schools operate for a longer

period of time daily due to extracurricular after school activities, such as clubs and athletics.

Furthermore, five of these schools have swimming pools, which may make these sites especially

attractive because it would increase the utilization of both the electrical and thermal output offered by a

fuel cell. There are also 279 colleges and universities in New York. Colleges and universities have

facilities for students, faculty, administration, and maintenance crews that typically include dormitories,

cafeterias, gyms, libraries, and athletic departments – some with swimming pools. Of these 606 locations

(327 high schools and 279 colleges), 541 are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I

– Figure 1: Education).

Educational establishments in New York have already shown interest in fuel cell technology. Examples

of existing or planned fuel cell applications in the state include high schools in Liverpool and East

Rochester, and colleges such as Rochester Institute of Technology and the State University of New York

College of Environmental Science and Forestry.

26

As defined by CBECS, Public Order & Safety facilities are buildings used for the preservation of law and order or public

safety. Although these sites are usually described as government facilities they are referred to as commercial buildings because

their similarities in energy usage with the other building sites making up the CBECS data. 27 EIA, Description of CBECS Building Types, www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html 28 Public schools are classified as magnets, charters, alternative schools and special facilities

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

12

NEW YORK

Table 2 - Education Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

6,991

(38)

541

(25)

250

(36)

75.0

(36)

591,300

(36)

1,592,568

(36)

150,782

(35)

Food Sales

There are over 25,000 businesses in New York known to be engaged in the retail sale of food. Food sales

establishments are potentially good candidates for fuel cells based on their electrical demand and thermal

requirements for heating and refrigeration. Approximately 485 of these sites are considered larger food

sales businesses with approximately 60 or more employees at their site.29

Of these 485 businesses, 415

are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 2: Food Sales).30

The application

of a large fuel cell (>300) at a small convenience store may not be economically viable based on the

electric demand and operational requirements; however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be appropriate.

Popular grocery chains such as Price Chopper, Supervalu, Wholefoods, and Stop and Shop have shown

interest in powering their stores with fuel cells in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York.31

Price

Chopper, located in Glenville, New York, is a location where a fuel cell power plant has been installed.

In addition, grocery distribution centers, such as Wal-Mart’s distribution center in Sharon Springs, New

York, or Rite Aid’s distribution center, in Liverpool, New York, are prime targets for the application of

hydrogen and fuel cell technology for both stationary power and material handling equipment.

Table 3 - Food Sales Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

25,000

(49)

415

(35)

415

(35)

124.5

(35)

981,558

(35)

2,643,663

(35)

250,297

(39)

Food Service

There are over 30,000 businesses in New York that can be classified as food service establishments

because they are used for the preparation and sale of food and beverages for consumption.32

Approximately 170 of these sites are considered larger restaurant businesses with approximately 130 or

more employees at their site and are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure

3: Food Services).33

The application of a large fuel cell (>300 kW) at smaller restaurants with less than

130 workers may not be economically viable based on the electric demand and operational requirements;

however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be appropriate to meet hot water and space heating

29

On average, food sale facilities consume 43,000 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel cell technology

(>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations show food sales

facilities employing more than 61 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the application of a larger fuel cell. 30 EIA, Description of CBECS Building Types, www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html 31 Clean Energy States Alliance (CESA), “Fuel Cells for Supermarkets – Cleaner Energy with Fuel Cell Combined Heat and

Power Systems”, Benny Smith, www.cleanenergystates.org/assets/Uploads/BlakeFuelCellsSupermarketsFB.pdf 32 EIA, Description of CBECS Building Types, www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html 33

On average, food service facilities consume 20,300 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel cell

technology (>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations show

food service facilities employing more than 130 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the application of a larger fuel

cell.

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

13

NEW YORK

requirements. A significant portion (18 percent) of the energy consumed in a commercial food service

operation can be attributed to the domestic hot water heating load.34

In other parts of the U.S., popular

chains, such as McDonalds, are beginning to show an interest in the smaller sized fuel cell units for the

provision of electricity and thermal energy, including domestic water heating.35

Table 4 - Food Services Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

30,000

(46)

170

(44)

170

(44)

51

(44)

402,084

(44)

1,082,946

(44)

102,531

(44)

Inpatient Healthcare

There are over 1,600 inpatient healthcare facilities in New York; 250 of which are classified as

hospitals.36

Of these 250 locations, 165 are located in communities serviced by natural gas and contain

100 or more beds onsite (Appendix I – Figure 4: Inpatient Healthcare). Hospitals represent an excellent

opportunity for the application of fuel cells because they require a high availability factor of electricity for

lifesaving medical devices and operate 24/7 with a relatively flat load curve. Furthermore, medical

equipment, patient rooms, sterilized/operating rooms, data centers, and kitchen areas within these

facilities are often required to be in operational conditions at all times which maximizes the use of

electricity and thermal energy from the fuel cell. Nationally, hospital energy costs have increased 56

percent from $3.89 per square foot in 2003 to $6.07 per square foot for 2010, partially due to the

increased cost of energy.37

Examples of healthcare facilities with planned or operational fuel cells include St. Francis, Stamford, and

Waterbury Hospitals in Connecticut, and North Central Bronx Hospital in New York.

Table 5 -Inpatient Healthcare Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

1,609

(40)

165

(39)

165

(39)

49.5

(39)

390,258

(39)

1,051,095

(39)

99,516

(43)

34 “Case Studies in Restaurant Water Heating”, Fisher, Donald, http://eec.ucdavis.edu/ACEEE/2008/data/papers/9_243.pdf, 2008 35

Sustainable business Oregon, “ClearEdge sustains brisk growth”,

http://www.sustainablebusinessoregon.com/articles/2010/01/clearedge_sustains_brisk_growth.html, May 8, 2011 36 EIA, Description of CBECS Building Types, www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html 37

BetterBricks, “http://www.betterbricks.com/graphics/assets/documents/BB_Article_EthicalandBusinessCase.pdf”, Page 1,

August 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

14

NEW YORK

Office

Equipment, 4% Ventilation, 4%

Refrigeration, 3%

Lighting, 11%

Cooling, 13%

Space Heating ,

33%

Water Heating ,

18%

Cooking, 5% Other, 9%

Lodging

There are over 1,922 establishments specializing

in travel/lodging accommodations that include

hotels, motels, or inns in New York.

Approximately 347 of these establishments have

150 or more rooms onsite, and can be classified as

“larger sized” lodging that may have additional

attributes, such as heated pools, exercise facilities,

and/or restaurants. 38

Of these 347 locations, 199

employ more than 94 workers and are located in

communities serviced by natural gas. 39

As shown

in Figure 4, more than 60 percent of total energy

use at a typical lodging facility is due to lighting,

space heating, and water heating. 40

The

application of a large fuel cell (>300 kW) at

hotel/resort facilities with less than 94 employees

may not be economically viable based on the

electrical demand and operational requirement;

however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be

appropriate. Popular hotel chains such as the

Hilton and Starwood Hotels have shown interest in

powering their establishments with fuel cells in

New Jersey and New York.

New York also has 636 facilities identified as convalescent homes, 58 of which have a bed capacities

greater than, or equal to 150 units, and are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I –

Figure 5: Lodging). 41

Table 6 - Lodging Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

2,558

(32)

76

(9)

76

(9)

22.8

(9)

607,856

(9)

1,637,160

(9)

155,003

(32)

Public Order and Safety

There are approximately 1,045 facilities in New York that can be classified as public order and safety;

these include 334 fire stations, 445 police stations, 198 state police stations, and 83 prisons. 42,43

Approximately, 173 of these locations employ more than 210 workers and are located in communities

38 EPA, “CHP in the Hotel and Casino Market Sector”, www.epa.gov/chp/documents/hotel_casino_analysis.pdf, December, 2005 39

On average lodging facilities consume 28,000 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel cell technology

(>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations show lodging

facilities employing more than 94 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the application of a larger fuel cell. 40 National Grid, “Managing Energy Costs in Full-Service Hotels”,

www.nationalgridus.com/non_html/shared_energyeff_hotels.pdf, 2004 41 Assisted-Living-List, “List of 675 Nursing Homes in New York (NY)”, http://assisted-living-list.com/ny--nursing-homes/,

September, 2011 42 EIA, Description of CBECS Building Types, www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html 43 USACOPS – The Nations Law Enforcement Site, www.usacops.com/me/

Figure 4 - U.S. Lodging, Energy Consumption

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

15

NEW YORK

serviced by natural gas.44,45

These applications may represent favorable opportunities for the application

of a larger fuel cell (>300 kW), which could provide heat and uninterrupted power. 46,47

The sites

identified (Appendix I – Figure 6: Public Order and Safety) will have special value to provide increased

reliability to mission critical facilities associated with public safety and emergency response during grid

outages. The application of a large fuel cell (>300 kW) at public order and safety facilities with less than

210 employees may not be economically viable based on the electrical demand and operational

requirement; however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be appropriate. Central Park Police Station in

New York City, New York is presently powered by a 200 kW fuel cell system.

