Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review

Transcription

1 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review Report Status: Version 3.1 Report Date: 23 rd December 2010 Last Updated: 23 rd February 2011 Deliverable Number: 3.1 Authors: R. Zaetta, B. Madden (Element Energy) Acknowledgement This project is co-financed by funds from the European Commission under FCH-JU Grant Agreement Number The project partners would like to thank the EC for establishing the New Energy World JTI framework and for supporting this activity. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/ ) for the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Technology Initiative under grant agreement n

2

3 Contact Details: - Ben Madden ben.madden@element-energy.co.uk Phone: + 44 (0) Roberto Zaetta roberto.zaetta@element-energy.co.uk Phone: +44 (0) Disclaimer: This document is the result of a collaborative work between NextHyLights Industry and Institute partners. The research involved extensive stakeholder consultation in locations around the world as well as feedback from the NextHyLights Industry Partners. The ideas presented in this document were reviewed by certain NextHyLights project partners to ensure broad general agreement with its principal findings and perspectives. However, while a commendable level of consensus has been achieved, this does not mean that every consulted stakeholder or NextHyLights Industry endorses the findings. 1

4 Contents Key message from the study...4 Executive summary Introduction Hydrogen Bus Technologies Hydrogen-fuelled Internal Combustion Buses Hybrid Fuel Cell versus non-hybridised Fuel Cell Buses Hybrid Fuel Cell Bus designs The Fuel Cell Bus Sector Hydrogen bus value chain Interaction with the fuel cell car supply chain Market conclusions Fuel Cell Buses: Status and Evolution Current technical performances Other technical issues Capital cost trends Historic performance summary Capital cost dynamics Aggregated Approach Bottom-Up Approach breaking down the cost structure Outlook to Capital cost dynamics summary Hydrogen Fuelling and Infrastructure Comments on the status of hydrogen refuelling stations for bus applications Hydrogen fuel cost Refuelling Station Performance CO2 emissions

5 6 Comparison with Alternative Technologies Total Cost of Ownership TCO at costs Total Cost of Ownership in Total Cost of Ownership Sensitivity to fuel prices TCO analysis for other hybridisations Outlook to Conclusions Next Generation of bus projects: what should be expected Annex A: International framework Annex B: Hydrogen refuelling stations for bus applications four case studies The hydrogen refuelling station in Hürth, Cologne The hydrogen refuelling station project in Leyton, London The hydrogen refuelling station project in HafenCity, Hamburg The hydrogen refuelling station project in Whistler, British Columbia Annex C: International Demonstrations Annex D: Interview Scripts for Fuel Cell Bus Stakeholders Annex E: List of Principal Consultees Bibliography of Annex A

6 Euro / Km / Bus Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review Key message from the study Hybrid fuel cell 1 bus technology provides one of the two viable zero emission bus options for the urban transit market (the other is an all-electric drivetrain, in e.g. Trolley buses). The technology is expected to provide a more flexible and cost effective solution (on a total cost of ownership basis) than trolley buses for new routes in the period between 2015 and 2020, whilst it is expected to converge towards diesel-fuelled bus total ownership cost levels by approx. 2025/30. At this point the economics will be dictated by the relative price of diesel versus hydrogen fuel for bus operators. The key challenge facing the technology is to create sufficient demand for hybrid in the short term while the buses are more expensive than alternatives, in order to justify the technology developments required to achieve the 2025/30 goal. Total Cost Of Ownership (TCO): hybrid fuel cell buses in comparison with diesel, diesel hybrid and trolley buses ( ) Cost projections based on a set of assumptions please refer to the contents of this study Taxes on fuel CO2 price 4.00 Diesel hybrid buses Trolley buses Overhead contact wire network - maintenance Extra maintenance facility costs 3.00 Bus Maintenance Fee 2.00 Diesel buses Propulsion-related Replacement cost Untaxed fuel Cost 1.00 Overhead contact wire network - Financing ~ Bus Financing and Depreciation Hybrid fuel cell buses : cost projections over time (150kW FC system) Alternative bus technologies as at cost projections Figure 1 Total cost of ownership for different bus drivetrains today and into the future assumes a 12m bus platform. Error bars represent upper and lower bound projections on ownership cost. Cost figures are expresses at 2010 money value. Figures assume an untaxed diesel fuel price of 0.58/litre. 1 Hybridised fuel cell buses combine hydrogen-fuelled fuel cells with energy storage devices such as batteries, super-capacitors or a combination of both. 4

7 Executive summary This document is a summary of the state of the art for hydrogen bus technology. The document is based on information available from recent international fuel cell bus demonstrations and from bilateral dialogues with key industry stakeholders and the bus operators (with experience of operating hydrogen vehicles) within the Hydrogen Bus Alliance and the CHIC project. The study looks at historical techno-economic performance of fuel cell buses, the cost structure of a hybrid fuel cell bus and the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) in comparison with alternative bus technologies. Summary of the main conclusions of the analysis The fuel cell bus sector The number of competitors in the market has increased over time, with at least 12 fuel cell bus providers and 9 fuel cell manufacturers competing for business in the international market. Of particular note, only 2-3 out of the six major European OEMs, have significant demonstration experience with hydrogen buses and are actively engaged in the sector. There is a general consensus among industry players that a wider participation of the larger players would be beneficial for the sector. Demonstration activity has occurred in waves, with a major increase in deployment around 2003, followed by a next wave based on so called next generation hybrid fuel cell buses which will enter service in the period By the end of 2011, approx. 110 fuel cell buses will be in day to day service worldwide. Hybrid fuel cell buses technical performance The analysis of historical performance data indicated that fuel cell bus performance is substantially improving over time. The table below provides a snapshot of the key metrics: 5

8 Hybrid FC buses (12m platform, low floor) Current Values Next Generation Diesel buses (12m platform, low floor) 8 15 kg/100km 7 12 kg/100km litre/100km Fuel Economy* (up to 30% improvement over an equivalent diesel route at parity of calorific content) (from 20% to 40% improvement over an equivalent diesel route at parity of calorific content) (approx kg- H2/100km at parity of calorific content) Range km km >> 400km Availability** 55% - 80% 90% 90% Refueling Time*** 7 10 minutes/bus 7minutes/bus? (It may depend on tank size) << 5minutes/bus * Fuel economy depends on drive cycles. It is worth noting that there is not a standard drive cycle to date and hence these figures are indicative of best of class urban drive conditions only. ** Availability is defined as the percentage of days of actual service compared to the number of day of scheduled service (over the year). *** Best of class performance range. Among the hydrogen bus options, hybridised fuel cell designs demonstrate far better fuel economy that non-hybridised fuel cell and hydrogen-fuelled internal combustion buses. The vast majority of hydrogen buses are now being built in hybrid fuel cell configuration and it assumed that this will be the basis for commercialising hydrogen buses. State of the art hybrid fuel cell buses provide one of two genuinely zero emission bus options for the urban transit market (the other is an electric drivetrain - typically in a trolley bus). Depending on the source of hydrogen, the buses can provide a zero carbon solution for public transit. Even using today s production from natural gas, there are considerable carbon savings available over conventional diesel buses (up to 50%). Other advantages over diesel vehicles include: substantially higher fuel efficiency (up to twice a diesel bus on a calorific basis) reduced urban noise, and in the long term reduced maintenance requirements (due to fewer moving parts and hence less lubrication etc.) The EC s HyFLEET:CUTE project proved that hydrogen buses can be operated reliably a availability figure of 92% was achieved in this trial. It is important to note that this was a well-controlled trial (with maintenance technicians at each site) and did not involve a hybrid drivetrain. 6

9 Hybrid fuel cell bus trials, by contrast, have shown relatively poor availability (55-80%) in trials before These will need to be improved before the technology can be rolled out outside small demonstration trials. The next generation of hybrid fuel cell bus trials (starting 2010) are designed to prove that the technology can achieve availability standards over 90% which will be sufficient to begin to commercialise the technology. The next generation of bus demonstrations (such as those in the EC funded CHIC project 2 ) are also aimed at understanding the fuel economy of next generation FC buses. Initial tests suggest they will achieve the lower bound of the fuel consumption range, i.e. up to a 40% improvement over an equivalent diesel route (on a calorific equivalent basis). The main technical constraints for fuel cell buses, compared to conventional diesel vehicles are: o o o Availability an equivalent operational availability compared to diesel vehicles has not yet been demonstrated for fuel cells in hybrid configurations. This is expected to be achieved in the next generation demonstrations. Fill time which is currently around 10 minutes (best available is 7 minutes), compared to a diesel fill times of approx. 3 minutes. This can create logistical problem for bus operators, particularly in tight urban depots. Lack of infrastructure meaning that dedicated hydrogen fuelling infrastructure is required at hydrogen bus depots this is bulky and also requires very high availability as there are no local back-up options available Hybrid fuel cell buses economic performance Diesel hybrid vehicles are currently gaining traction in the market for environmentally friendly urban buses. These have a total cost of ownership higher than diesel buses, suggesting public authorities are prepared to fund some additional cost of operating low emission vehicles. However, a Total Cost of Ownership analysis for today s fuel cell buses suggests that the cost of operating a fuel cell bus today is over three or four times that of a conventional diesel bus. This additional cost is not acceptable to bus operators, meaning the technology must reduce in cost to gain genuine commercial traction. There are two main approaches to cost reduction. In the first, progressive generations of fuel cell systems designed for buses are projected to reduce fuel cell system costs below 2,000/kW (from over 4,000/kW today), whilst increased 2 7

10 volumes of fuel cell buses reduce the costs for bus builders to assemble and sell the buses. This would reduce fuel cell bus costs to a lower bound of approximately 500,000 (for large orders) and an upper bound o 950,000 between 2015 and This will require: o o o Next generation of fuel cell systems, with lower component costs and simpler manufacturing processes (expected to be launched ) the market experiencing standardisation in the hybrid manufacturing process, reducing labour costs and overheads for bus manufacturers An increase in fuel cell bus sales (of the order of low 100s in the period ), which leads to economies of scale for buses and fuel cells and helps reduce some of the risk premium applied to FC buses by bus builders On a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) basis, these buses are not expected to be able to compete with diesel bus technologies by 2015/18. They may, however, be able to gain some market traction on environmentally sensitive routes which would typically be serviced by trolley buses. It is therefore likely that subsidies will be also required beyond 2015/18 to support further increases in the size of the FC bus market. Beyond 2015, there are two paths being considered for further fuel cell bus cost reduction, which differ according to their approach to the fuel cell stack. In the first, volume sales for fuel cell passenger cars (from 2015 onwards) are expected to drive the costs of automotive stacks down to very low levels (low 100 s of euros per kw for a fuel cell bus system based on a passenger car stack). These very low cost stacks can then be used in buses and offer low total costs of ownership, despite the relatively short lifetimes (automotive stacks are typically designed for only 5,000 hour life). Buses using passenger car based stacks have the potential to reduce costs well below 400,000 by 2022/25. The alternative approach is to continue to develop longer life fuel cell systems dedicated to the bus market. Here higher stack costs are offset by longer lifetimes. The development of these lower cost stacks is believed to require bus volumes in the 1,000 s in the 2015 to 2020 period. Again there is potential to reduce overall bus costs to an affordable level by 2022/25. Concluding, Hydrogen bus technology is expected to provide a more flexible and cost effective solution (on a total cost of ownership basis) than trolley buses for new routes in the period between 2015 and 2020, whilst it is expected to converge towards diesel-fuelled bus total ownership cost levels by approx. 2025/30. At this point the economics will be dictated by the relative cost of diesel versus hydrogen. 8

11 Refuelling facilities and bus refuelling Fuelling hydrogen buses allows very large refuelling facilities to be deployed, potentially with very long contract life. For a bus depot requiring 1,000kg/day, with a guaranteed requirement for over 10 years, the untaxed hydrogen costs at the pump (e.g. all-inclusive) could fall below 4-5/kg, even using today s fuelling technology. Given the increased efficiency of fuel cell buses, this can lead to approximately equal fuel costs compared to untaxed diesel options. Taxation regimes will vary this comparison. This suggests that infrastructure need not be a major barrier to increased FC bus rollout. Most of the existing refuelling stations for bus applications are currently based on trucked-in gaseous or liquid hydrogen, as centralized hydrogen production has proved to be more cost effective than on-site production technologies, particularly for the higher daily demands which characterise bus operation (compared with passenger cars). On-site production from electrolysis has tended to occur only where a very high priority is placed on zero carbon hydrogen, where on-site electrolysers can produce hydrogen from green electricity. On-site production tends to add a premium between 1.5 and 2 times the price of delivered hydrogen. For urban bus depots, there is often limited space for new fuelling equipment. This means station footprint can be an important factor in selecting the fuelling system of choice. Here, new designs are required for large scale fuelling (over 1,000kg/day), which will be compatible with future bus depots based on hydrogen. The refuelling time experienced by fuel cell bus operators ranges between 7 and 10 minutes per bus, assuming 30-40kg of on-board hydrogen storage at 350bar. As typical refuelling times for diesel buses are less than 3 minutes/bus, the longer fill times for hydrogen buses risk causing an unacceptable level of inconvenience for transit operators when dealing with fleets of over 100 buses. This is a challenge for hydrogen buses which needs further work. Solutions could be logistical (e.g. fuelling more buses in parallel), practical (e.g. fuelling at different times of the day) or technical (e.g. increasing storage capacity on buses to allow fuelling only every two days) but are relatively unexplored to date. It is therefore recommended that these types of solutions are addressed in near term projects such as the CHIC project. 9

12 1 Introduction Hydrogen buses have the potential to provide zero emission and ultra-low carbon public transport. Because of this potential there has been considerable research and demonstration effort dedicated to developing hydrogen bus technology. The technology is, however, not fully commercially mature and will require further public support in the coming years to stand on its own within the market. Work Package 3 of the NextHyLights project is aimed at understanding the pathway to achieving commercial maturity within the sector. This State of the Art document is intended to provide a review of the state of the art of hydrogen bus technologies, as well as providing insights into the barriers to widespread market introduction and how these barriers will evolve in the future. The document is a first main deliverable from work package 3 of the NextHyLights project. The work package aims to produce a roadmap to commercialisation for hydrogen bus technologies. This state of the art review is a key document underpinning the production of the roadmap and its associated technical and economic targets. The review begins with an overview of the current state of the technology and an assessment of the current market. Hydrogen buses are then compared to the current state of the art for alternative bus drivetrains to identify the main barriers to their wider adoption. The future dynamics of the sector are then analysed, to understand if and when those barriers may be overcome. The analysis is based on information sourced from:- o o o The work of the Hydrogen Bus Alliance 3, who have an ongoing dialogue with the hydrogen bus industry as well as the range of operators of hydrogen buses. A review of the literature on hydrogen fuel cell buses, particularly data from large national demonstration programs in Europe and North America In depth interviews with the key players in the hydrogen bus and hydrogen infrastructure sectors. We consulted widely within the fuel cell, bus and hydrogen supply industries to reach these conclusions. A list of consultees is provided in the

13 Annex E: List of Principal Consultees. The interviews were based on a dedicated interview script, circulated in advance. The scripts were based on our best assessment of the state of the sector immediately before each interview, and were constantly updated. Copies of the latest versions are provided in Annex D: Interview Scripts for Fuel Cell Bus Stakeholders The data obtained has been anonymised, aggregated, and processed. The outputs of this process range from graphical exhibits on buses techno-economic performance to future capital and expenditure cost models. Structure of this report This report is structured in the following way: o o o o o o o Chapter 1 present a brief comparison between the three main hydrogen bus technologies Chapter 2 provide a description of the fuel cell bus segment in terms of active bus demonstrations and industry players Chapter 3 analyses the real-world performance of fuel cell buses in recent demonstrations Chapter 4 explores hybrid fuel cell bus architecture and bus component costs, in order to analyse the likely evolution of technology costs in the period Chapter 5 deals with the specific infrastructure issues as they relate to hydrogen supply for buses Chapter 6 compares the techno-economic performance of 12m platform hybrid fuel cell buses with alternative technologies on a like-for-like basis, both under a qualitative and quantitative (Total Cost of Ownership) point of view Chapter 7 provides a set of conclusions from this study. 11

14 1.1 Hydrogen Bus Technologies Hydrogen buses have evolved substantially in the last two decades. A number of different design configurations have been used, including hydrogen in internal combustions engines, and various fuel cell technologies. In addition, companies have used direct drive systems and hybrid drive systems, where an energy storage device (battery or ultra-capacitor) is included within the drivetrain to reduce peak loads and allow regenerative braking s : development and proof of the fuel cell bus concept : realisation of the largest demonstration of fuel cell buses in permanent service (HyFleet:Cute) Today : examples of hybrid fuel cell buses currently in operation Figure 2 Selected fuel cell buses from 1990s to date. Source: public web resources. In this section we present a brief comparison between the three main hydrogen bus technologies which have been used in the past five years. We conclude that the bus industry appears to be settling on a consensus to use fuel cells in hybrid drivetrains as the platform to deliver commercially viable hydrogen buses. 12

15 Finally, the concept designs of hybridised fuel cell buses are broken down in their key structural components in order to understand the architecture of the technology. 1.2 Hydrogen-fuelled Internal Combustion Buses Hydrogen-fuelled internal combustion engine buses (H2-ICE) have also offered a significantly lower fuel economy than hybridised fuel cell buses 4. In addition their exhaust is not strictly pollution-free, as some NOx is inevitably produced in the combustion process. Table 1, below, summarizes the performance of recent H2-ICE trials in comparison with hybridised fuel cell buses. Table 1 Performance of hybrid fuel cell buses in comparison with non hydrogen-fuelled internal combustion engine buses. H2-ICE Hybridised Fuel Cell Bus Fuel Economy (kg of hydrogen consumed per 100km) kg/100km 8 15 kg/100km Range (assuming a 40kg hydrogen storage capacity on-board) km km In-service Pollution (toxic emissions from exhausts) Traces 5 of NOx None Source: Hydrogen Bus Alliance, HyFEET:CUTE, stakeholders interviews. The observed availability of H2-ICE buses in demonstration projects is comparable with traditional diesel buses (~90%) and their capital costs are significantly lower than the current generation of hydrogen fuel cell buses. As a result, developers have considered pursuing H2-ICE-type designs as a transition to fuel cell buses. However, in recent years the major engine manufacturers (Ford and MAN) who were pursuing the technology have pulled back from H2-ICE, which has led to a shortage of viable engines for H2-ICE based buses. 4 This fact has been proved by the HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration. 5 The high temperature within the combustion chamber promotes the chemical reaction between the oxygen and nitrogen present in the air, producing oxides of nitrogen (NOx). 13

16 Whilst it is not possible to rule out a resurgence of H2-ICE interest, at this stage it appears unlikely that hydrogen buses will be commercialised based on H2-ICE technology and we focus instead on commercialisation pathways for hybrid fuel cell buses. If a developer of viable H2-ICE engines emerges before fuel cell hybrid have achieved their projected cost reduction (see below), there is likely to be a resurgence in interest in the use of H2-ICE buses. 1.3 Hybrid Fuel Cell versus non-hybridised Fuel Cell Buses Early fuel cell bus designs involved an electric drivetrain, where a fuel cell generates electricity which is directly supplied to an electric motor. For example, the EvoBus buses operated for the CUTE program (Figure 3, below) used this drivetrain configuration. Figure 3: Architecture of the EvoBus fuel cell bus operated in the CUTE and HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration. Source: However, the CUTE project (among others) showed that the direct coupling of the fuel cell to the motor has four significant disadvantages: 1. Directly coupling the fuel cell to the motor exposes the fuel cell to the dynamic profile of the bus s drive cycle. This spiky demand on the fuel cell tends to degrade the fuel cell quickly and reduces fuel cell life. 2. By operating the fuel cell over the full range of its operating characteristics, the cell is often moved away from its peak efficiency, reducing overall performance. 3. The requirement to meet the full peak load with the fuel cell means very large fuel cell systems are required for peak power provision. 14

17 4. There is no mechanism to capture the kinetic energy dissipated when the bus operator applies the brakes. In the light of these problems, all of the main fuel cell bus developers have now moved to a fully hybridised mode, with the fuel cell operating in a series hybrid configuration 6. In a hybrid mode, all of the above problems can be overcome, as the energy store buffers peak loads and allows regenerative braking (Figure 4, below). In these next generation fuel cell buses, developers are still experimenting with the energy storage device, which can be batteries, ultra capacitors, or a combination of both 7. Figure 4 Layout of the hybrid drivetrain configuration for hybrid fuel cell buses. The drivetrain can include either a battery system or ultra-capacitors or a combination of both. 6 One of the earlier public demonstrations of hybridised FC buses was performed by Toyota and Hino under the Japan Hydrogen and Fuel Cell program (JHFC) in Hybridised designs, however, became the dominant choice only from The largest fleet demonstration ever programmed started in occasion of the 2010 Winter Olympic Games in British Columbia, Canada, performing 20 hybridised buses. Today, every demonstration of fuel cell buses is based on hybridised architectures. 7 For example, the new Evobus Citaro hybrid uses batteries only, the new Wrightbus hydrogen bus for London will only use ultra-capacitors and the APTS bus for Amsterdam and Cologne will use a combination of both. 15

18 The integration of energy storage systems with fuel cell modules has proved to be far more efficient than designs adopting fuel cell modules alone 8. Table 2, below, summarises typical performance of the two technologies. Table 2 Performance of hybrid fuel cell buses in comparison with non hybridised fuel cell buses. Non-hybridised Fuel Cell Bus Hybridised Fuel Cell Bus Fuel Economy (kg of hydrogen consumed per 100km) kg/100km 8 15 kg/100km Range (assuming a 40kg hydrogen storage capacity on-board) km km Source: Hydrogen Bus Alliance, HyFEET:CUTE, stakeholders interviews. The hybridised systems have, however, still to prove the high availability standards achieved by the non-hybridised fuel cell buses in the HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration. The most recent demonstration of hybridised designs has shown availabilities generally below 80% against an average 92% achieved in the HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration. These next generation hybrid buses are at the beginning of their demonstration life. Most bus developers report that the availability problems come from problems in power electronics or energy storage systems as opposed to the fuel cell itself. As a result, similar improvements in availability to those experienced with diesel hybrid drivetrains can be expected. Hybridised designs are constantly being improved, and benefit from synergies with hybrid diesel buses - a technology which is entering serial production both in the USA and Europe. Hybrid fuel cell buses share the same components of the electric drivetrain with hybrid diesel buses, when used in a series hybrid configuration. The consolidation of the hybrid diesel electric manufacturing process is therefore expected to help in the optimisation of the hybrid-electric powertrains. 8 The development of the hybridised FC bus concept design was one of the achievements of the HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration, as a mean to halve the fuel consumption of fuel cell-powered buses ( 16

19 1.4 Hybrid Fuel Cell Bus designs As described above, the hydrogen bus sector appears to have settled on a hybridised fuel cell system as the drivetrain of choice for hydrogen fuelled buses. Hybridised systems offer trade-offs between energy storage capacity and fuel cell power output, allowing a range of different configurations. For example: New Flyer/Ballard (BC Transit bus demonstration 12m platform) Battery Capacity: 47kWh, Fuel Cell system: nominal max output 150kW Van Hool/UTC (AC Transit bus demonstration 12m platform) Battery Capacity: 54kWh, Fuel Cell system: nominal max output 120kW Skoda Electric/Proton Motor (Neratovice bus demonstration 12m platform): Battery: 100kW/27kWh, Ultra-capacitors: 200kW/0.32 kwh, Fuel Cell system max output: 48kW EvoBus/AFCC (Hamburg Hochbahn bus demonstration 12m platform) Battery: 250kW/26.9kWh, Fuel Cell systems max output: 140kW (two units of 75kW) Wrightbus/Ballard (Transport for London demonstration 12m platform) Super-capacitors: 180kW/0.6kWh, Fuel Cell system: nominal max output 75kW APTS/Ballard (e.g. Regionalverkehr Köln bus demonstration 18m platform) Battery: 100kW/25kWh, super-capacitors 100kW/2kWh, Fuel Cell system: nominal max output 150kW A third hybridised configuration is known as Battery Dominant. An example is the Proterra bus concept: Proterra/Hydrogenics (e.g. Burbank bus demonstration 10m platform) Battery Capacity: 55kWh, Fuel Cell system: nominal max output 32kW (two units of 16kW) In battery-dominant designs, the fuel cell system is considered a range extender, which recharges the battery during the drive cycle. The batteries themselves provide the main motive power for the bus. All the hybridised fuel cell bus designs present common structural elements. Table 3, below, provides a schematic description. 17

20 Table 3 Description of the principal structural components of hybrid fuel cell buses. Item Characteristics Remarks Bus Body 18, 12, 10, and 6 meter platforms have all been used. Bus Chassis Similar to diesel / diesel Hybrid. 18, 12, 10, and 6 meter platforms. CNG bus bodies are often used (thanks to similar structural requirements for roofmounted fuel tanks). - Fuel Cell System Fuel cell systems are based on Proton Exchange Membranes (PEM) stacks. Power output ranges between 10kWe to 200KWe, depending on bus platform and manufacturer. Near term targets: extended warranties from 15,000 to 20,000hours (2015 target). Warranties up to 15,000 hours. Power Electronics Various offered as ad hoc packages by integrator firms or directly by fuel cell / bus manufacturers. The power electronics and system controls currently provide the most significant availability problems for FC buses. The next generation of buses are expected to solve these problems. Electric Motor DC, AC induction, Asynchronous/Synchronous AC, Permanent Magnet Synchronous Strong synergies with hybrid diesel buses. The electric motor can be either a single main motor or hub mounted (where the motor is designed within the wheel). Energy Storage System Fuel Cell Cooling System Hydrogen Storage System Power generally ranges from 25kW to 240kW. Energy storage systems are generally based on battery packs (either NiMH or Li-ion) and/or ultracapacitors (generally up to 100 kw). Maximum power output and storage capacity varies depending on hybrid architecture. The majority of the stack manufacturers use liquid cooled systems, with radiators to dissipate heat. Hydrogen storage systems are generally based on Type III cylinder technology, storing compressed hydrogen at a pressure of 350bar. Near and long term targets for the energy storage systems are higher energy densities, faster charging time and reduction of battery weight. - The next generation hybrid bus range is generally considered satisfactory for city transit services (>250km) at current storage pressures. Higher pressures (700 bar), however, have been suggested to improve bus fuelling logistics (more hydrogen on the bus could mean refuelling required only every second day). 18