Table 7 - Public Order and Safety Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

1,045

(32)

173

(55)

173

(55)

51.9

(55)

409,180

(55)

1,102,057

(5)

104,341

(58)

Energy Intensive Industries

As shown in Table 2, energy intensive industries with high electricity consumption (which on average is

4.8 percent of annual operating costs) have been identified as potential locations for the application of a

fuel cell.48

In New York, there are approximately 1,647 of these industrial facilities that are involved in

the manufacture of aluminum, chemicals, forest products, glass, metal casting, petroleum, coal products

or steel and employ 25 or more employees.49

Of these 1,647 locations, 1,401 are located in communities

serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 7: Energy Intensive Industries).

44

CBECS,“Table C14”, http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003set19/2003pdf/alltables.pdf,

November, 2011 45

On average, public order and safety facilities consume 12,400 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel

cell technology (>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations

show public order and safety facilities employing more than 212 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the

application of a larger fuel cell. 45 EIA, Description of CBECS Building Types, www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html 46

2,628,000 / 12,400 = 211.94 47

CBECS,“Table C14”, http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003set19/2003pdf/alltables.pdf,

November, 2011 48 EIA, “Electricity Generation Capability”, 1999 CBECS, www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/pba99/comparegener.html 49 Proprietary market data

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

16

NEW YORK

Table 8 - 2002 Data for the Energy Intensive Industry by Sector50

NAICS Code Sector Energy Consumption per Dollar Value of Shipments (kWh)

325 Chemical manufacturing 2.49

322 Pulp and Paper 4.46

324110 Petroleum Refining 4.72

311 Food manufacturing 0.76

331111 Iron and steel 8.15

321 Wood Products 1.23

3313 Alumina and aluminum 3.58

327310 Cement 16.41

33611 Motor vehicle manufacturing 0.21

3315 Metal casting 1.64

336811 Shipbuilding and ship repair 2.05

3363 Motor vehicle parts manufacturing 2.05

Companies such as Coca-Cola, Johnson & Johnson, and Pepperidge Farms in Connecticut, New Jersey,

and New York have installed fuel cells to help supply energy to their facilities.

Table 9 - Energy Intensive Industry Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

1,647

(35)

140

(33)

140

(33)

42

(33)

331,128

(33)

891,838

(33)

84,438

(38)

Government Owned Buildings

Buildings operated by the federal government can be found at 502 locations in New York; 41 of these

properties are actively owned, rather than leased, by the federal government and are located in

communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 8: Federal Government Operated Buildings).

There are also a number of buildings owned and operated by the State of New York. The application of

fuel cell technology at government owned buildings would assist in balancing load requirements at these

sites and offer a unique value for active and passive public education associated with the high usage of

these public buildings.

Table 10 - Government Owned Building Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

502

(40)

41

(46)

41

(46)

12.3

(46)

16,556

(46)

261,181

(46)

24,728

(50)

Wireless Telecommunication Sites

Telecommunications companies rely on electricity to run call centers, cell phone towers, and other vital

equipment. In New York, there are approximately 1,514 telecommunications and/or wireless company

tower sites (Appendix I – Figure 9: Telecommunication Sites). Any loss of power at these locations may

50 EPA, “Energy Trends in Selected Manufacturing Sectors”, www.epa.gov/sectors/pdf/energy/ch2.pdf, March 2007

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

17

NEW YORK

result in a loss of service to customers; thus, having reliable power is critical. Each individual site

represents an opportunity to provide back-up power for continuous operation through the application of

on-site back-up generation powered by hydrogen and fuel cell technology. It is an industry standard to

install units capable of supplying 48-72 hours of backup power, which is typically accomplished with

batteries or conventional emergency generators.51

The deployment of fuel cells at selected

telecommunication sites will have special value to provide increased reliability to critical sites associated

with emergency communications and homeland security. An example of a telecommunication site that

utilizes fuel cell technology to provide backup power is a T-Mobile facility located in Storrs, Connecticut.

Table 11 - Wireless Telecommunications Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

1,514

(38)

151

(38) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) There are 84 WWTPs in New York that have design flows ranging from 2,600 gallons per day (GPD) to

88 million gallons per day (MGD); 14 of these facilities average between 3 – 88 MGD. WWTPs

typically operate 24/7 and may be able to utilize the thermal energy from the fuel cell to process fats, oils,

and grease.52

WWTPs account for approximately three percent of the electric load in the U.S.53

Digester

gas produced at WWTP’s, which is usually 60 percent methane, can serve as a fuel substitute for natural

gas to power fuel cells. Anaerobic digesters generally require a wastewater flow greater than three MGD

for an economy of scale to collect and use the methane.54

Most facilities currently represent a lost

opportunity to capture and use the digestion of methane emissions created from their operations

(Appendix I – Figure 10: Solid and Liquid Waste Sites). 55,56

A 200 kW fuel cell power plant in Yonkers, New York, was the world’s first commercial fuel cell to run

on waste gas created at a wastewater treatment plant. The fuel cell generates about 1,600 MWh of

electricity a year, and reduces methane emissions released to the environment.57

Table 12 - Wireless Telecommunication Date Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

84

(15)

2

(13)

2

(13)

0.6

(13)

4,730

(13)

12,741

(13)

1,206

(14)

51 ReliOn, Hydrogen Fuel Cell: Wireless Applications”, www.relion-inc.com/pdf/ReliOn_AppsWireless_2010.pdf, May 4, 2011 52

“Beyond Zero Net Energy: Case Studies of Wastewater Treatment for Energy and Resource Production”, Toffey, Bill,

September 2010, http://www.awra-pmas.memberlodge.org/Resources/Documents/Beyond_NZE_WWT-Toffey-9-16-2010.pdf 53

EPA, Wastewater Management Fact Sheet, “Introduction”, July, 2006 54 EPA, Wastewater Management Fact Sheet, www.p2pays.org/energy/WastePlant.pdf, July, 2006 55 “GHG Emissions from Wastewater Treatment and Biosolids Management”, Beecher, Ned, November 20, 2009,

www.des.state.nh.us/organization/divisions/water/wmb/rivers/watershed_conference/documents/2009_fri_climate_2.pdf 56 EPA, Wastewater Management Fact Sheet, www.p2pays.org/energy/WastePlant.pdf, May 4, 2011 57 NYPA, “WHAT WE DO – Fuel Cells”, www.nypa.gov/services/fuelcells.htm, August 8, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

18

NEW YORK

Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP)

There are 83 landfills in New York identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through

their LMOP program: 40 of which are operational, six are candidates, and 45 are considered potential

sites for the production and recovery of methane gas. 58,59

The amount of methane emissions released by a

given site is dependent upon the amount of material in the landfill and the amount of time the material has

been in place. Similar to WWTPs, methane emissions from landfills could be captured and used as a fuel

to power a fuel cell system. In 2009, municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills were responsible for

producing approximately 17 percent of human-related methane emissions in the nation. These locations

could produce renewable energy and help manage the release of methane (Appendix I – Figure 10: Solid

and Liquid Waste Sites).

Table 13 -Landfill Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

83

(39)

5

(33)

5

(33)

1.5

(33)

11,826

(33)

31,851

(33)

3,016

(41)

Airports

During peak air travel times in the U.S., there are approximately 50,000 airplanes in the sky each day.