21 2 The Fuel Cell Bus Sector The fuel cell bus sector has been constantly expanding over the last 10 years, showing an increasing number of in revenue service demonstration projects. Figure 5, below, summarises the cumulative number of fuel cell buses in transit demonstrations between 2002 and 2010 and the number of buses in operation by 2011 according to currently planned activities. The figure also reports the main international deployment targets. It is worth noting that the figures after 2009 refer only to hybridised fuel cell designs. Number of Buses Fuel Cell buses in service: historical data and selected international targets Cumulative number of buses (hist. data) CaFCP Zbus target (upper value) China target HBA target JTI and HBA target JTI target MKE target 10 SHHP target Figure 5 Cumulative number of fuel cell buses in operation and selected international deployment targets between 2010 and data include preliminary data of the CHIC demonstration, and assumes that a number of demonstrations active through 2010 will be still running in Bus deployment has tended to occur in waves, with a substantial increase in activity around the time of the CUTE trial in and a new wave of next generation buses entering service between 2010 and Over 110 hybridised fuel cell buses will be operative worldwide by The main sites which have been announced for the next generation bus trials will be: Amsterdam/Cologne 4 new APTS buses from 2011 AC Transit a fleet of up to 16 Van Hool buses arriving during

22 BC Transit 20 New Flyer buses operating from the winter Olympics 2010 Hamburg a fleet of 10 new EvoBus vehicles operating from early 2011 London 8 new ISE/Wrightbus vehicles operating from late 2010 All of these sites will use hybridised fuel cell buses. In addition, a number of other locations are in the final stages of commercial negotiation. The main international fuel cell demonstration activities from 2002 to 2010 are reported in the Annex C. The demonstrations have been selected according to two criteria: Demonstration of buses in public transit projects (e.g. in-revenue service). Military or university demos have been excluded. Demonstration no older than CUTE ( ). The analysis of these demonstrations allows an identification of the most active industry firms in fuel cell bus demonstration. Figure 6, below, reports the principal fuel cell bus manufacturers against the cumulative number of fuel cell buses produced Bus manufacturers' experience on Fuel Cell Buses (units produced in the last 7 years) 60 APTS EvoBus Hino Hyundai IVECO Marcopolo New Flyer Proterra Rampini ZEV SAIC Van Hool Technobus Figure 6 Buses manufacturers experience in FCB demonstrations expressed as number of buses provided by Figures include preliminary data from the newly initiated CHIC project. 20

23 The bus manufacturer segment is populated by a number of competitors, offering different expertise and services. Some firms are able to manufacture whole bus solutions (e.g. EvoBus, Proterra), whilst a larger number are based on a bus platform, which is then adapted by a fuel cell provider or systems integrator (e.g. ISE/Wrightbus or Vossloh/APTS). In these arrangements, the bus manufacturer plays a reduced role in delivering the project the bulk of the work being carried out by the integrators or fuel cell system supplier. From Figure 6 the bus segment can be characterised as having 3-4 players with a significant demonstration experience (notably EvoBus and Van Hool), with a number of players entering the space to gain first operational experience with new, smaller trials. Figure 7, below, summarises the principal fuel cell system manufacturers against the cumulative number of buses powered. The market of fuel cell system is again populated by a number of international competitors, although it is currently dominated by few firms (Ballard and UTC). FC manufacturers' experience on Fuel Cell Buses (number of buses powered in the last 7 years ) 80 AFCC Ballard Hydrogenics Hyundai Nuvera Proton Motor Shen Li Toyota Figure 7 FC manufacturers experience in FCB demonstrations expressed as number of buses powered by Figures include preliminary data from the newly initiated CHIC project. It should be noted, however, that both in the bus and FC system segments an increasing number of firms are becoming active in the sector over time. Figure 8, below, plots the most active FC bus and fuel cell system manufacturers against time. The year of reference is defined as the year of operation of the first FC bus provided or powered. UTC 21

24 The number of competitors in the FC bus market has slowly increased in time, showing a substantial increase in the last two years. This increment is partially due to the entrance into the market of Chinese and Brazilian firms through the UNDP Fuel Cell Bus program, as well as European firms through new purchase orders made by the members of the Hydrogen Bus Alliance (HBA) and North American transit agencies. 14 Number of competitors in the FC bus market Cumulative number of firms Bus Manufacturers FC Manufacturers Figure 8 Cumulative number of firms active in the FC bus market against time. The figure reports the number of firms that provided or powered at least one fuel cell bus for any given year. Data for 2010 includes projects planned to be operative by The penetration of new competitors in the fuel cell bus market has been promoted by the initiation of a new wave of demonstration projects, which has led to new investments in the sector. 22

25 2.1 Hydrogen bus value chain The value chain of hybridised fuel cell buses involves a larger number of stakeholders. These firms provide highly specialised components or services, such as the hydrogen storage system, the electric powertrain and integration services. Figure 9, below, summarises the typical value chain of hybrid FC buses. Fuel Cell System Body Chassis Hydrogen Storage systems Battery Power electronics Electric Motors Vehicle Integration Vehicle Testing OEM FC manufacturers Specialty Firms Integrators = component manufacturer / service provider = may manufacture the component or provide the service Figure 9 Schematic of the value chain for hybrid fuel cell buses. Dark blue shows the specialty for each stakeholder. In light blue are marked service and components that can be provided by the different stakeholders. Schematically, the value chain presents nine key elements in delivering an operational hybrid fuel cell bus, from the manufacturing of the fuel cell system to the vehicle testing (this latter being generally performed before and during the in-revenue operation of the bus). Some OEMs, the bus manufacturers, have a comprehensive presence on most of the value chain, typically through controlled firms (this is the case for Daimler through AFCC, EvoBus etc., for example). 23

26 2.2 Interaction with the fuel cell car supply chain Whilst all stakeholders agree than rapid growth in the passenger car market for fuel cells will help expand the overall supply chain for fuel cells, there are two competing views of how fuel cell buses might be affected by developments within the fuel cell powered passenger car segment. The view tends to depend on whether the stakeholder has a major stake in the automotive fuel cell developments. The key distinction is whether or not the bus market is driven by progresses in the fuel cell car market: OEM driven: the FC bus segment is seen as more developed than the fuel cell car segment, but ultimately the latter will drive the whole vehicle market. Accordingly, bus cost and performance are expected to be strongly dependent on the actual results that will be achieved by the fuel cell car segment. Fuel Cell Manufacturer (not auto) driven: the fuel cell automotive market is expected to be driven by the car segment in the long term, but specialised fuel cells for buses are projected to be able to achieve a commercial market introduction independent of the passenger car segment. It is worth noting that there is not a consensus within the industry on this issue to date. This difference in outlook leads to two different strategies for fuel cell bus development and hence for the commercialisation of the technology which are discussed in the following chapters. 24

27 2.3 Market conclusions The bus market has a much more fragmented supply chain than the passenger car segment. Conventional buses are often built by two separate companies, one supplying the chassis and the other the bus body and bus operators often deal with more than one company for the maintenance of a single bus. This fragmentation is reflected in the supply chain for hydrogen fuel cell buses, where some buses are built by a dedicated OEM and others are built by consortia that supply different aspects of the bus. The fuel cell bus market has developed in phases, with an initial deployment led by Europe s CUTE project around , followed by a new wave of next generation hybrid buses which will go into service between The fuel cell bus market has historically been dominated by a limited number of players (EvoBus, Van Hool and New Flyer for buses and Ballard and UTC for fuel cells) and currently only 2-3 major European manufacturers (out of the six major European OEMs) have made significant investments in hydrogen bus technologies. These are, most notably, EvoBus and Van Hool for fuel cell buses and MAN who have invested in Hydrogen ICE buses, but recently moved away from further bus demonstration in the short term. The new wave of next generation buses will bring an increasing number of players to the market but there is a general consensus within the existing fuel cell bus players that more of the large players investing in the technology would increase competition, helping to accelerate the cost reduction process, and increase the overall confidence of the bus industry in the technology. 25

28 3 Fuel Cell Buses: Status and Evolution In this section we summarise the real-world performance of fuel cell buses in recent demonstrations. The information collected provides a quantitative analysis of the fuel cell bus segment s status and insights on its evolution. In gathering and consolidating this information, we faced several difficulties due to the inherent differences between the demonstrations selected. Performance data were available only for a restricted number of demonstrations, having typically a small pilot fleet of 5 or fewer buses. In addition the data results spread over a wide range of values, reflecting:- Different bus platforms (6, 10 and 12m demonstrations have taken place) and fuel cell systems Different driving cycles Different climates and operating conditions (e.g. AC, ventilation, hilly versus flat etc.) The values collected should be interpreted accordingly. To ensure consistency of the outputs, only 12 and 10 metre bus platforms have been considered. The lack of test protocols for fuel cell buses makes the comparison of demonstration data difficult, and limits any definitive conclusions on the merits of different hybridised bus designs. The historic data gathered, however, describe the overall state of the technology well. 3.1 Current technical performances Figure 10, Figure 11 and Figure 12, below, display historical data for three key technical performance indicators of fuel cell buses: availability, range and fuel economy. The figures also show selected international performance targets by 2015, for comparison purposes. 26

29 % km Availability (%) Hybrid Fuel Cell buses Non hybridised FC buses (HYFLEET:CUTE) Historical Data DOE target HBA target JTI target Figure 10 Evolution of fuel cell bus availability and some international targets (by 2015). Bus availability is defined as the percentage of days of actual service compared to the number of day of scheduled service over the year. The ratio should exclude downtimes for planned maintenance Range (km) 400 Hybrid FC buses Non-hybridised FC buses (CUTE and HyFLEET:CUTE demos) Historical Data DOE target MKE target Figure 11 Evolution of the fuel cell bus range in comparison with some international targets (by 2015). 95% confidence limits are shown where data were available. 9 This is compatible with HyFLEET:CUTE s availability definition: the ratio of time buses were not in maintenance to the total timeframe of the project operation expressed as a percentage. 27

30 Fuel Economy (kg/100km) 30 kg H2 / 100 km Nonhybridised FC buses Hybrid FC buses Historical Data HBA target JTI target Figure 12 Evolution of the fuel cell bus fuel economy in comparison with some international targets (by 2015). The data displayed above show that fuel cell bus performance is improving through time. The main conclusions from this analysis can be summarised as follows: Availability: The highest availability ever reached to date, 92%, was achieved by non-hybridised fuel cell buses in the HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration. It is important to note that this was a well-controlled trial (with dedicated maintenance technicians at each site) and did not involve a hybrid drivetrain. The worst availability recorded for hybrid fuel cell buses refer to some North American demonstrations which, in contrast to the CUTE and HyFLEET:CUTE demonstrations, were far less controlled by on-site technicians and were better characterized as one-off prototypes than a dedicated trial. In general, hybrid fuel cell buses have not consistently met such high availability as non-hybrid variants, showing values lower that 80% in most of the demonstrations considered here. The achievement of a level of availability equal to conventional diesel buses is one of the key aims of the next generation of hybrid fuel cell buses, to be introduced in The main cause of the poor availability has been the novelty of hybridised designs. Causes of failure have centred on power electronics, batteries, control systems and integration issues. The HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration proved that fuel cell buses can achieve very high availability standards. There is no fundamental reason why 28

31 hybrid fuel cell buses will not reach the same high availability as soon as the technology has matured. Hybridised designs are constantly improving, and benefit from synergies with hybrid diesel buses in the optimisation of electric drivetrains. Range: Bus range is generally satisfactory, especially for city transit services. For larger semi-rural routes (e.g. the BC Transit routes in Whistler) there are still some issues where ranges over 450km are required. However, these can be mitigated with more hydrogen tanks on the vehicle, at the expense of greater vehicle weight. Hybridised fuel cell buses show higher ranges, thanks to their superior fuel economy. Fuel Economy: In all the demonstrations analysed, hybridised designs show far better fuel efficiency than non-hybridised designs. Fuel economy of hybridised fuel cell buses is clearly improving over time, showing impressive results for best in class trials. The lack of trials with common drive cycle characteristics makes data interpretation difficult. OEMs and public authorities should be encouraged in promoting common test protocols in order to ensure the comparability of different bus performance data. The next generation of hybrid fuel cell bus demonstrations (such as CHIC) are also aimed at understanding the fuel economy of next generation FC buses. Here, it will be important to ensure that results can be compared at least against equivalent diesel buses on the same routes. In conclusion, future demonstrations should target high levels of availability, at least comparable with existing diesel buses (90%), in order to make the technology attractive to end users. In addition demonstrations should target the most efficient end of the current fuel economy range, in order to maximise the benefits of the technology. 29

32 3.2 Other technical issues A number of other technical issues are relevant to bus operators when considering hydrogen vehicle purchase. These include: Noise: The noise of urban buses is a major drawback of an efficient public transport option. The main noise from a conventional bus is from the diesel engine. As the fuel cell system itself is silent, it should be possible to dramatically improve the noise levels emanating from a fuel cell bus. On many of the early fuel cell buses, various point sources of noise meant that the buses were not truly silent. In particular air compressors to pressurize the inlet air for the fuel cell stack have cause high pitched noise issues. Fuel cell system integrators envisage these issues being resolved with next generation air compressors and lower pressure stacks. Table 4 Current noise performance of basic diesel and hybrid fuel cell buses in comparison with the European noise limit in force for the external environment. The EU limit is intended for vehicles carrying more than 9 passengers and having a mass exceeding 3.5 tons. Condition EU Limit Basic diesel bus Hybrid fuel cell bus Engine power < 150kW 78db ~ 78db < 75db Source: stakeholders consultation Weight: The additional weight of hydrogen tanks and the fuel cell balance of systems compared to a diesel bus increase the load on the axle and can lead to restrictions in the number of standing passengers allowed. Table 5, below provides some indication of the effect of additional weight on some of the recent hydrogen buses, compared to their diesel equivalent and the effect on passenger carrying capacity. 30

33 Table 5 Typical weight and passenger capacity for diesel and hybrid fuel cell buses Typical Diesel bus (12m platform) Hybrid Fuel Cell Bus (12m platform) Kerb Weight up to 12 tonne up to 2.5 tonnes additional weight Passenger Capacity (overall) up to 110 passengers Reduced by additional weight (up to 30 passengers less) Source: Web resources, Stakeholders consultation. The reduction in passenger capacity may present a problem for bus companies on very busy urban routes. However, future buses are likely to reduce this weight penalty compared with diesel buses. The main solution to reducing weight has been to reduce the hydrogen carrying capacity of the vehicle. This can be achieved with the increased efficiency of the hybridised drivetrains in next generation buses. Other weight improvements are foreseen from reduction in balance of plant weight and improvements to the overall drivetrain packaging, where hundreds of kilograms of savings have been achieved in the current generation of fuel cell buses. Refuelling time: One of the major constraints for bus operators is the refuelling time for hydrogen buses. Large bus operators typically refuel all of the buses in their depot in a short window at the end of their service at night. With depots containing over 200 buses in some cases this lead to a requirement for very rapid fill times. Fill times below 5 minutes for diesel buses are common. Filling over 30kg of hydrogen in less than 5 minutes is not currently feasible without pre-cooling the hydrogen (as the temperature increase at these high fill rates would damage the hydrogen tanks). This is a major constraint. Potential solutions are technical (e.g. cooling the hydrogen), relate to infrastructure (e.g. filling to 700 bar, to fill more hydrogen and allow less frequent fuelling) or logistical, (e.g. change depot layouts and filling patterns to allow longer filling periods). The logistical solutions are the least favoured by bus operators and will act as a barrier to entry for hydrogen vehicles unless a technical solution is developed. 31

34 3.3 Capital cost trends Figure 13, below, displays historical data on fuel cell bus capital cost in comparison with HBA and Canadian targets. The figure shows capital costs decreasing through time, suggesting an evolution towards the 2015 targets. The cost trajectory between 2010 and 2015, however, is far from clear. In Section 4, below, we explore the perception of all the major industry players in order to analyse the possible dynamics for the window. 3.5 Bus Capital Costs (, millions) 3.0, millions Historical Data HBA upper target HBA lower target Figure 13 Historical capital cost data for fuel cell buses ( data), and selected international targets by

35 3.4 Historic performance summary A snapshot of the performance of today s hybrid FC buses is provided in Table 6, below. Table 6 Performance of state of art hybrid fuel cell buses (12m, Low Floor) Item Data Range Average Values Comment Capital Cost ( ) million --- By comparison, the typical diesel bus (12m platform) costs is 170, ,000 depending on specification. Fuel Economy 8 15 kg/100km ~ 10 kg/100km Including ACHV and Electrical Load Range km ~ 350 km Including ACHV and Electrical Load Availability 55% - 92% 80% The upper bound has been achieved in the HyFLEET:CUTE demonstration. Lower values are from less successful early trials It is possible to conclude that fuel cell bus technology is evolving towards meeting the main technical metrics for commercial success. The main requirement for next generation trials is to prove that the hybridised fuel cell architecture can perform at a level of availability that is acceptable for the buses to act as replacement for conventional diesel fuelled vehicles. Given the success of achieving these levels during the HYFLEET:CUTE project, it is realistic to expect that once the initial teething troubles are ironed out, the hybrid fuel cell vehicles will achieve these levels in the next generation trials starting The capital cost of the buses is still some way off the levels required for commercial viability. Current costs are 4-7 times the level of an equivalent diesel bus. Trends for the cost of hybrid fuel cell buses will be discussed at length in the following section. 33

36 4 Capital cost dynamics In this section we analyse stakeholders perspectives on fuel cell bus and bus component costs, in order to analyse the likely evolution of technology costs in the period. We interviewed the majority of the players in the fuel cell bus sector. The data collection was based on interview scripts, used as a guide for bilateral interviews held confidentially. The data has been anonymised, aggregated and finally processed in order to provide the outputs summarised in this section and in Section 5.2. We adopted two approaches to analyse bus capital costs: In the Aggregated Approach, stakeholders were asked about their perception of bus cost and cost dynamics (i.e. cost reduction in time due to technology improvements and cost reductions for increasing order volumes). In the Bottom-Up approach the cost structure of fuel cell buses is broken down into its main components. Stakeholders are asked about cost, performance and warranty of each component. 4.1 Aggregated Approach All of the industry stakeholders interviewed agreed on two different but related effects in driving the cost of hybrid fuel cell buses. The first is a pure learning effect in the near term, e.g. in the window, where technology improvement helps drive down costs. Most fuel cell manufacturers are evolving their system generations towards a commercial product. Each evolution brings cost reductions through ease of manufacturing and reduced materials costs. This improvement in time has a significant effect by 2015, when a next generation of fuel cell systems will be available. The second effect is related to the achievement of an early economy of scale beyond (i.e. the achievement of a large volume of sales per year). This vision is reflected by Figure 14, below. 34

37 2 Hybrid Fuel Cell Bus Cost - relation between time and volume Million Volume per year: buses Volume per year: buses Volume per year: buses Volume per year: 500-1,000 buses Industry's Projections Figure 14 Cost/volume dynamics over time based on industry s perspective. Original data has been anonymised into data intervals. The intervals summarise bus cost projections for different minimum bus sales volume per year. Figures are in millions of Euro (exchange rate assumed: 1 = 1.4$). Figure 15, below, summarizes the gathered stakeholders cost projections against time only in comparison with the historical data reported in Section 3.3. For comparison purposes, Figure 15 displays the upper bound for the commercial entry of the fuel cell bus technology, which is based on an assumption of an early market in subsidized and environmentally sensitive markets (where e.g. tram systems operate today) and a commercial target as suggested by the members of the Hydrogen Bus Alliance (HBA). The commercial target represents bus costs comparable with the more expensive diesel hybrid buses in the European market. 35

38 3.5 Bus Capital Costs: hystorical data and stakeholder perspective (, millions) 3 Historical data millions Industry's Projections Figure 15 Industry perception on cost evolution in time (as in Table 3.2) in comparison with the historical data reported in section 3.1. Exchange rate assumed ( ): 1= $1.4. Figure 14 and Figure 15 suggest that a hybrid fuel cell bus cost below 700,000 is achievable. The more optimistic stakeholders see that this could be achieved before 2015, provided there is sufficient volume of demand pre-2015, whilst the more cautious stakeholders (typically from mainstream bus OEMs) would see this point between 2015 and This conclusion is also supported by the bottom-up analysis of the problem, which suggests rapid cost reduction may be available (see Figure 16, below). 36

39 4.2 Bottom-Up Approach breaking down the cost structure We identified 8 components in the fuel cell bus cost structure. Table 7, below, summarises the responses obtained from the stakeholders interviewed. Table 7 Fuel Cell Bus cost break-down in time and volume according to stakeholders perspective (exchange rate assumed: 1 = $1.4) Components Indicative cost (2010 ) Indicative cost 2015 and beyond (2010 ) Remarks Chassis and Body ~ 140, ,000 / bus ~ 140, ,000 / bus 15 years of life expected Up to 5 years warranty Costs are not expected to benefit from economy of scale effects. Fuel Cell System ~ 3,000 6,000/kW Cost varies according to manufacturer and FC rated power. The cost range reflects market data for system over 70kW. Remarks: 5 years or 10-15,000h warranty range Two philosophies exist, depending on automotive volumes. Please note that there is not a consensus within the industry on this issue yet. High Auto FC take-up: / kw for more than 10,000 FC cars / year. The fuel cell system is assumed to be standardised for car applications, with max10,000 hours warranty Costs for units bigger than 30 kw Warranty costs have a major impact on cost requiring only a simple 1 year warranty can reduce cost by up to 40% The lower bound range assumes the existence of passenger car volume. Bus based markets 860 1,000/ kw for buses / year and ~20,000 hours warranty Up to 2,150 / kw if the market fails to achieve volume (e.g. << 100 buses / year) Assume long life stacks - 20,000 hours warranty (by 2015) 37

40 FC Cooling System ~ 15,000/ bus ~ 15,000/ bus Costs are not expected to benefit from economy of scale effects. Energy Storage System Battery: ~ 720 1,220/kWh for NiMH and Li-Ion technologies. Up to 3 years warranty. Ultra Capacitors: ~ 110/kW. Up to 2 years warranty ~ / kwh the current FC bus trend is for longer life higher cost batteries at the top of this range Costs for storage capacity between 20kWh and 100kWh. Electric light-vehicle industry target is approx. 200 /kwh by 2015/ Hydrogen Storage System ~ 1,300 2,150/kg Remark: lower bound cost may not include additional items such as storage system insulation ~ / kg Cost for storage capacity more than 30 kg. Power Electronics and Electric Motors ~ 72, ,000 / bus Remark: this cost includes DC/DC convertors and the electric motor/s ~ 72, ,000 / bus by 2015 Cost similarity with diesel hybrid buses. Limited scope for cost reduction in time stakeholders suggest 10% potential improvement Labour for drivetrain integration ~ 64, ,000/ bus ~ 36,000-50,000/ bus by 2015 As low as 3,600 / bus beyond Assuming bus assembling and testing. Learning effects in time expected thanks to the improvement of the manufacturing process of hybrid diesel buses. OEM Investments costs This cost component includes a combination of factors added by bus OEMs in manufacturing the buses. It currently includes items such as risk premium, non-recurring engineering costs (if any), and additional labour costs required to manufacture a novel product (e.g. hand assemble the FC buses, etc.) Currently, these costs are estimated at up to 26% of the final bus cost. As these costs are driven by confidence and volume, their impact on bus cost is expected to substantially reduce over time. Data source: North American and European industry players. Exchange rate assumed: 1= $1.4 The data reported in Table 7 present a wide range of values for almost all components. Clearly, stakeholder perception of component costs greatly varies according to their own 10 See for example: Battery for Electric Cars, Challenges, Opportunities and the Outlook to 2020, Boston Consulting Group, January

41 experience. In practice, different bus architectures require different technical specifications for similar components. This may explain some of the variation in the projections. Otherwise the range is likely due to the maturity of the supply chain and lack of transparency on component pricing. Figure 16 and Figure 17, below, summarise the information collected in Table 7 and reproduce the bottom-up reconstruction of the cost of a 12m hybrid fuel cell bus in two hybrid configurations (powered by a 150kW and 75kW FC system). We consider three points in time: The fuel cell bus costs between today and 2014, are based on the range of component costs provided by stakeholders Estimated bus costs between 2015 and 2018, assuming there is little benefit in fuel cell prices from take up of automotive FC systems. This spread of prices in this path reflects the uncertainty around the scale of procurement of FC buses before 2015, with larger committed orders having the potential to drive costs to the lower bound by reducing the uncertainty for fuel cell supplier and the bus OEM. The bus cost in , reflecting the expected costs for a fuel cell system in a market where large demand of automotive fuel cell systems is driven by the car segment (> 10,000 fuel cell cars/year) or dedicated bus stacks have reduced in cost due to increased volumes (1,000 s of buses per year). 39

42 (Thousands) (Thousands) Hybridised Fuel Cell Buses: Cost Break-down ,800 1,650 1,500 1,350 1,200 1, Cost Range : Upper and lower bound Cost projections based on a set of assumptions please refer to Table 8 Cost Range Bus based market: Upper and lower bound Cost Range High FC car take-up: Upper and lower bound OEM Investment Costs Labour Power Electronics and Motors Hydrogen Storage System Energy Storage System FC Cooling System Fuel Cell System Chassis and Body Assumptions: FC System: 150 kw Energy Storage System: 50kWh Hydrogen Storage System: 40kg Figure 16 Break-down of the cost of a hybridised fuel cell bus in the time window , according to the data reported in Table 7. It is modelled a 12m platform bus, powered by 150kW fuel cell system, a 50kWh battery system and with 40kg of on-board hydrogen storage. Buses cost is expressed at 2010 money value. Hybridised Fuel Cell Buses: Cost Break-down ,650 1,500 1,350 1,200 1, Cost Range : Upper and lower bound Cost projections based on a set of assumptions please refer to Table 8 Cost Range Bus based market: Upper and lower bound Cost Range High FC car take-up: Upper and lower bound OEM Investment Costs Labour Power Electronics and Motors Hydrogen Storage System Energy Storage System FC Cooling System Fuel Cell System Chassis and Body Assumptions: FC System: 75 kw Energy Storage System: 50kWh Hydrogen Storage System: 30kg Figure 17 Break-down of the cost of a hybridised fuel cell bus in the time window , according to the data reported in Table 7. The data is based on a 12m bus, powered by 75kW fuel cell system, a 50kWh battery system and with 30kg of on-board hydrogen storage. Buses cost is expressed at 2010 money value. 40