Ensuring safe operations of commercial and private aircrafts are the responsibility of air traffic

controllers. Modern software, host computers, voice communication systems, and instituted full scale

glide path angle capabilities assist air traffic controllers in tracking and communicating with aircrafts;

consequently, reliable electricity is extremely important.60

There are approximately 395 airports in New York, including 147 that are open to the public and have

scheduled services. Of those 147 airports, 19 (Table 3) have 2,500 or more passengers enplaned each

year and are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 11: Commercial

Airports). An example, of an airport currently hosting a fuel cell power plant to provide backup power is

Albany International Airport located in Albany, New York.

58

Due to size, individual sites may have more than one potential, candidate, or operational project. 59 LMOP defines a candidate landfill as “one that is accepting waste or has been closed for five years or less, has at least one

million tons of waste, and does not have an operational or, under-construction project.”EPA, “Landfill Methane Outreach

Program”, www.epa.gov/lmop/basic-info/index.html, April 7, 2011 60 Howstuffworks.com, “How Air Traffic Control Works”, Craig, Freudenrich,

http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/air-traffic-control5.htm, May 4, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

19

NEW YORK

Table 14 – New York Top Airports' Enplanement Count

Airport61

Total Enplanement in 2000

John F. Kennedy International 16,155,437

LaGuardia 12,697,208

Buffalo Niagara International 2,140,002

Albany International 1,407,092

Great Rochester International 1,218,403

Long Island MacArthur 1,120,686

Syracuse Hancock International 1,060,746

Westchester County 507,145

Stewart International 274,126

Binghamton Regional, Edwin A. Link Field 128,827

Elmira/Corning Regional 112,866

Tompkins County 99,861

Chautauqua County / Jamestown 18,298

Clinton County 9,126

Duchess County 7,508

Oneida County 4,774

Adirondack Regional 4,342

Massena International, Richards Field 3,715

Watertown International 2,710

Seven of New York’s 395 airports are considered “Joint-Use” airports. Albany International (ALB),

Stewart International (SWF), Niagara Falls International (IAG), Schenectady County (SCH), Syracuse

Hancock International (SYR), Francis S Gabreski (FOK) and Westchester County (HPN) are facilities

where the military department authorizes use of the military runway for public airport services. Army

Aviation Support Facilities (AASF), located at these sites are used by the Army to provide aircraft and

equipment readiness, train and utilize military personnel, conduct flight training and operations, and

perform field level maintenance. These locations represent favorable opportunities for the application of

uninterruptible power for necessary services associated with national defense and emergency response.

Furthermore, all of these sites are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure

11: Commercial Airports).

Table 15 - Airport Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

395

(47)

22 (7)

(44)

22

(44)

6.6

(44)

52,034

(44)

140,146

(44)

13,269

(42)

61 Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “New York Transportation Profile”,

www.bts.gov/publications/state_transportation_statistics/new_york/pdf/entire.pdf, September, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

20

NEW YORK

Military The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) is the largest funding organization in terms of supporting fuel

cell activities for military applications in the world. DOD is using fuel cells for:

Stationary units for power supply in bases.

Fuel cell units in transport applications.

Portable units for equipping individual soldiers or group of soldiers.

In a collaborative partnership with the DOE, the DOD plans to install and operate 18 fuel cell backup

power systems at eight of its military installations, two of which are located within the Northeast region

(New York and New Jersey).62

In addition, Fort Drum, Fort Hamilton, and Watervliet Arsenal are

potential sites for the application of hydrogen and fuel cell technology (Appendix I – Figure 11:

Commercial Airports).63

Table 16 - Military Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

3

(21)

3

(21)

3

(21)

0.9

(21)

7,096

(21)

19,111

(21)

1,809

(25)

62 Fuel Cell Today, “US DoD to Install Fuel cell Backup Power Systems at Eight Military Installations”,

http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/online/news/articles/2011-07/US-DOD-FC-Backup-Power-Systems, July 20, 2011 63

Naval Submarine Base New London, “New London Acreage and Buildings”,

http://www.cnic.navy.mil/NewLondon/About/AcreageandBuildings/index.htm, September 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

21

NEW YORK

POTENTIAL TRANSPORTATION TARGETS

Transportation is responsible for one-fourth of the total global GHG emissions and consumes 75 percent

of the world’s oil production. In 2010, the U.S. used 21 million barrels of non-renewable petroleum each

day. Roughly 29 percent of New York’s energy consumption is due to demands of the transportation

sector, including gasoline and on-highway diesel petroleum for automobiles, cars, trucks, and buses. A

small percent of non-renewable petroleum is used for jet and ship fuel.64

The current economy in the U.S. is dependent on hydrocarbon energy sources and any disruption or

shortage of this energy supply will severely affect many energy related activities, including

transportation. As oil and other non-sustainable hydrocarbon energy resources become scarce, energy

prices will increase and the reliability of supply will be reduced. Government and industry are now

investigating the use of hydrogen and renewable energy as a replacement of hydrocarbon fuels.

Hydrogen-fueled fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) have many advantages over conventional

technology, including:

Quiet operation;

Near zero emissions of controlled pollutants such as nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide,

hydrocarbon gases or particulates;

Substantial (30 to 50 percent) reduction in GHG emissions on a well-to-wheel basis compared to

conventional gasoline or gasoline-hybrid vehicles when the hydrogen is produced by

conventional methods such as natural gas; and 100 percent when hydrogen is produced from a

clean energy source;

Ability to fuel vehicles with indigenous energy sources which reduces dependence on imported

energy and adds to energy security; and

Higher efficiency than conventional vehicles (See Table 4).65,66

Table 17 - Average Energy Efficiency of Conventional and Fuel Cell Vehicles (mpge67

)

Passenger Car Light Truck Transit Bus

Hydrogen Gasoline Hybrid Gasoline Hydrogen Gasoline Hydrogen Fuel Cell Diesel

52 50 29.3 49.2 21.5 5.4 3.9

FCEVs can reduce price volatility, dependence on oil, improve environmental performance, and provide

greater efficiencies than conventional transportation technologies, as follows:

Replacement of gasoline-fueled passenger vehicles and light duty trucks, and diesel-fueled transit

buses with FCEVs could result in annual CO2 emission reductions (per vehicle) of approximately

10,170, 15,770, and 182,984 pounds per year, respectively.68

64 “US Oil Consumption to BP Spill”, http://applesfromoranges.com/2010/05/us-oil-consumption-to-bp-spill/, May31, 2010 65 “Challenges for Sustainable Mobility and Development of Fuel Cell Vehicles”, Masatami Takimoto, Executive Vice President,

Toyota Motor Corporation, January 26, 2006. Presentation at the 2nd International Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Expo Technical

Conference Tokyo, Japan 66 “Twenty Hydrogen Myths”, Amory B. Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute, June 20, 2003 67 Miles per Gallon Equivalent 68 Fuel Cell Economic Development Plan, Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development and the

Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc, January 1, 2008, Calculations based upon average annual mileage of 12,500

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

22

NEW YORK

Replacement of gasoline-fueled passenger vehicles and light duty trucks, and diesel-fueled transit

buses with FCEVs could result in annual energy savings (per vehicle) of approximately 230

gallons of gasoline (passenger vehicle), 485 gallons of gasoline (light duty truck) and 4,390

gallons of diesel (bus).

Replacement of gasoline-fueled passenger vehicles, light duty trucks, and diesel-fueled transit

buses with FCEVs could result in annual fuel cost savings of approximately $885 per passenger

vehicle, $1,866 per light duty truck, and $17,560 per bus.69

Automobile manufacturers such as Toyota, General Motors, Honda, Daimler AG, and Hyundai have

projected that models of their FCEVs will begin to roll out in larger numbers by 2015. Longer term, the

U.S. DOE has projected that between 15.1 million and 23.9 million light duty FCEVs may be sold each

year by 2050 and between 144 million and 347 million light duty FCEVs may be in use by 2050 with a

transition to a hydrogen economy. These estimates could be accelerated if political, economic, energy

security or environmental polices prompt a rapid advancement in alternative fuels.70

Strategic targets for the application of hydrogen for transportation include alternative fueling stations;

New York Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) refueling stations; bus transits operations;

government, public, and privately owned fleets; and material handling and airport ground support

equipment (GSE). Graphical representation of potential targets analyzed are depicted in Appendix I.