43 Costs The bottom up approach was able to reproduce the cost range currently observed in the market, based on the data above. The main cost component is the capital cost of the fuel cell system itself. The second main component increasing the cost of the bus is the combination of factors added by bus OEMs in manufacturing the buses, which includes a risk premium, nonrecurring engineering and other costs and additional labour required to hand build the FC buses. These two factors represent the vast majority of the additional cost of today s FC buses and hence can be considered the two main barriers to an economically viable capital cost for FC buses. Costs from 2015 Figure 16 and Figure 17 suggest whole bus costs lower than 700,000 as early as by 2015/8 and not necessary in conjunction with a large demand of automotive FC systems. According to Figure 16 and Figure 17, the cost components with the greatest potential to reduce in time are the cost of fuel cell system itself, the OEM investment costs and the additional labour required to install a hybrid electric drivetrain and a fuel cell/h2 system. Stakeholders expect most of the extra costs currently priced by OEMs (such eventual risk premium, extra labour costs etc.) to fall as the market experiences standardisation of the hybrid manufacturing process and the consolidation of an early market for fuel cell buses. As volumes increase, these costs can be spread over more vehicles and there is scope to create efficiencies within the manufacturing process. In addition, as the product gains more exposure to the market, the risks associated with the product are reduced and with it the risk premiums for the product. Stakeholders perception of fuel cell system cost evolution through time and through increases in volume is illustrated in Figure 18 below. The main FC manufacturing stakeholders identified learning and volume effects as different but interacting forces in driving FC costs through time. Breakthroughs in the durability of fuel cell systems are expected to greatly reduce costs in the next few years, thanks to reduced warranty costs. The warranty costs faced by the manufacturers (essentially the stack refurbishment costs) are fully internalised in the whole cost of the fuel cell system. This cost is currently a considerable part and may represent up to 40% of the whole cost of the fuel cell, according to stakeholder feedback. Improvements in the durability of fuel cells may therefore considerably lower the cost of the warranty even in absence of a large bus demand. This is summarised in Figure 18, below, in the time window

44 Fuel Cell System cost in time - step-function-like representation / kw 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 Learning Effects (breakthrough in cell durability) Volume ~ low 100's buses (bulk procurements) Volume ~ low 1,000's buses and/or large automotive market (~ 10,000 cars/year) 1, Figure 18 Fuel cell systems cost as a function of time and volume according to stakeholders perspective (sales volume refers to the global market). The figure schematically plots the data reported in Table 3.3. The figures by 2015 assume 20,000 hour warranties whilst the figures by 2020 assume that the fuel cell system is standardised for car applications (10,000 hours warranty). Figures for apply for fuel cell systems bigger than 100kW only. Cost figures are expressed at 2010 money value. In volume terms, the cost of a bus fuel cell system is expected to reduce to approximately 850 1,000/kW given a demand of a few hundreds of buses per year and for warranties up to 20,000 hours. This is summarised in Figure 18 in the intermediate time window between 2013 and Further cost reduction of the fuel cell system is ultimately envisaged, but this will require an automotive fuel cell market with a large demand of fuel cell cars (> 10,000 cars/year), reaching costs as low as /kW. These figures assume that fuel cell buses can be powered with a fuel cell system sharing highly standardised components with car fuel cell systems. Accordingly, the figures assume of warranty of roughly 10,000hours.This is summarised in Figure 18 in the time window beyond The cost of bus fuel cell system, however, is likely to reduce further beyond 2015 also independently to large automotive volume, due to an increasing optimization of the technology and standardisation of the manufacturing process. 42

45 (Thousands) Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review 4.3 Outlook to 2030 The bottom-up analysis of the hybrid fuel cell bus cost can be extended to 2030 in a similar fashion to that described above. However, it should be noted that in looking out to 2030, the cost of hybrid drivetrain components becomes much more challenging for stakeholders to predict. Figure 19, below, summarises the key results from this analysis. The capital cost of hydrogen buses is expected to reduce further by 2030 as some cost components such as extra labour and the risk premium costs are ultimately envisaged to disappear. Hybrid fuel cell buses, however, are not expected to reach today s capital cost level of diesel buses, as fundamentally the hybrid fuel cell architecture requires extra components on top of the basic diesel bus architecture. The cost for hybrid fuel cell buses in can be also estimated by pricing these extra components according to s figures. Using these assumptions, fuel cell buses are expected to ultimately cost between 100,000 and 200,000 more than a basic diesel bus and approx. 50, ,000 more than the cost level expected for diesel hybrid buses by Hybridised fuel cell buses: cost break-down outlook to Diesel hydrod bus (projection) Basic diesel bus 300 Power Electronics and Motors 200 Hydrogen Storage System Energy Storage system 100 FC Cooling System Fuel Cell System 0 150kW hybridisation 75kW hybridisation Hybrid fuel cell bus, outlook to 2030 Diesel Bus (2030) Diesel hybrid Bus (2030) Chassis and Body Figure 19 Break-down of the cost of a hybridised fuel cell bus according to stakeholders projections for ~ It is modelled on a hybrid fuel cell bus based on a 12m platform bus, powered by a 150kW or 75kW fuel cell system. The two hybridisations are compared to today s diesel bus cost level and the cost level expected for diesel hybrid buses by approx Buses cost is expressed at 2010 money value. 43

46 It is worth noting that by 2030 the cost difference between different fuel cell bus hybridisation architectures is expected to depend more on the actual specifications of the electric drive-train than on the rated power output of the fuel cell system. For example, a 75kW-powered fuel cell bus by 2030 could be slightly more expensive than a 150kW-powered one as different energy storage requirements (battery capacity) or hybridization choices (battery, super-capacitors or a combination of both) may have more influence on the final bus cost than the cost of the fuel cell system itself. 4.4 Capital cost dynamics summary The current cost of a fuel cell bus is over 5 times the cost of a basic diesel equivalent. This is too high for commercial traction and will prevent any market traction for the technology. There are two key factors which increase the cost of a fuel cell bus over a typical diesel hybrid bus: The fuel cell itself The various additional costs associated with assembling a fuel cell bus, such as additional labour, non-recurring engineering and a risk premium to cover the risks of selling a new technology. Both of these costs are predicted to reduce with time and volume of buses. This reduction could lead to a cost range for FC buses of approx. 450, ,000 between , independently from sales volume in the passenger car segment. The lower bound of this range refers to 75kW fuel cell buses and will require a commitment to hundreds of vehicle orders before Further reductions are likely to derive from increases in the use of fuel cells in the passenger car segment. These could reduce the cost of a fuel cell bus well below 400,000 in the 2018 to 2022 time frame under best case assumptions. Ultimately, the capital cost of hybrid fuel cell buses is not expected to reach the cost of diesel buses due to the additional components required. Hybrid fuel cell buses are expected to cost approx. between 100,000 and 200,000 more than a basic diesel bus and approx. 50, ,000 more than the cost level expected for diesel hybrid buses by Figure 20, below, summarises in one graph the cost projections for the period analysed above. 44

47 Hybrid fuel cell bus capital cost : cost projection summary Millions Costs projections based on a set of assumptions please refer to Table 8 150kW FC bus ( ) 75kW FC Bus ( ) 150kW FC Bus ( ) kW FC Bus ( ) 150kW FC Bus ( ) kW FC Bus ( ) Averaged costs Averaged costs Averaged costs Averaged costs ~ kW FC Bus (~ 2030) 75kW FC Bus (~ 2030) Figure 20 Hybrid fuel cell cost over time as suggested by Figure 15, Figure 16 and Figure 19. Buses cost is expressed at 2010 money value. Our survey identified two competing views within the industry on how bus fuel cell systems might be affected by the evolution of the passenger car segment. These views can be summarised as it follows: Dedicated bus stack led: Fuel cell system manufacturers foresee that specialised systems for buses will continue to have a role, independent of the car segment. This option would imply more costly fuel cell systems but with extended warranty e.g. up to 20,000 hours or more by 2015/20. Led by passenger car stack development: The alternative is to see fuel cell systems sharing highly standardised components with passenger car stacks. This option would imply cheap fuel cell systems but with reduced life (as passenger car lifetime requirements are lower than those for heavy duty buses). This view would favour cheap bus fuel cell systems to be frequently swapped. Remark: According to European bus operators, both philosophies are acceptable as long as they offer same economic benefit on a total cost of ownership (TCO) basis. Generally speaking, as bus operators are already used to frequently replacing bus components, there are no major logistical problems in dealing with less durable fuel cell systems, provided replacement rates do not exceed one stack swap per year. 45

48 5 Hydrogen Fuelling and Infrastructure General hydrogen infrastructure issues are analysed elsewhere within the NextHyLights project (work package number 5). This chapter deals with the specific infrastructure issues as they relate to hydrogen supply for buses. Two of the main differences between hydrogen bus fuelling facilities and those for passenger cars can be summarised as it follows: Scale of hydrogen demand a refuelling facility supporting 20 passenger cars with a typical usage profile might expect to fuel only 10-30kg of hydrogen per day. 20 hydrogen buses would require between 400kg and 600kg of hydrogen each day, depending on their route. A full hydrogen bus depot with over 200 buses could require over 4 tonnes of hydrogen each day. This is larger than any of the fuelling facilities which have been considered for passenger cars and will require new station designs. Initial design concepts for larger scale fuelling (e.g. over 2,500kg/day) are already required, to allow bus operators to plan for larger hydrogen fleets in depots of the future (even though these fleets are unlikely to be operational until well after 2015). Pressure all existing hydrogen buses use compressed gaseous hydrogen at 350bar, as opposed to the 700bar standard for passenger cars in Europe. The cost of filling stations is considerably lower at 350 bar compared to 700bar and 350bar filling is therefore emerging as the standard pressure for bus fuelling for the foreseeable future. Some manufacturers have considered 700bar designs to improve range (most notably for shifting bus refuelling from once a day to every two days) and also for more space-challenged storage situations on-board buses (double decker buses, articulated buses). So far these have not been required by the market, but as the passenger car sector develops solutions around 700 bar, a case may emerge for new designs based on 700bar. This situation will need to be reviewed periodically. Apart from the main differences discussed above, the refuelling stations for car and bus applications clearly share similar issues on technology readiness and economics. Generally speaking, the priorities for hydrogen refuelling station development are: a) To achieve standardisation and modularisation of hydrogen components across different suppliers and b) Develop sound safety records from an increasing number of refuelling stations in service. 46

49 c) From this, develop more straightforward codes and standardisation procedures to streamline the permitting process for hydrogen fuelling facilities. Standardisation of refuelling station designs would bring benefits in term of reduced capital and maintenance costs. More precisely, such a process would reduce the number of bespoke components (which are typically expensive and costly to replace in case of breakdowns), ease personnel training and offer economy of scale benefits in case of large sales volume. The capital cost of refuelling stations is expected to decrease over time thanks to sales volume effects, with limited improvements expected from technology breakthroughs. Most of the components of a hydrogen refuelling station are well known in the industrial gas market but often require very specialised hand-built components due to the lack of a large demand for hydrogen filling stations. Nevertheless, improvement in selected components most notably on hydrogen compression technologies and on site electrolysers, where used, could bring further cost reductions. The development of sound safety records is key for ensuring quicker approval process and, hence, reducing risk and overhead costs for investors. Although the existing hydrogen refuelling stations have demonstrated an excellent safety performance, hydrogen refuelling projects are often subjected to regulation and safety standards far more stringent than any other transport fuel due to the lack of extensive safety records. As a consequence, the fulfilment of local regulations, liabilities and safety distances currently leads to a lengthy and cost intensive process which can take, in some cases more than one year to be completed. 47

50 5.1 Comments on the status of hydrogen refuelling stations for bus applications In annexe B we analyse the status of hydrogen refuelling station technology for bus applications through four case studies of hydrogen fuelling stations deployed for large bus fleets. Each case study provides information on the project and, where possible, evaluates the hydrogen cost at the pump. In this subsection we comment the status of the hydrogen refuelling technology for bus applications according to a) the case four case studies analysed in the annexe B and b) the consultation of key hydrogen infrastructure industry players Hydrogen fuel cost Figure 21, below, summarises the hydrogen cost at the pump as suggested by the four case studies (annex B). The hydrogen costs reflect different dispensing capacities and financial assumptions (such as the hydrogen and electricity purchase price) and include refuelling stations capital and maintenance costs. For the purpose of comparison, the figure includes taxed and untaxed diesel retail prices in the USA and in Europe expressed in Euro per kg of hydrogen-equivalent (calorific content), plus selected international targets by It should be noted that the DoE, Canada and JTI targets include production and distribution costs only, and hence do not include refuelling stations capital and maintenance costs and taxation. 48

51 / kg Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review Untaxed hydrogen cost at the pump, including refueling station capital and maintenance costs Hamburg case study (50% on-site production from electrolysis) Cologne case study (Trucked-in gaseous, kg/day) Cologne case study (Piped-in gaseous, kg/day) London case study (Trucked-in liquid, H2 purchase price: 3-6/kg) JTI targer (2015) HBA target (2015) DOE target (2015) Canada target (2015) US taxed diesel 2010 US untaxed diesel 2010 EU taxed diesel price range 2015 targets EU untaxed diesel 2010 Figure 21 Untaxed hydrogen cost at the pump as suggested by the four case studies analysed in the previous sections, in comparison with some international targets. The figure also displays taxed and untaxed retail prices of diesel in the USA and Europe (average of 26 state members). All costs are expressed in Euro per kg of Hydrogen equivalent. Assumptions: 1 kg of H2 = diesel gallons = 3.33 diesel litres; exchange rate: 1 ( ) = $1.4 (2010). Diesel prices reflect average data as in May Sources: Figure 21 shows that the hydrogen prices suggested by the case studies analysed are generally higher than the taxed diesel prices in both the American and European market. The same analysis, however, suggests that cost parity with the taxed diesel price in the European market can be reached using today s refuelling station designs. Continuing the price analysis on the equipment installed in the case study filling stations to consider higher hydrogen demands, it becomes apparent that even using today s equipment it is possible to achieve cost parity with taxed diesel. This occurs with demands over kg H2 /day in the case of Cologne and over 800kg H2 /day for London. 49

52 / kg-h Hydrogen fuel cost at the pump versus dispensing volume (10 year contract, delivered liquid hydrogen) Average EU taxed and untaxed diesel fuel price (~ 1.15 and 0.58/ litre) 300 kg/day 500kg/day 1,000kg/day 1,500 kg/day 3 Assumptions: Refueling Station capital cost: 3million Refueling Station capital cost: 1.5million Discount Rate: 3.5% Hydrogen Fuel Purchase Price: 3-4 / kg Annual Maintenance Fee: 117,000 Figure 22 Demand volume and contract length effects on the untaxed hydrogen cost at pump for delivered liquid hydrogen. The model considers key parameters such as the total capital cost of hydrogen refuelling station, maintenance fee, different dispensing volumes and contract durations with hydrogen suppliers Among the different production options, on-site electrolysis currently offers the highest price at the pump -three times higher than the taxed diesel price in the European market even at ultra-low electricity prices. These results are consistent with the expectation of major European fuel retailers and gas companies, who foresee substantial cost reduction in the hydrogen retail price thanks to a) larger hydrogen throughputs b) increasing refuelling station sales volume and c) design standardisation (hence simplification). These results are encouraging and suggest that hydrogen costs at the pump will be considerably reduced in large demonstration projects. A reduction of the hydrogen cost to a level comparable with the calorific equivalent cost of taxed diesel fuel in the EU (< 5 per kg of hydrogen-equivalent) seems achievable even with today s equipment, especially assuming a throughput higher than 1,000 kg H2 per day and refuelling station capital costs lower than 3 million Refuelling Station Performance Table 2, below, summarises the current techno-economic performance of the refuelling stations described in the four case studies discussed above. 50

53 Table 8 Refuelling performances according to the case studies in case studies in section 6.2.3, 6.2.4, 6.2.5, Item Performances Refuelling station cost 1,300,000-7,500,000 (Figures include overheads cost; data range reflects dispensing capacity and hydrogen production method) Refuelling time 7-10 minutes/bus no precooling (Figures reflect bus refuelling at 350bar; on-board bus hydrogen storage capacity approx kg; the 10 minutes figure refers to the refuelling of up to eighteen buses in sequence) Footprint m 2 (Data range reflects different dispensing capacities and hydrogen production methods) Dispensing capacity 100 1,000 kg of hydrogen per day On-site hydrogen storage capacity ,000 kg Perhaps the three key issues today are the capital cost, refuelling time and footprint of the refuelling stations. Each of issue is tackled in turn below. Refuelling station cost The four case studies analysed above suggest a refuelling station cost of 1,300,000-7,500,000. These figures, which include overhead costs such as permitting and planning costs, reflect different dispensing capacities and hydrogen production methods. It is, however, possible to combine these figures with data provided by other European stakeholders to calculate the relationship between the refuelling station capital costs and dispensing capacities at the current status of the technology. Figure 23, below, summarises this result. 51

54 Euro per unit of dispensing capacity ( / kg-day) 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Refueling station cost as a function of its dispensing capacity Capacity (kg-h2/day) Refueling station cost as a function of its dispensing capacity Figure 23 Cost of a hydrogen refuelling station as a function of its dispensing capacity. The data points reflect either historical data or stakeholders projections. The costs are provided per unit of dispensing capacity ( per kg-day) and include overheads (40% of the cost). Figures are in 2010 s money value. Figure 23 suggests that the cost of a refuelling station reduces considerably (per kg hydrogen dispensed) as the dispensing capacity increases, especially where hydrogen is not produced on-site. These costs are expected to reduce further over time. European fuel retailing firms, for example, foresee 4% decrease in the hydrogen refuelling station capital cost between 2010 and 2030, due to increasing sales volume and design standardisation effects. Refuelling time The refuelling time experienced by fuel cell bus operators ranges between 7 and 10 minutes per bus, assuming 30-40kg of on-board hydrogen storage at 350bar. Typical refuelling times for diesel buses are less than 5 minutes (closer to three minutes per bus). The longer fill times for hydrogen buses risks becoming an unacceptable level of inconvenience for transit operators when dealing with fleets of over 100 buses. These operators typically refuel all buses in a depot in a short overnight window of between 4 and 6 hours. Any increase in fill times per bus will cause problems with this window. 52

55 This is a challenge for hydrogen buses which needs further work. Solutions could be logistical (e.g. installing additional dispensers at depots to allow simultaneous fuelling of buses), practical (e.g. altering route patterns to allow fuelling during the day) or technical (e.g. pre-cooling hydrogen to allow faster fuelling or operating 700 bar tanks to allow fuelling only every two days). It is recommended that these types of solutions are explored in the near term projects for hydrogen bus demonstration such as the CHIC project. Remark: Interested bus operators have signalled that refuelling times over 5 minutes per bus may be satisfactory for the majority of bus operators if in-depot cleaning of the buses is allowed during refuelling. Existing standard procedures for diesel buses include buses refuelling during their cleaning, which typically require about 5 to 6 minutes. Footprint The four case studies analysed above demonstrated that the footprint for a filling station depend on the hydrogen production and storage technology. Among the different options, designs based on delivered hydrogen tend to have smaller footprints, as the refuelling stations can benefit from less on-site production and compression equipment and lower backup storage volumes. Liquid hydrogen technology, in particular, allows extremely low footprints. The refuelling station in Whistler, for example, has a footprint of less than 700m 2 even if it is the largest ever constructed by dispensing capacity (1 tonne per day). By contrast, solutions based on on-site hydrogen production generally have larger footprints, mainly due to the need to store low-pressure hydrogen on-site for buffering and backing upon-site production and ensuring high hydrogen availability. Among the on-site hydrogen production options, steam methane reforming (SMR) is perhaps the most space-demanding. SMR technology requires stable output profiles to run at maximum efficiency and to avoid catalyst degradation (which is very sensitive to thermal cycling). This requirement for stability of output leads to high demand for on-site storage to meet unsteady demands. 53

56 5.2 CO2 emissions Table 9, below, summarises the range of CO 2 emissions per kilometre for hybrid fuel cell buses compared with diesel and diesel hybrid buses. There is a very wide range for fuel cell hybrids, reflecting the wide range in CO 2 emissions for different hydrogen production pathways. At the ultra-low CO 2 end (production from renewable, nuclear or fossils fuels with CCS) the CO 2 emissions are over 90% lower than a conventional diesel bus. At today s state of the art for hydrogen production from methane (approx. 10kgCO 2 /kg of H 2 ), there is still a CO 2 advantage over both diesel and diesel hybrid buses at the highest fuel economy for fuel cell buses (N.B.: next generation of FC buses are expected to achieve a fuel economy up to 40% better than diesel buses over an equivalent route at parity of calorific content). As the fuel economy drops from this point, or less efficient methane based reformation pathways are used, the CO 2 emissions tend towards that of a conventional diesel bus and can even increase above those for hybrid diesel buses. This suggests that any medium term strategy for hydrogen bus rollout should target a CO 2 content below 10kgCO 2 /kg of hydrogen and best in class fuel economy, to ensure that the deployment leads to real CO 2 savings. Table 9: CO 2 emissions per km travelled comparison between selected bus technologies. The figures on the CO 2 content of the hydrogen fuel reflect different production paths. Hybrid Fuel Cell Bus Hybrid Diesel Bus Fuel Economy (nominal range, Fuel CO 2 content current values) 8 15kg/100km 0* 0.36 kg-co 2/kWh (0* 12 kg-co 2/kg-H2) litres/100km 0.3 kg-co 2/kWh (3kg-CO 2/litre) Diesel Buses litres/100 km 0.3 kg-co 2/kWh (3kg-CO 2/litre) Trolley Buses ~ kWh/100km depend on grid content (Average EU-27: 0.6kg/kWh) Kg CO 2 per km travelled 0* * (assuming average EU-27 grid)** Source: Stakeholder consultation. * For renewable hydrogen and electricity the CO 2 content is assumed equal to zero. ** The average CO2 grid content in EU-27 was ~ 0.6 kg/kwh for thermal generation in 2005 (Source: Eurostat) 54

57 6 Comparison with Alternative Technologies This section compares the techno-economic performance of 12m platform hybrid fuel cell buses with alternative technologies. We consider the main five bus technology alternatives to fuel cell buses: Diesel buses (currently up to 90% of the European urban bus fleet 11 ) Hybrid-electric diesel (Hybrid diesel) Compressed Natural Gas buses (CNG) Battery-electric buses Trolley buses Table 10, below, provides a detailed comparison between battery, hybrid fuel cell, hybrid diesel and trolley buses. A colour code eases the interpretation of the comparison of the technologies performance with the operating benchmark, which are basic diesel buses. A green label means better performance in comparison with the benchmark, whilst a red label means worse / unacceptable performance. The intermediate colours represent intermediate performance. The table immediately illustrates the attractiveness of diesel hybrid relative to diesel buses. Diesel hybrid buses offer genuine fuel economy gains and hence CO 2 saving and air quality improvements, at a capital cost closer to the conventional diesel bus (up to 50% more expensive). Furthermore, the fuel costs and infrastructure issues are the same and the availability is becoming comparable with a conventional diesel bus. For this reason, numerous European bus operators are increasing uptake of hybrid bus technology. Fuel cell hybrid buses by contrast can offer compelling environmental benefits, even compared to diesel hybrids, but suffer from: o High capital costs (see section 5) o Higher maintenance costs which will reduce with fuel cell costs o Higher fuel costs (see section 6) o A lack of hydrogen infrastructure (section 6) o Longer fill times (section 4) 11 Source: International Association of Public Transport (UITP), 55

58 Each of these problems will need to be overcome if fuel cell buses are to occupy the environmental bus technology space currently occupied by diesel hybrid buses. Electric buses have a number of apparently fundamental limitations which will prevent their widespread adoption. In particular: The slow recharging time for the buses The high power demand for charging- which will increase the cost of charging infrastructure at bus depots The high weight of the batteries Limited range below that required for a typical cycle These limitations would rule out a fully autonomous battery powered bus, providing, for example, an 18 hour route. There are however new options being developed which could include more limited battery capacity (or super capacitors) with fast charging at bus stops or layover areas (Figure 24, below). These could include inductive charging or small plug-in stations for short bursts of charge. Such technologies have still to be extensively tested in commercial applications and hence it is not possible to perform a comparison with fuel cell buses at present. Figure 24 Examples of an ultra-fast charging station for ultra-capacitor-powered buses (left) and a fast charging stations for battery-powered buses (right). Ultra-fast charging points recharge the buses in few seconds at each bus stop, whilst fast charging points recharge the buses at the route end only. Sources: ; Finally, it is possible to remove the batteries all together and move to a trolley bus architecture. Trolley bus systems offer a highly reliable zero emission solution. However, the drawback is the high cost of the overhead cabling infrastructure (approx. 400,000-1,000,000 per kilometre including substations) and the fact that the trolley bus will be fixed to particular routes limiting operational flexibility. The trolley bus architecture is therefore mainly deployed on short, heavily used inner city routes. 56