Alternative Fueling Stations

There are over 7,000 retail fueling stations in New York;71

however, only 240 public and/or private

stations within the state provide alternative fuels, such as biodiesel, compressed natural gas, propane,

and/or electricity for alternative-fueled vehicles.72

Development of hydrogen fueling at alternative fuel

stations and at selected locations owned and operated by NYSDOT would help facilitate the deployment

of FCEVs within the state. (See Appendix I – Figure 12: Alternative Fueling Stations). There are

approximately 16 existing or planned transportation fueling stations in the Northeast region where

hydrogen is provided as an alternative fuel.73,74,75

Fleets

There are over 18,700 fleet vehicles (excluding state and federal vehicles) classified as non-leasing or

company owned vehicles in New York.76

Fleet vehicles typically account for more than twice the amount

of mileage, and therefore twice the fuel consumption and emissions, compared to personal vehicles on a

per vehicle basis. There is an additional 20,963 passenger automobiles and/or light duty trucks in New

York, owned by state and federal agencies (excluding state police) that traveled a combined 172,555,800

miles for passenger car and 14,000 miles for light trucks (U.S. EPA) and 37,000 average miles/year per bus (U.S. DOT FTA,

2007) 69 U.S. EIA, Weekly Retail Gasoline and Diesel Prices: gasoline - $3.847 and diesel – 4.00,

www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_a_epm0r_pte_dpgal_w.htm 70

Effects of a Transition to a Hydrogen Economy on Employment in the United States: Report to Congress,

http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/congress_reports.html, August 2011 71 “Public retail gasoline stations state year” www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/docs/gasoline_stations_state.xls, May 5, 2011 72 Alternative Fuels Data Center, www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/ 73 Alternative Fuels Data Center; http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/ 74 Hyride, “About the fueling station”, http://www.hyride.org/html-about_hyride/About_Fueling.html 75 CTTransit, “Hartford Bus Facility Site Work (Phase 1)”,

www.cttransit.com/Procurements/Display.asp?ProcurementID={8752CA67-AB1F-4D88-BCEC-4B82AC8A2542}, March, 2011 76

Fleet.com, “2009-My Registration”, http://www.automotive-

fleet.com/Statistics/StatsViewer.aspx?file=http%3a%2f%2fwww.automotive-fleet.com%2ffc_resources%2fstats%2fAFFB10-16-

top10-state.pdf&channel

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

23

NEW YORK

miles in 2010, while releasing 12,370 metrics tons of CO2. 77

Conversion of fleet vehicles from

conventional fossil fuels to FCEVs could significantly reduce petroleum consumption and GHG

emissions. Fleet vehicle hubs may be good candidates for hydrogen refueling and conversion to FCEVs

because they mostly operate on fixed routes or within fixed districts and are fueled from a centralized

station.

Bus Transit

There are approximately 7,780 directly operated buses that provide public transportation services in New

York.78

As discussed above, replacement of a conventional diesel transit bus with fuel cell transit bus

would result in the reduction of CO2 emissions (estimated at approximately 183,000 pounds per year), and

reduction of diesel fuel (estimated at approximately 4,390 gallons per year).79

Although the efficiency of

conventional diesel buses has increased, conventional diesel buses, which typically achieve fuel economy

performance levels of 3.9 miles per gallon, have the greatest potential for energy savings by using high

efficiency fuel cells. In addition to New York, other states have also begun the transition of fueling transit

buses with alternative fuels to improve efficiency and environmental performance.

Material Handling

Material handling equipment such as forklifts are used by a variety of industries, including

manufacturing, construction, mining, agriculture, food, retailers, and wholesale trade to move goods

within a facility or to load goods for shipping to another site. Material handling equipment is usually

battery, propane or diesel powered. Batteries that currently power material handling equipment are heavy

and take up significant storage space while only providing up to 6 hours of run time. Fuel cells can

ensure constant power delivery and performance, eliminating the reduction in voltage output that occurs

as batteries discharge. Fuel cell powered material handling equipment last more than twice as long (12-

14 hours) and also eliminate the need for battery storage and charging rooms, leaving more space for

products. In addition, fueling time only takes two to three minutes by the operator compared to least 20

minutes or more for each battery replacement, which saves the operator valuable time and increases

warehouse productivity.

Fuel cell powered material handling equipment has significant cost advantages, compared to batteries,

such as:

1.5 times lower maintenance cost;

8 times lower refueling/recharging labor cost;

2 times lower net present value of total operations and management (O&M) system cost.

63 percent less emissions of GHG (Appendix XI provides a comparison of PEM fuel cell and

battery-powered material handling equipment and Ports).

Fuel cell powered material handling equipment is already in use at dozens of warehouses, distribution

centers, and manufacturing plants in North America.80

Large corporations that are currently using or

planning to use fuel cell powered material handling equipment include CVS, Coca-Cola, BMW, Central

Grocers, and Wal-Mart (Refer to Appendix X for a partial list of companies in North America that use

77 U.S. General Services Administration, “GSA 2010 2010 Fleet Reports”, Table 4-2, 78

NTD Date, “TS2.2 - Service Data and Operating Expenses Time-Series by System”,

http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/data.htm, December 2011 79 Fuel Cell Economic Development Plan, Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development and the

Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc, January 1, 2008. 80 DOE EERE, “Early Markets: Fuel Cells for Material Handling Equipment”,

www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/education/pdfs/early_markets_forklifts.pdf, February 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

24

NEW YORK

fuel cell powered forklifts).81

There are approximately 80 distribution center/warehouse sites that have

been identified in New York and may benefit from the use of fuel cell powered material handling

equipment (Appendix I – Figure 13: Distribution Centers/Warehouses & Ports).

Ground Support Equipment

Ground support equipment (GSE) such as catering trucks, deicers, and airport tugs can be battery

operated or more commonly run on diesel or gasoline. As an alternative, hydrogen-powered tugs are

being developed for both military and commercial applications. While their performance is similar to that

of other battery-powered equipment, a fuel cell-powered GSE remains fully charged (provided there is

hydrogen fuel available) and does not experience performance lag at the end of a shift like battery-

powered GSE.82

Potential large end-users of GSE that serve New York’s largest airports include Air

Canada, Delta Airlines, Continental, JetBlue, United, and US Airways (Appendix I – Figure 11:

Commercial Airports).83

Ports

Ports in New York/New Jersey, which service large vessels, such as container ships, tankers, bulk

carriers, and cruise ships, may be candidates for improved energy management. New York’s largest port,

the Port of New York/New Jersey handles cargo such as, roll on-roll off automobiles, liquid and dry bulk,

break-bulk and specialized project cargo.84

With a daily average of 9,799 in twenty-foot equivalent units

(TEU) the Port of New York/New Jersey ranked 22nd

on the list of the world’s top container ports and 3rd

in the United States.85

The cruise industry in New York also provides $600 million in economic activity

and approximately 3,300 jobs for the City.

In one year, a single large container ship can emit pollutants equivalent to that of 50 million cars. The

low grade bunker fuel used by the worlds 90,000 cargo ships contains up to 2,000 times the amount of

sulfur compared to diesel fuel used in automobiles.86

While docked, vessels shut off their main engines

but use auxiliary diesel and steam engines to power refrigeration, lights, pumps, and other functions, a

process called “cold-ironing”. An estimated one-third of ship emissions occur while they are idling at

berth. Replacing auxiliary engines with on-shore electric power could significantly reduce emissions.

The applications of fuel cell technology at ports may also provide electrical and thermal energy for

improving energy management at warehouses, and equipment operated between terminals (Appendix I –

Figure 13: Distribution Centers/Warehouses & Ports).87

Table 18- Ports Data Breakdown

State Total

Sites

Potential

Sites

FC Units

(300 Kw) MWs

MWhrs

(per year)

Thermal Output

(MMBTU)

CO2 emissions

(ton per year)

NY

(% of Region)

26

(22)

3

(16)

3

(16)

0.9

(16)

7,096

(16)

19,111

(16)

1,809

(18)

81 Plug Power, “Plug Power Celebrates Successful year for Company’s Manufacturing and Sales Activity”,

www.plugpower.com, January 4, 2011 82 Battelle, “Identification and Characterization of Near-Term Direct Hydrogen Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Markets”,

April 2007, www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/pemfc_econ_2006_report_final_0407.pdf 83 JFK International, “Airlines”, http://www.panynj.gov/airports/jfk-airlines.html, October, 2011 84

Panynj.gov/port, http://www.panynj.gov/port/, September 2011 85

Bts.gov, “America’s Container Ports, Page 17”,

http://www.bts.gov/publications/americas_container_ports/2011/pdf/entire.pdf, January, 2011 86

“Big polluters: one massive container ship equals 50 million cars”, Paul, Evans; http://www.gizmag.com/shipping-

pollution/11526/, April 23,2009 87

Savemayportvillage.net, “Cruise Ship Pollution”, http://www.savemayportvillage.net/id20.html, October, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

25

NEW YORK

CONCLUSION

Hydrogen and fuel cell technology offers significant opportunities for improved energy reliability, energy

efficiency, and emission reductions. Large fuel cell units (>300 kW) may be appropriate for applications

that serve large electric and thermal loads. Smaller fuel cell units (< 300 kW) may provide back-up power

for telecommunication sites, restaurants/fast food outlets, and smaller sized public facilities at this time.

Table 19 –Summary of Potential Fuel Cell Applications

Category Total Sites Potential

Sites

Number of Fuel

Cells

< 300 kW

Number of

Fuel Cells

>300 kW

CB

EC

S D

ata

Education 6,991 54188

291 250

Food Sales 25,000+ 41589

415

Food Services 30,000+ 17090

170

Inpatient Healthcare 1,609 16591

165

Lodging 2,558 25792

257

Public Order & Safety 1,045 17393

173

Energy Intensive Industries 1,647 14094

140

Government Operated

Buildings 502 41

95

41

Wireless

Telecommunication

Towers

1,51496

15197

151

WWTPs 84 298

2

Landfills 83 599

5

Airports (w/ AASF) 395 22 (7) 100

22

Military 3 3 3

Ports 26 3 3

Total 71,457 2,088 442 1,646

As shown in Table 5, the analysis provided here estimates that there are approximately 2,088 potential

locations, which may be favorable candidates for the application of a fuel cell to provide heat and power.

Assuming the demand for electricity was uniform throughout the year, approximately 1,236 to 1,646 fuel

88 541 high schools and/or college and universities located in communities serviced by natural gas 89 415 food sale facilities located in communities serviced by natural gas 90 Ten percent of the 3,025 food service facilities located in communities serviced by natural gas 91 165 Hospitals located in communities serviced by natural gas and occupying 100 or more beds onsite 92 321 hotel facilities with 100+ rooms onsite and 58 convalescent homes with 150+ bed onsite located in communities serviced

by natural gas 93 Correctional facilities and/or other public order and safety facilities with 212 workers or more. 94 Ten percent of the 1,401 energy intensive industry facilities located in communities with natural gas. 95 Three actively owned federal government operated building located in communities serviced by natural gas 96

The Federal Communications Commission regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire,

satellite and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. 97 Ten percent of the 1,514 wireless telecommunication sites in New York targeted for back-up PEM fuel cell deployment 98 Ten percent of New York WWTP with average flows of 3.0+ MGD 99 Ten percent of the landfills targeted based on LMOP data 100 Airport facilities with 2,500+ annual Enplanement Counts and/or AASF

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

26

NEW YORK

cell units, with a capacity of 300 – 400 kW, could be deployed for a total fuel cell capacity of 494 to 659

MWs.

If all suggested targets are satisfied by fuel cell(s) installations with 300 kW, a minimum of 3.89 million

MWh electric and 10.49 million MMBTUs (equivalent to 3.07 million MWh) of thermal energy would be

produced, which could reduce CO2 emissions by at least 993,147 tons per year.101

New York can also benefit from the use of hydrogen and fuel cell technology for transportation such as

passenger fleets, transit district fleets, municipal fleets and state department fleets. The application of

hydrogen and fuel cell technology for transportation would reduce the dependence on oil, improve

environmental performance and provide greater efficiencies than conventional transportation

technologies.

• Replacement of a gasoline-fueled passenger vehicle with FCEVs could result in annual CO2

emission reductions (per vehicle) of approximately 10,170 pounds, annual energy savings of 230

gallons of gasoline, and annual fuel cost savings of $885.

• Replacement of a gasoline-fueled light duty truck with FCEVs could result in annual CO2

emission reductions (per light duty truck) of approximately 15,770 pounds, annual energy savings

of 485 gallons of gasoline, and annual fuel cost savings of $1866.

• Replacement of a diesel-fueled transit bus with a fuel cell powered bus could result in annual CO2

emission reductions (per bus) of approximately 182,984 pounds, annual energy savings of 4,390

gallons of fuel, and annual fuel cost savings of $17,560.

Hydrogen and fuel cell technology also provides significant opportunities for job creation and/or

economic development. Realizing approximately $292 million in revenue and investment, the hydrogen

and fuel cell industry in New York is estimated to have contributed approximately $18 million in state

and local tax revenue, and over $166 million in gross state product. Currently, there are approximately

180 New York companies that are part of the growing hydrogen and fuel cell industry supply chain in the

Northeast region. Eight of these companies are defined as hydrogen system or fuel stack or system

OEMs, and were responsible for supplying 808 direct jobs and $119 million in direct revenue and

investment in 2010. If newer/emerging hydrogen and fuel cell technology were to gain momentum, the

number of companies and employment for the industry could grow substantially.

101

If all suggested targets are satisfied by fuel cell(s) installations with 400 kW, a minimum of 5.48 million MWh electric and

25.73 million MMBTUs (equivalent to 7.54 million MWh) of thermal energy would be produced, which could reduce CO2

emissions by at least 1.40 million tons per year.

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

27

NEW YORK

APPENDICES

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

28

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 1: Education

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

29

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 2: Food Sales

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

30

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 3: Food Services

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

31

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 4: Inpatient Healthcare

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

32

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 5: Lodging

Appendix I – Figure 6: Public Order and Safety

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

33

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 7: Energy Intensive Industries

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

34

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 8: Federal Government Operated Buildings

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

35

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 9: Telecommunication Sites

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

36

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 10: Municipal Waste Sites

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

37

NEW YORK

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

38

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 11: Commercial Airports

Appendix I – Figure 12: Alternative Fueling Stations

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

39

NEW YORK

Appendix I – Figure 13: Distribution Centers/Warehouses & Ports

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

40

NEW YORK

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

41

NEW YORK

Appendix II – New York Estimated Electrical Consumption per Sector

Category Total Site

Electric Consumption per

Building (1000 kWh)102

kWh Consumed per Sector

Mid Atlantic

Education 7,270 548.529 3,987,805,830

Food Sales 25,000+ 226.142 5,653,550,000

Food Services 30,000+ 121.041 3,631,230,000

Inpatient Healthcare 1,609 10,472.33 16,849,985,406

Lodging 2,558 457.97 1,171,484,702

Public Order & Safety 1,332 243.328 324,112,896

Total 67,769 31,618,168,834

Residential103

50,532,000,000

Industrial 19,946,000,000

Commercial 76,821,000,000

Other Commercial 31,618,168,834

102

EIA, Electricity consumption and expenditure intensities for Non-Mall Building 2003 103

DOE EERE, “Electric Power and Renewable Energy in New York”;

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/states/electricity.cfm/state=NY; October, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

42

NEW YORK

Appendix III – Key Stakeholders

Organization City/Town State Website

New Energy New York Albany NY http://www.neny.org/

New York State Energy

Research and Development

clean energy R&D

Albany NY http://www.nyserda.org/

Committee on Environment

and Public Work

New York

City NY

http://epw.senate.gov

Capital District Clean

Communities (Clean Cities) Albany NY http://www.afdc.energy.gov/cleancities/coalition/albany

Greater Long Island Clean

Cities Coalition Stony Brook

NY http://www.gliccc.org/

NYCLHVCC New York

City NY http://nyclhvcc.org/about/

Genesee Region Clean

Communities (Clean Cities) Genesee

NY http://www.grcc.us/

New York Power Authority

(NYPA) White Plains NY http://www.nypa.gov/

Long Island Power Authority

(LIPA) Uniondale

NY http://www.lipower.org/

STS/Public Policy, Rochester

Institute of Technology Rochester NY http://www.rit.edu/

Building Department

Administrators Riverhead

NY http://www.gcexpediting.com

New York City Economic

Development Corp.