59 Table 10 Comparison between bus technologies. Colours legend: red = worst performance in comparison with benchmark (diesel buses); yellow = slightly worst performance; light green: slightly improved performance; green = better performance. A white box means absence of data or similar performance. 12m bus platform Capital Cost Observed Fuel Economy figures (in urban route). Please note that fuel economy figures depend on driving cycle Fuel Cost Range Operating benchmark Basic diesel bus: Approx. 170, ,000 Diesel bus: litre/km (~ 3.5 5kWh/km) ~ /km (assuming a taxed diesel fuel cost of 1/litre) 500 km (for urban service) Approx. 1 million Battery Hybrid Fuel Cell Hybrid Diesel Trolley NA (under testing) NA (under testing it depends on actual fuel economy) Approx million Up to 40% improvement over an equivalent diesel route at parity of calorific content ~ /km (assuming a hydrogen fuel cost ~ 4-6/kg) Approx. 350,000 (serial) 500,000 (first-of-a-kind models) Up to 25% - 30% improvement over an equivalent diesel route ~ /km (assuming a taxed diesel fuel cost of 1/litre) < 100km Up to 500km Equal to diesel buses -- Approx. 500, ,000 (cost figures for western European markets) Up to 50% improvement over an equivalent diesel route ~ 0.18 /km + 20% (assuming a taxed electricity cost of 0.1/kWh) In-Tank Energy Capacity to Weight ratio (Energy Storage System plus Engine) ~ 3.5 kwh/kg (assuming 280kg of diesel on board and a 200kW engine) ~ kWh/kg ~ 1 kwh/kg (assuming 35kg of H2 on board and a 150kW FC system) Bus Availability ~ 90% NA (under testing) 55% - 80% (diesel equivalence expected for next generation buses) Refuelling time 0.1 seconds/kwh Up to 15 seconds/kwh (using industrial conductive recharging points) 0.45 seconds/kwh (assuming 40kg of H2 on board at 350bar) Similar to diesel buses -- Similar to diesel buses Equal to diesel buses -- Pollution from Exhausts CO, NOx, SOx, PMs Absent Water vapour only CO, NOx, SOx, PMs (up to 30% reduction over benchmark) Similar to diesel buses Absent CO2 emissions kg-co2/km (diesel fuel carbon content: 2.3kg/litre) Depends on the electricity carbon content. Up to 100% reduction over benchmark (e.g. renewable electricity) Depends on the hydrogen carbon content. Up to 100% reduction over benchmark (e.g. renewable hydrogen) Up to 30% reduction over benchmark Depends on the electricity carbon content. Up to 100% reduction over benchmark (e.g. renewable electricity) Propulsion system durability Diesel engines have a life of approx. 7 years in heavy duty applications NA (under testing) The battery system for heavy duty application, however, has a typical warranty of 2-3 years. The fuel cell systems for heavy duty application have a typical warranty of 10,000 15,000hours (or 5 years). Battery: 2-3 year warranty. Extra maintenance required by the hybridelectric drivetrain. Battery: up to 5 years warranty. -- Infrastructures -- Need of recharging infrastructures (at bus depots or along the bus route) Need of hydrogen refuelling infrastructures (at bus depots) and delivery networks -- Need of overhead contact wire networks throughout all bus route 57

60 Table 11 - Conclusions In order to be accepted as an alternative solution to diesel buses, battery buses have to: Battery Increase battery energy density (at least by 5 or 10 times) Reduce weight Achieve far better recharging times (by 10 times) These targets are unlikely to be achieved in the next 10 years, according to the most up-to-date studies of sector 12. For example, the maximum energy density ever achievable by battery is capped to 0.2kWh/kg by engineering constraints. In addition, it is worth noting that large automotive battery packs have still to prove outstanding safety records and that another challenge of the technology is its high capital costs. Hybrid fuel cell buses are closer to satisfying the transit agencies needs than battery buses. The technology requires very little change in the behavioural requirements of transit operators. In particular the technology offers similar performance to existing diesel fleet in terms of safety, range and refuelling time. Hybrid Fuel Cell The absence of commercial hydrogen infrastructure need not be a showstopper to the deployment of fuel cell buses, since refuelling facilities are typically purchased by transit operators as part of the decision to make a fuel cell bus deployment. The technology, however, must achieve: Substantially lower capital costs A higher availability in hybrid mode Lower fuel cost Improved fuelling logistics Hybrid Diesel Hybrid diesel buses are currently the lowest cost environmental alternative to diesel buses, proving lower environmental impacts and similar economic performance (on TCO basis). The technology, however, does not offer a zero emission option. There are still improvements to be made in the cost of diesel hybrid drivetrains. Trolley Trolley buses are able to provide a low-zero carbon transportation. Due to the high cost of the overhead contact wire network (approx. 500,000 1,000,000 per kilometre, including substations), this technology is currently deployed only in short inner city routes. 12 See for example: Battery for Electric Cars, Challenges, Opportunities and the Outlook to 2020, Boston Consulting Group, January

61 6.1 Total Cost of Ownership So far we have compared the technical performance of hybrid fuel cell buses with alternative technologies. In practice, however, transit operators compare different options through Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) models. We developed a TCO model for hybrid fuel cell buses and for three of the alternative technologies discussed above: diesel, Hybrid diesel and Trolley buses. Battery buses have not been considered due to lack of data on the actual cost of recharging facilities. The TCO model considers 9 elements: Bus financing and depreciation Overhead Contact Wire Network financing (for trolley buses) Fuel cost Taxes on Fuel Propulsion related replacement costs 13 Bus maintenance fee 14 Extra maintenance facility costs 15 Overhead Contact Wire Network maintenance (for trolley buses) CO2 price (e.g. existence of a carbon pricing system in the transport sector) The output of the model is a yearly cost per km travelled per bus (e.g. / km / bus). We consider for all the bus technologies a discount period of 12 years, a discount rate of 3.5% 16 and an annual mileage of 70,000km (which is representative of a heavy use urban transit route). The fuel cost has been modelled using capital and maintenance cost assumptions from equipment providers, and hence is scalable with the hydrogen demand at the bus depot (larger depots use more fuel and hence reduce the effect of capital and maintenance costs). The input data for the TCO analysis are based on the information collected from interviewees as well as bus operators in the Hydrogen Bus Alliance members. The 13 The propulsion replacement cost for fuel cell buses is the cost for refurbishing the fuel cell unit at the end of its life (assumed to be at the end of the warranty). We assume this cost is 65% of the cost of an equivalent new unit between 2010 and 2015 and 40% of it by 2020 (cost reduction is foreseen to come from improved stacks manufacturing processes). 14 The maintenance fee for hybrid fuel cell, hybrid diesel and trolley buses includes the maintenance cost of the hybrid-electric / electric drivetrain. 15 Because hydrogen is generally treated as a hazardous chemical in most of the European regulations and standards, maintenance facilities for hydrogen-fuelled bus must be adapted (or constructed) in order to meet all the safety criteria. 16 We assume that investors (e.g. bus operators) can access public funds or financial schemes and hence benefit from low discount rates for financing bus projects. 3.5% is a typical figure within the European Union. 59

62 capital cost of the fuel cell bus is taken from the bottom-up analysis performed in Section 5. Figure 25, Figure 26 and Figure 27 summarise graphically the results of our TCO model in three time windows: at current costs of the technology at the average cost projected by 2015, assuming take up of FC buses in the hundred s leading up to this reflects the long dedicated FC bus development pathway At the level, where automotive volumes are assumed to drive down fuel cell system costs. This represents the passenger car dependent pathway. Each analysis is considered in turn TCO at costs The first TCO graph, Figure 25, below, clearly illustrates that fuel cell buses are some way from being commercially viable for bus operators. Even under best case assumptions, the cost of ownership of a FC bus is over three times that of a basic diesel bus. The main factors affecting the cost are the high capital cost, which increases the bus financing cost, and the cost of replacing components. The component replacement cost is due to the limited warranty available for fuel cell systems in today s buses. With a warranty of only 12,000 hours and a yearly service of over 5,000 hours, it is necessary to replace this high cost component every 2.5 years. This is prohibitively expensive. This problem could be mitigated by operating on less arduous routes, but the main issue is a need to reduce the fuel cell system replacement cost and increase the lifetime of the system itself. The graph also illustrates the competition between today s incumbent technologies. The diesel hybrid is close in TCO terms to the diesel bus but is not yet a genuinely competitive alternative. Despite this, the technology is seeing considerable traction in the market, which suggests there is a genuine commercial driver for environmentally benign technologies. Trolley buses show a higher cost of ownership under the route assumptions made here (7km length, buses) due to the cost of overhead infrastructure and to high maintenance fee. The capital cost figures reflect the cost range in the western European market. 60

63 Euro / km / bus Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review Total Cost Of Ownership (12 years life, 12m platform bus): comparisons at costs Taxes on fuel CO2 price Principal Assumptions: Hybrid Fuel Cell bus Fuel cell bus capital cost: 1,000,000-1,600,000 Euro Fuel cell bus maintenance fee: 20,000-30,000 Euro /year Fuel cell system cost: 2,800-3,500 Euro/kW Fuel cell system specs: 150kW; 12,000 hours warranty Fuel economy: kg-h2/100km Hydrogen refueling station throughput: 500-1,000 kg-h2/day Hydrogen refueling station maintenance fee: 100, ,000 / year Hydrogen cost at the pump: 4-8 Euro/kg 4.00 Overhead contact wire network - maintenance Extra maintenance facility costs Hybrid Diesel bus Bus capital cost: 350,000 (series) - 500,000 Euro (first-of-kind models) Bus maintenance fee: 16,000-20,000 Euro /year Fuel Economy: liters / 100km Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) Bus Maintenance Fee Propulsion-related Replacement cost Diesel bus Bus capital cost: 170, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee: 12,700-20,000 Euro /year Fuel Economy: liters/ 100km Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Hybrid Fuel Cell Hybrid Diesel Diesel Trolley Lower Bound Untaxed Fuel Cost Overhead contact wire network - Financing Bus Financing and Depreciation Trolley bus Bus capital cost: 500, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee : 30,000-50,000 Euro /year Overhead wire network cost: 500,000-1,000,000 Euro / km Overhead wire network maintenance fee: 3,000-30,000 Euro/km/year Overhead wire network life: 20 years Fuel Economy: 187kWh/ 100km Electricity Price: 0.1 Euro / kwh (taxed), Euro / KWh (untaxed) Service route: 7km lenght / buses in service Common Financial Inputs Discount Period : 12 years Discount Rate: 3.5% Annual Mileage: 70,000km (5,000 hours) CO2 price: Euro/tonne Figure 25 TCO comparisons for costs of the technologies. The hybrid fuel cell bus capital cost is evaluated through the bottom-up approach proposed in Table 7 and displayed by Figure 16. The maintenance fee for hybrid fuel cell and hybrid diesel bus includes the maintenance of the hybrid-electric drivetrain. Figures refer to 150kW hybridisations. 61

64 6.1.2 Total Cost of Ownership in The next graph (Figure 26, below) shows the TCO for the period, by which time next generation of fuel cell systems will have reduced FC costs considerably. A limited deployment of FC buses before this period is assumed to have increased the confidence and experience of the bus manufacturers, reducing the premiums for additional labour and general project risk. The graph illustrates that under lower bound assumptions, the fuel cell bus cost is approaching the upper bound of costs for diesel hybrid and diesel bus operations. The lower range of the TCO is well within the range of ownership costs for a trolley bus system. The TCO analysis shows that the FC bus can offer lower overall fuel costs, at the current taxed cost of diesel, due to higher FC bus efficiencies (note that this assumes no tax on hydrogen fuel, the sensitivity to which is explored later). The upper bound by contrast is well outside these ranges, suggesting an ownership cost approx. twice that of diesel bus alternatives (such as diesel hybrid and trolley buses). The main difference between the upper and lower bound is the assumptions on the cost of the FC bus and associated fuel cells. In the lower bound the FC cost is 850/kW and the bus has a cost of 500,000. This is a very optimistic target and will only be achieved with a considerable deployment commitment to FC bus technology prior to FC manufacturers suggest that volume orders of hundreds of buses would be required to unlock savings towards this level by The upper bound suggests a FC bus cost of approx. 950,000 which is achievable even for small orders in 2013, and hence is a very conservative upper bound. Hence there is good confidence that the TCO for FC buses will lie in the range suggested by We can conclude that by FC buses are unlikely to offer a commercially attractive alternative to diesel and diesel hybrid buses (even with a taxation benefit for hydrogen fuel). The technology will require additional subsidy beyond 2015 if significant volumes are to come forward in conventional urban bus routes. It is, however, likely that the TCO will have improved considerably from today s state of the art, to the point where the TCO lies between 1.5 and 2 times the cost of operating a typical diesel hybrid bus. When competing on environmentally sensitive routes where a trolley bus would otherwise be deployed, fuel cell buses at the lower bound of costs could achieve ownership cost parity. This is particularly true for long sub-urban routes where the high cost of the overhead cable networks will be prohibitive. 17 Note that stack manufacturers would not provide stacks at these prices during this volume order phase pre-2015, rather the volume orders would unlock the potential to offer FC s at this price from 2015 onwards. 62