New York

City NY http://www.nycedc.com/Pages/HomePage.aspx

Mayor's office of

Environmental Coordination

New York

City NY

http://www.nyc.gov

New York State Public

Service Commission Augusta NY http://www.dps.state.ny.us/

Utility Companies

National Grid http://www.nationalgridus.com/

Central Hudson Gas & Electric http://www.cenhud.com/

National Fuel Gas Distribution http://www.natfuel.com/

NYSEG http://www.nyseg.com/

St. Lawrence Gas Co. http://www.stlawrencegas.com/about.shtml

Appendix IV – New York Incentives and Programs

Funding Source: NYSERDA

Program Title: Local Option – Municipal Sustainable Energy Program

Applicable Energies/Technologies: Solar Water Heat, Solar Space Heat, Solar Thermal

Process Heat, Photovoltaics, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal Electric, Fuel Cells, Geothermal

Heat Pumps, Anaerobic Digestion, Fuel Cells using Renewable Fuels, Geothermal Direct-Use

Summary: Property-Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing effectively allows property owners

to borrow money to pay for energy improvements. The amount borrowed is typically repaid via a

special assessment on the property over a period of years.

Restrictions: In order to qualify for a loan, energy audits or renewable energy feasibility studies

must be performed by a contractor certified according to standards set by the New York State

Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) or by a local government under

standards at least as stringent as those developed by NYSERDA. Energy efficiency improvements

must meet cost-effectiveness criteria also established by NYSERDA. Please see the program web

site above for information on the status of the development of these standards.

Timing: To speak with a NYSERDA representative about collaborating with these existing

programs, please send us an email at standards@nyserda.org.

Maximum Size: Loan amounts may not exceed 10% of the appraised real property value or cost of the qualified

improvements; other terms locally determined

Requirements: **The Standards are currently under development and will be posted as they are

completed. Please check our website frequently for updates**

http://www.nyserda.org/About/energy_services_standards.asp

Rebate amount: Depends on project

For further information, please visit:

http://www.nyserda.org/About/energy_services_standards.asp

Source:

NYSERDA; “Standards for Providing Energy Services in New York”;

http://www.nyserda.org/About/energy_services_standards.asp; September, 2011

DSIRE USA; “Local Option – Municipal Sustainable Energy Program”;

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=NY68F&re=1&ee=1; September 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

44

Funding Source: RPS surcharge

Program Title: Fuel Cell Rebate and Performance Incentive

Applicable Energies/Technologies: Fuel Cells, Fuel Cells using Renewable Fuels

Summary: The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) offers

incentives for the purchase, installation, and operation of customer sited tier (CST, also called

"behind the meter") fuel cell systems used for electricity production

Restrictions: Incentive levels and limitations vary by system size. Bonus capacity incentives are

available for large projects that provide secure/standalone capability at sites of Essential Public

Services.

Timing: 12/31/2015 (or until funds are exhausted)

Maximum Size:

►Total Incentives:

Large systems (larger than 25 kW): $1 million

Small systems (up to 25 kW): $50,000

►Capacity Incentives:

Large systems only (larger than 25 kW): $200,000 for basic capacity incentive, $100,000 for bonus

capacity incentive

►Performance Incentives:

Large systems (greater than 25 kW): $300,000 per year per project site

Small systems (up to 25 kW): $20,000 per year per project site

Requirements: http://www.nyserda.org/funding/2157pon.asp

Rebate amount:

►Capacity Incentives:

Large systems only (larger than 25 kW): Basic incentive of $1,000/kW + possible $500/kW bonus for systems

that provide standalone capability to serve essential services

►Performance Incentives:

All systems: $0.15/net kWh

For further information, please visit: http://www.nyserda.org/funding/2157pon.asp

Sources:

NYSERDA “RPS Customer-Sited Tier Fuel Cell Program” – September 27, 2011

DSIRE “NYSERDA – Fuel Cell rebate and Performance Incentive”, September 27, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

45

Appendix V – Partial list of Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Supply Chain Companies in New York104

Organization Name Product or Service Category

1 AWS Truepower LLC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

2 Bergmann Associates P.C. Engineering/Design Services

3 Blasch Precision Ceramics Inc. Components

4 CG Power Solutions Inc. Equipment

5 Clough Harbour & Associates LLP Engineering/Design Services

6 College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering at SUNY Albany Research & Development

7 E2TAC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

8 Einhorn Yaffee Prescott Architecture & Engineering P.C. Engineering/Design Services

9 Environmental Advocates of New York Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

10 Heslin Rothenberg Farley Mesiti P.C. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

11 Hoffman Warnick LLC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

12 Intertek Lab or Test Equipment/Services

13 MTI Instruments Inc. Components

14 MTI Micro Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM

15 National Grid Other

16 New York Energy Research and Development Authority Research & Development

17 New York State Office of Science, Technology and Innovation Research & Development

18 New York Thruway Authority Other

19 NY-BEST (New York Battery and Energy Storage) Other

20 NYSERDA Other

21 O'Brien & Gere Engineers Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

22 Research Foundation of SUNY Research & Development

23 Suburban Propane Partners LP Fuel

24 SUNY Albany Research & Development

25 Tyco Electronics Components

26 Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

27 Alfred University Research & Development

28 Stearns & Wheeler GHD Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

29 Power Management Concepts LLC Engineering/Design Services

30 SUNY Binghamton Research & Development

31 Axiom Consulting Partners LLC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

32 Nextek Power Systems Inc. FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services

33 Lee Spring Company Equipment

34 Caplugs (Protective Industries Inc.) Equipment

35 Cobey Inc. Equipment

36 Conax Technologies LLC Components

37 Continental Fan Mfg. Inc. Components

38 ENrG Inc. Components

39 G-Tec Equipment

40 SUNY Buffalo Research & Development

41 Subgard International Equipment

42 CDH Energy Corporation Engineering/Design Services

104

Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster Supply Chain Database Search, http://neesc.org/resources/?type=1, August 11, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

46

Organization Name Product or Service Category

43 The Linde Group Fuel

44 Bren-Tronics Inc. Components

45 Corning Inc. Components

46 PCB Piezotronics Inc. Components

47 SRA International Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

48 AES Greenidge LLC Other

49 Sabin Metal Corporation Materials

50 Island Pump & Tank Corp. Fuel

51 Weico Wire & Cable Inc. Equipment

52 AEYCH LLC Engineering/Design Services

53 PAETEC Holding Corp. Engineering/Design Services

54 Torrey Pines Research Research & Development

55 Xactiv Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

56 American Aerospace Controls Inc. Components

57 SUNY Farmingdale Research & Development

58 Air Liquide Fuel

59 Zicar Zirconia Inc. Materials

60 Burnham Polymeric Materials

61 Exergy LLC Components

62 Hobart and William Smith Colleges Research & Development

63 Air Products and Chemicals Inc. Fuel

64 Clean Harbors Other

65 The Raymond Corporation FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services

66 Mercury Aircraft Inc. Manufacturing Services

67 eVionyx Inc. FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services

68 Hofstra University Research & Development

69 Delphi Automotive LLP Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM

70 Sitron-USA Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services

71 General Motors Battery and Fuel Cell Research Center Hydrogen System OEM

72 MicroPen Technologies Corporation Materials

73 Oak-Mitsui Technologies Components

74 EmPowerCES LLC Other

75 Alloys International Inc. Materials

76 J B Nottingham Co. Inc. (Duraline) Components

77 Advanced Plastic and Material Testing Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services

78 Cornell Fuel Cell Institute Research & Development

79 Primet Precisions Materials Inc. Materials

80 Widetronix Inc. Components

81 Capital Express International Inc. Transportation/Packing Services & Supplies

82 Water Cooling Corporation (The Pump Warehouse) Equipment

83 Tech City Properties Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

84 AVOX Systems Inc. Equipment

85 Harper International Components

86 IMR Test Labs Lab or Test Equipment/Services

87 Atlantic Detroit Diesel-Allison LLC Equipment

88 H2 Pump LLC Hydrogen System OEM

89 Plug Power Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

47

Organization Name Product or Service Category

90 Barton & Loguidice P.C. Engineering/Design Services

91 Diversified Manufacturing Inc. Manufacturing Services

92 Hardware Specialty Co. Inc. Components

93 Piller USA Inc. Equipment

94 Curtis Instruments Inc. Components

95 AECOM Technology Corporation Engineering/Design Services

96 American Wind Power and Hydrogen LLC Hydrogen System OEM

97 Arotech Corporation Equipment

98 CH2M Hill Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

99 City University of New York Research & Development

100 Columbia University Research & Development

101 Consolidated Edison Company of New York Inc. Other

102 Direct Energy Other

103 FXFOWLE Architects LLP Engineering/Design Services

104 General Electric Manufacturing Services

105 Hunter College Research & Development

106 Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. Manufacturing Services

107 Mitsui & Co. Inc. Transportation/Packing Services & Supplies

108 Pred Materials International Inc. Materials

109 Sendyne Corp. Components

110 Sojitz Corporation of America Transportation/Packing Services & Supplies

111 Solid Cell Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM

112 Tokyo Gas Co. Ltd. Fuel

113 Tradition Energy (TFS Energy) Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

114 Verizon Communications Inc. Other

115 WilmerHale LLP Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

116 SiGNA Chemistry, Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM

117 IEC Electronics Corp. Manufacturing Services

118 Ultralife Corporation Manufacturing Services

119 Upstate Refractory Services Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services

120 Precision Process Equipment Inc. Equipment

121 GE Global Research Research & Development

122 Custom Electronics Inc. Components

123 Ioxus Inc. Components

124 HARBEC Plastics Inc. Manufacturing Services

125 Flow Safe Inc. Equipment

126 Tecknowledgey Inc. Components

127 Global Equipment Company Inc. (Systemax Inc.) Equipment

128 WATT Fuel Cell Corp. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM

129 Clarkson University Research & Development

130 Axio Power Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

131 CH Energy Group Inc. Other

132 Hitachi Metals America Ltd. Materials

133 The Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Letter Other

134 Airflow Catalyst Systems Components

135 American Aerogel Corporation Materials

136 AMETEK Power Systems & Instruments Components

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

48

Organization Name Product or Service Category

137 Applied Coatings Group Inc. Materials

138 Cerion Enterprises LLC Components

139 Eastman Kodak Company Materials

140 Eldre Corporation Equipment

141 Impact Technologies LLC Engineering/Design Services

142 MWI Inc. Materials

143 PEKO Precision Products Inc. Manufacturing Services

144 Precision Design Systems Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services

145 RocCera LLC Materials

146 Rochester Institute of Technology Research & Development

147 University of Rochester Research & Development

148 Viewpoint Systems Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services

149 KNF Clean Room Products Corporation Lab or Test Equipment/Services

150 Vacuum Instrument Corp. Lab or Test Equipment/Services

151 Precision Flow Technologies Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services

152 DiGesare Mechanical Inc. FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services

153 SuperPower Inc. Research & Development

154 Amphenol Corporation Components

155 SUNY Stony Brook Research & Development

156 Fluid Metering Inc. Equipment

157 C & S Companies Engineering/Design Services

158 Carrier Corp. Other

159 Cooper Industries Inc. Components

160 Evans Analytical Group Research & Development

161 Marjama Muldoon Blasiak & Sullivan LLP Consulting/Legal/Financial Services

162 SUNY Center for Sustainable & Renewable Energy Research & Development

163 901 D LLC Components

164 e2v Inc. Components

165 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Research & Development

166 T & J Electrical Corporation FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services

167 The Paper Battery Company Other

168 Long Island Power Authority Other

169 Brookhaven National Laboratory Research & Development

170 Applied Mechanical Technologies Inc. Engineering/Design Services

171 Progressive Machine and Design Manufacturing Services

172 Praxair Inc. Fuel

173 Chem-Tainer Industries Inc. Equipment

174 United States Military Academy at West Point Research & Development

175 Electro Industries/GaugeTech Equipment

176 New York Power Authority Other

177 Pace Energy and Climate Center Other

178 Pearlman Public Relations LLC Other

179 Tech Air Inc. Fuel

180 Poly Lam Products Corp. Other

181 Cosa Instrument Corporation Equipment

182 Markinter Co. Materials

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

49

Appendix VI – Partial list of Hydrogen and Fuel Cell OEM Companies in New York105

Organization Name Product or Service Category Website Address

1 MTI Micro Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.mtimicrofuelcells.com/

2 Delphi Automotive LLP Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.delphi.com/

3 General Motors Battery and Fuel Cell Research Center Hydrogen System OEM http://www.gm.com/

4 H2 Pump LLC Hydrogen System OEM http://www.h2pumpllc.com/index.html

5 Plug Power Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.plugpower.com/

6 American Wind Power and Hydrogen LLC Hydrogen System OEM http://www.windpowerandhydrogen.com/index.html

7 Solid Cell Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.solidcell.com/index.htm

8 WATT Fuel Cell Corp. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM www.wattfuelcell.com

105

Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster Supply Chain Database Search, http://neesc.org/resources/?type=1, August 11, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

50

Appendix VII – Comparison of Fuel Cell Technologies106

Fuel Cell

Type

Common

Electrolyte

Operating

Temperature

Typical

Stack

Size

Efficiency Applications Advantages Disadvantages

Polymer

Electrolyte

Membrane

(PEM)

Perfluoro sulfonic

acid

50-100°C

122-212°

typically

80°C

< 1 kW – 1

MW107

>

kW 60%

transportation

35%

stationary

• Backup power

• Portable power

• Distributed

generation

• Transportation

• Specialty vehicle

• Solid electrolyte reduces

corrosion & electrolyte

management problems

• Low temperature

• Quick start-up

• Expensive catalysts

• Sensitive to fuel

impurities

• Low temperature waste

heat

Alkaline

(AFC)

Aqueous solution

of potassium

hydroxide soaked

in a matrix

90-100°C

194-212°F

10 – 100

kW 60%

• Military

• Space

• Cathode reaction faster

in alkaline electrolyte,

leads to high performance

• Low cost components

• Sensitive to CO2

in fuel and air

• Electrolyte management

Phosphoric

Acid

(PAFC)

Phosphoric acid

soaked in a matrix

150-200°C

302-392°F

400 kW

100 kW

module

40% • Distributed

generation

• Higher temperature enables

CHP

• Increased tolerance to fuel

impurities

• Pt catalyst

• Long start up time

• Low current and power

Molten

Carbonate

(MCFC)

Solution of lithium,

sodium and/or

potassium

carbonates, soaked

in a matrix

600-700°C

1112-1292°F

300

k W- 3 M

W

300 kW

module

45 – 50%

• Electric utility

• Distributed

generation

• High efficiency

• Fuel flexibility

• Can use a variety of catalysts

• Suitable for CHP

• High temperature

corrosion and breakdown

of cell components

• Long start up time

• Low power density

Solid Oxide

(SOFC)

Yttria stabilized

zirconia

700-1000°C

1202-1832°F

1 kW – 2

MW 60%

• Auxiliary power

• Electric utility

• Distributed

generation

• High efficiency

• Fuel flexibility

• Can use a variety of catalysts

• Solid electrolyte

• Suitable f o r CHP & CHHP

• Hybrid/GT cycle

• High temperature

corrosion and breakdown

of cell components

• High temperature

operation requires long

start up

time and limits

Polymer Electrolyte is no longer a single category row. Data shown does not take into account High Temperature PEM which operates in the range of 160oC to 180

oC. It solves

virtually all of the disadvantages listed under PEM. It is not sensitive to impurities. It has usable heat. Stack efficiencies of 52% on the high side are realized. HTPEM is not a

PAFC fuel cell and should not be confused with one.

106 U.S. Department of Energy, Fuel Cells Technology Program, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/fuelcells/pdfs/fc_comparison_chart.pdf, August 5, 2011 107

Ballard, “CLEARgen Multi-MY Systems”, http://www.ballard.com/fuel-cell-products/cleargen-multi-mw-systems.aspx, November, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

51

Appendix VIII –Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats for New York

Strengths

Stationary Power – Strong market drivers (elect cost,

environmental factors, critical power), some PEMFC

technology and H2/FC industrial base available

Transportation Power - Strong market drivers (appeal to

market, environmental factors), strong indigenous technology

and industrial base in PEMFC industrial applications, SOFC

APU’s, FCV’s, H2Gen, H2 infrastructure plans, noticeable

traction in early hydrogen refueling stations

Portable Power – Some DMFC technology/industry base

Economic Development Factors – Supportive state policies

towards transportation and stationary power, large funding and

program management agency in NYSERDA, active efforts to

recruit tech companies to NY, technically trained workforce,

strong academic resources

Weaknesses

Stationary Power – cost/performance improvements required

across industry

Transportation Power – hydrogen infrastructure build out, plus

cost/performance improvements required across industry

Portable Power – not in the “mainstream” of

energy/environmental activity, somewhat disconnected to the

stationary power and transportation OEM’s/developers

Economic Development Factors – State incentives need to be

longer term to induce real market penetration

Opportunities

Stationary Power – NY has several small SOFC technology

developers.

Transportation Power – As home to a leading fuel cell vehicle

supplier, NY will benefit significantly with general

H2/transportation growth

Portable Power – With some existing technology base, and

excellent research/academic resources, NY can recruit more

portable fuel cell developers

Economic Development Factors – strong export opportunities,

also NY can leverage its significant nanotechnology

commitment to help grow its hydrogen/fuel cell industry

Threats

Stationary Power – General impatience in both investor and

government communities towards long SOFC development

timeframes. Progress and stronger government support of

other renewable energy technologies such as solar, wind,

geothermal

Transportation Power – Electric vehicles are both a threat, in

that they “raise the bar” from traditional internal combustion,

and an opportunity as an automotive platform that can

accommodate fuel cells as the next phase

Economic Development Factors – competition from other

states/regions and other technologies, notably solar PV

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

52

Appendix IX – Partial Fuel Cell Deployment in the Northeast region

Manufacturer Site Name Site Location Year

Installed

Plug Power T-Mobile cell tower Storrs CT 2008

Plug Power Albany International Airport Albany NY 2004

FuelCell Energy Pepperidge Farms Plant Bloomfield CT 2005

FuelCell Energy Peabody Museum New Haven CT 2003

FuelCell Energy Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers Manhattan NY 2004

FuelCell Energy Sheraton Hotel Edison NJ 2003

FuelCell Energy Sheraton Hotel Parsippany NJ 2003

UTC Power Cabela's Sporting Goods East Hartford CT 2008

UTC Power Whole Foods Market Glastonbury CT 2008

UTC Power Connecticut Science Center Hartford CT 2009

UTC Power St. Francis Hospital Hartford CT 2003

UTC Power Middletown High School Middletown CT 2008

UTC Power Connecticut Juvenile Training School Middletown CT 2001

UTC Power 360 State Street Apartment Building New Haven CT 2010

UTC Power South Windsor High School South Windsor CT 2002

UTC Power Mohegan Sun Casino Hotel Uncasville CT 2002

UTC Power CTTransit: Fuel Cell Bus Hartford CT 2007

UTC Power Whole Foods Market Dedham MA 2009

UTC Power Bronx Zoo Bronx NY 2008

UTC Power North Central Bronx Hospital Bronx NY 2000

UTC Power Hunt's Point Water Pollution Control Plant Bronx NY 2005

UTC Power Price Chopper Supermarket Colonie NY 2010

UTC Power East Rochester High School East Rochester NY 2007

UTC Power Coca-Cola Refreshments Production Facility Elmsford NY 2010

UTC Power Verizon Call Center and Communications Building Garden City NY 2005

UTC Power State Office Building Hauppauge NY 2009

UTC Power Liverpool High School Liverpool NY 2000

UTC Power New York Hilton Hotel New York City NY 2007

UTC Power Central Park Police Station New York City NY 1999

UTC Power Rochester Institute of Technology Rochester NY 1993

UTC Power NYPA office building White Plains NY 2010

UTC Power Wastewater treatment plant Yonkers NY 1997

UTC Power The Octagon Roosevelt Island NY 2011

UTC Power Johnson & Johnson World Headquarters New Brunswick NJ 2003

UTC Power CTTRANSIT (Fuel Cell Powered Buses) Hartford CT 2007 -

Present

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

53

Appendix X – Partial list of Fuel Cell-Powered Forklifts in North America108

Company City/Town State Site Year

Deployed

Fuel Cell

Manufacturer

# of

forklifts

Coca-Cola San Leandro CA

Bottling and

distribution center 2011 Plug Power 37

Charlotte NC Bottling facility 2011 Plug Power 40

EARP

Distribution Kansas City KS Distribution center 2011 Oorja Protonics 24

Golden State

Foods Lemont IL Distribution facility 2011 Oorja Protonics 20

Kroger Co. Compton CA Distribution center 2011 Plug Power 161

Sysco

Riverside CA Distribution center 2011 Plug Power 80

Boston MA Distribution center 2011 Plug Power 160

Long Island NY Distribution center 2011 Plug Power 42

San Antonio TX Distribution center 2011 Plug Power 113

Front Royal VA Redistribution

facility 2011 Plug Power 100

Baldor Specialty

Foods Bronx NY Facility

Planned

in 2012 Oorja Protonics 50

BMW

Manufacturing

Co.

Spartanburg SC Manufacturing plant 2010 Plug Power 86

Defense

Logistics

Agency, U.S.

Department of

Defense

San Joaquin CA Distribution facility 2011 Plug Power 20

Fort Lewis WA Distribution depot 2011 Plug Power 19

Warner

Robins GA Distribution depot 2010 Hydrogenics 20

Susquehanna PA Distribution depot 2010 Plug Power 15

2009 Nuvera 40

Martin-Brower Stockton CA Food distribution

center 2010 Oorja Protonics 15

United Natural

Foods Inc.

(UNFI)

Sarasota FL Distribution center 2010 Plug Power 65

Wal-Mart

Balzac Al,

Canada

Refrigerated

distribution center 2010 Plug Power 80

Washington

Court House OH

Food distribution

center 2007 Plug Power 55

Wegmans Pottsville PA Warehouse 2010 Plug Power 136

Whole Foods

Market Landover MD Distribution center 2010 Plug Power 61

108

FuelCell2000, “Fuel Cell-Powered Forklifts in North America”, http://www.fuelcells.org/info/charts/forklifts.pdf, November, 2011

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012

54

Appendix XI – Comparison of PEM Fuel Cell and Battery-Powered Material Handling Equipment

3 kW PEM Fuel Cell-Powered

Pallet Trucks

3 kW Battery-powered

(2 batteries per truck)

Total Fuel Cycle Energy Use

(total energy consumed/kWh

delivered to the wheels) -12,000 Btu/kWh 14,000 Btu/kWh

Fuel Cycle GHG Emissions

(in g CO2 equivalent 820 g/kWh 1200 g/kWh

Estimated Product Life 8-10 years 4-5 years No Emissions at Point of Use

Quiet Operation

Wide Ambient Operating

Temperature range

Constant Power Available

over Shift

Routine Maintenance Costs

($/YR) $1,250 - $1,500/year $2,000/year

Time for Refueling/Changing

Batteries 4 – 8 min./day 45-60 min/day (for battery change-outs)

8 hours (for battery recharging & cooling) Cost of Fuel/Electricity $6,000/year $1,300/year Labor Cost of

refueling/Recharging $1,100/year $8,750/year

Net Present Value of Capital

Cost $12,600

($18,000 w/o incentive) $14,000

Net Present Value of O&M

costs (including fuel) $52,000 $128,000