65 Euro / km /bus Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review Total Cost Of Ownership (12 years life, 12m platform): comparisons at costs (bus based market) Taxes on fuel CO2 price Principal Assumptions: Hybrid Fuel Cell bus Fuel cell bus capital cost: 520, ,000 Euro Fuel cell bus maintenance fee: 20,000 Euro /year Fuel cell system cost: 850-2,100 Euro/kW Fuel cell system specs: 150kW; 20,000 hours warranty Fuel economy: 8-10 kg-h2/100km Hydrogen refueling station throughput: 500-1,000 kg-h2/day Hydrogen refueling station maintenance fee: 100, ,000 / year Hydrogen cost at the pump: 4-6 Euro/kg Overhead contact wire network - maintenance Extra maintenance facility costs Hybrid Diesel bus Bus capital cost: 230, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee: 16,000-20,000 Euro /year Fuel economy: liters / 100km Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Hybrid Fuel Cell Hybrid Diesel Diesel Trolley Lower Bound Bus Maintenance Fee Propulsion-related Replacement cost Untaxed Fuel Cost Overhead contact wire network - Financing Bus Financing and Depreciation Diesel bus Bus capital cost: 170, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee: 12,700-20,000 Euro /year Fuel Economy: liters/ 100km Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) Trolley bus Bus capital cost: 500, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee : 30,000-50,000 Euro /year Overhead wire network cost: 500,000-1,000,000 Euro / km Overhead wire network maintenance fee: 3,000-30,000 Euro/km/year Overhead wire network life: 20 years Fuel Economy: 187kWh/ 100km Electricity Price: 0.1 Euro / kwh (taxed), Euro / KWh (untaxed) Service route: 7km lenght / buses in service Common Financial Inputs Discount period : 12 years Discount rate: 3.5% Annual mileage: 70,000km (5,000 hours) CO2 price: Euro/tonne Figure 26 TCO comparisons for technologies cost as for the period according to stakeholders perspective. The hybrid fuel cell bus capital cost is evaluated through the bottom-up approach proposed in Table 7 and displayed by Figure 16. The maintenance fee for hybrid fuel cell and hybrid diesel bus includes the maintenance of the hybrid-electric drivetrain. Warranty of the fuel cell system is considered up to 20,000hours. Figures refer to 150kW hybridisations. 63

66 6.1.3 Total Cost of Ownership From 2018 to 2022, further cost reductions in fuel cell systems are projected, due to synergies with developments in automotive systems and progressive improvements in bus fuel cell system costs. In the TCO model presented here, it is assumed that FC system costs reduce to between 140 and 350 per kw, based on automotive stack technology, but that warranties remain at 10-12,000 hours (implying more frequent stack replacement). This level is higher than the target price for automotive FC systems, as in practice fuel cell bus systems will be more costly due to more expensive balance of plant and a need to include stack replacement costs to meet the warranty requirements for the stacks. At the lower bound of these fuel cell system prices, the FC Bus can compete on total cost of ownership with hybrid diesel technologies. At the upper bound, there is still some increase in overall ownership costs. This suggests that as the automotive fuel cell sector evolves, fuel cell buses are likely to move to a sustainable, unsubsidized position in the market. This should lead to substantial take-up, particularly given that the analysis presented here does not include a financial allocation for the benefits of reduced noise and air polluting emissions compared with diesel vehicles. It is also worthwhile to note that the fuel cell bus costs projected here are well within the trolley bus cost range, suggesting that the technology can comfortably compete with trolley buses for clean urban routes by Stack manufacturers developing dedicated bus fuel cell systems also project substantial cost reductions between 2018 and 2022 (provided there is sufficient demand to justify continued development in the period leading up to 2015). These systems will have longer lifetimes and warranties (over 20,000hrs) and lower costs below 800/kW. At these costs the conclusion above relating to the auto-model should also hold true for the bus stack only philosophy. 64

67 Euro / km /bus Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Technology State of the Art Review Total Cost Of Ownership (12 years life, 12m platform): comparisons at costs (high FC car take-up) Taxes on fuel CO2 price Principal Assumptions: Hybrid Fuel Cell bus Fuel cell bus capital cost: 350, ,000 Euro Fuel cell bus maintenance fee: 20,000 Euro /year Fuel cell system cost: Euro/kW Fuel cell system specs: 150kW; 10,000-12,000 hours warranty Fuel economy: 8-9 kg-h2/100km Hydrogen refueling station throughput: 500-1,000 kg-h2/day Hydrogen refueling station maintenance fee: 100, ,000 / year Hydrogen cost at the pump: 4-5 Euro/kg 1.50 Overhead contact wire network - maintenance Extra maintenance facility costs Hybrid Diesel bus Bus capital cost: 230, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee: 16,000-20,000 Euro /year Fuel economy: liters / 100km Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound Hybrid Fuel Cell Hybrid Diesel Diesel Trolley Lower Bound Bus Maintenance Fee Propulsion-related Replacement cost Untaxed Fuel Cost Overhead contact wire network - Financing Bus Financing and Depreciation Diesel bus Bus capital cost: 170, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee: 12,700-20,000 Euro /year Fuel Economy: liters/ 100km Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) Trolley bus Bus capital cost: 500, ,000 Euro Bus maintenance fee : 30,000-50,000 Euro /year Overhead wire network cost: 500,000-1,000,000 Euro / km Overhead wire network maintenance fee: 3,000-30,000 Euro/km/year Overhead wire network life: 20 years Fuel Economy: 187kWh/ 100km Electricity Price: 0.1 Euro / kwh (taxed), Euro / KWh (untaxed) Service route: 7km lenght / buses in service Common Financial Inputs Discount period : 12 years Discount rate: 3.5% Annual mileage: 70,000km (5,000 hours) CO2 price: Euro/tonne Figure 27 TCO comparisons for technology costs as in In this comparison, the cost of the fuel cell system reflects the existence of a large automotive fuel cell system market, driven by a demand of fuel cell cars (> 10,000 units / year). The bus fuel cell system is assumed to share highly standardised components with the car fuel cell systems and, accordingly, the same warranty (10,000 12,000 hours). Figures refer to 150kW hybridisations. 65

68 6.1.4 Sensitivity to fuel prices These results have been further investigated through sensitivity analyses on pricing issues relating to the fuel. We analysed the variation of the difference between the fuel cell bus and diesel average TCO performance varying:- Diesel fuel cost Hydrogen fuel cost CO2 price Figure 28, Figure 29 and Figure 30 below summarise the results of a set sensitivity analyses for the and periods. The results show how changes in the fuel prices affect the difference in average TCO between the fuel cell bus and the diesel bus. Figure 30 focuses on the diesel fuel prices required for achieving TCO parity in the 2018 to 2022 period. From the sensitivity analysis, the fuel cell bus TCO performance is clearly very sensitive to the cost of hydrogen and diesel fuels. This is particularly pronounced in the cost range, where the relatively small cost of the fuel cell system maximizes the advantages from a lower hydrogen fuel cost and higher diesel fuel cost. Both sensitivity analyses show that the TCO performance of hybrid fuel cell buses can be improved by up to 18% - 40% in comparison with diesel buses if the hydrogen cost is halved and by up to 20% - 50% if the untaxed diesel fuel cost doubles by On the other hand, higher hydrogen costs (e.g. through taxation) or the possibility of removing taxes on diesel fuel would have a significant negative affect the fuel cell bus TCO performance. In conclusion, in order to ease the competitiveness of hybrid fuel cell buses in comparison with diesel buses it is important to:- Achieve lower bounds prices of hydrogen Fully tax diesel fuel at the same rate as that used for passenger cars Avoid taxing hydrogen fuel, certainly until the buses have achieved a commercially viable capital cost The price of CO 2 emissions plays a very limited role, even for prices as high as 120/tonne. It should be noted, however, that the environmental benefits of fuel cell technology are more than simply reducing CO2 emissions. The introduction of the technology in urban centres would displace a range of harmful pollutants such as NOx and PMs, currently emitted by the diesel bus fleet in operation. In this TCO model, however, the urban air quality is not monetized. 66

69 Sensitivity analysis: difference between Hybrid Fuel Cell and Diesel Buses TCO performance - average values Untaxed Diesel cost + 50% Baseline assumptions: No taxes on Diesel fuel H2 price + 50% H2 price - 50% CO2 price + 50% 20% 18% Hydrogen price at the pump: 4-6 Euro/kg Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) CO2 price: Euro/tonne Baseline: TCO = 1.25/ km/bus -2% -20% -18% Improved TCO performance for Hybrid FC Buses Figure 28 Sensitivity analysis of the average difference between TCO performances of fuel cell buses (powered by a 150kW FC system) and diesel buses - technologies cost as by Sensitivity analysis: difference between Hybrid Fuel Cell and Diesel Buses TCO performance - average values Untaxed Diesel cost + 50% Baseline assumptions: No taxes on Diesel fuel H2 price + 50% H2 price - 50% CO2 price + 50% 56% 42% Hydrogen price at the pump: 4-5 Euro/kg Diesel price: 1.15 Euro / liter (taxed), 0.58 Euro / liter (untaxed) CO2 price: Euro/tonne Baseline: TCO = 0.43/km/bus -5% -57% -42% Improved TCO performance for Hybrid FC Buses Figure 29 Sensitivity analysis of the average difference between TCO performances of fuel cell (powered by a 150kW FC system) and diesel buses and diesel buses - technologies cost as by

70 Total Cost Of Ownership: hybrid fuel cell buses in comparison with diesel buses (values as for cost projections, untaxed hydrogen price at the pump: 4-5/kg ) Euro / Km / Bus Hybrid fuel cell ~ 2020 Diesel different diesel prices Green Hydrogen cost premium (if at 8/kg, e.g. assuming electrolysis from excess wind capacity) Taxes on diesel ( 0.57/litre) Diesel bus untaxed diesel fuel price = 2/litre Diesel bus untaxed diesel fuel price = 1.5/litre Diesel bus untaxed diesel fuel price = 1/litre Diesel bus untaxed diesel fuel price = 0.58/litre Hybrid Fuel Cell ( ) 75kW Hybrid Fuel Cell ( ) 150kW Figure 30 TCO comparison between hybrid fuel cell and basic diesel buses as for cost assumption for different taxed diesel fuel prices (averaged values). The analysis suggests TCO parity for diesel fuel prices of approx. 2/litre, assuming a hydrogen cost at the pump of 4-5/kg and no taxation on the fuels. The figure also describes how the use of green hydrogen (derived from e.g. electricity derived from renewable sources) may imply a further cost premium on top of buses TCO (left hand side of the picture). Assuming a green hydrogen cost at the pump of 8/kg 18, for example, TCO parity is still achievable if taxes on diesel are included (e.g. for a final diesel fuel prices of approx. 2.5/litre). Remark: A recent EU coalition study into hydrogen for passenger cars 19 concludes that hydrogen costs (untaxed) at the pump below 5 /kg are feasible beyond As this refers to higher pressure filling that is unlikely to be required for buses, this suggests even lower hydrogen costs can be achieved. Looking at the medium-long term, the study also concluded that hydrogen is likely to be produced by a broad technology mix which would ultimately deliver zero carbon hydrogen by approximately Looking at the short or medium term ( ), however, green hydrogen is likely to cost up to two times more than hydrogen from conventional technologies ( brown hydrogen). 18 Based on Industry projections for wind derived green hydrogen costs in 2020 supplied during the project. 19 A Portfolio of Power-trains for Europe: a fact-based analysis - The Role of Battery Electric Vehicles, Plug-in Hybrids and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles, McKinsey & Company, available at 68

71 6.1.5 TCO analysis for other hybridisations The results of the total cost of ownership analysis discussed above proved to be relatively unaffected by the specific hybridisation design of fuel cell buses. Clearly, the overall bus capital and ownership cost slightly varies with the hybridisation designs as they typically requires a different fuel cell rated power, energy storage capacity and, in some cases, on-board hydrogen storage capacity. This cost difference, however, is predicted to greatly reduce as the cost of these key components and the bus itself decreases in time. Total Cost Of Ownership (TCO): 150kW & 75kW FC bus in comparison with diesel, diesel hybrid and trolley buses ( ) Taxes on fuel Euro / Km / Bus Cost projections based on a set of assumptions please refer to the contents of this study CO2 price Overhead contact wire network - maintenance Extra maintenance facility costs Bus Maintenance Fee Propulsion-related Replacement cost 1 Untaxed fuel Cost 0 Overhead contact wire network - Financing Bus Financing and Depreciation figures as at cost projections Figure 31 Snapshot of the main findings of the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis in comparison with diesel and trolley bus technologies in the time frame. Figures includes results for both 150kW and 75kW hybridisations. The analysis, which is based on untaxed hydrogen and untaxed diesel prices, includes the effect of diesel taxation on the top of the column. Cost figures are expressed at 2010 money value. 69

72 6.1.6 Outlook to 2030 The analysis above suggests that by 2020 hybrid fuel cell technology is unlikely to reach a competitive position in comparison with diesel-powered alternatives. This is ultimately envisaged to be achieved in the period between 2025 and Extending the TCO analysis to 2030, and excluding taxation on the diesel fuel, hybrid fuel cell buses can demonstrate better economic performance (on TCObasis) than diesel and diesel hybrid buses by 2030, with an untaxed diesel fuel price over 0.80/litre. Total Cost Of Ownership (TCO): outlook to 2030 hybrid fuel cell buses in comparison with diesel, diesel hybrid and trolley buses Taxes on fuel 2.5 Untaxed diesel price: 0.58/litre Taxed price: 1.15/litre Untaxed diesel price: 0.90/litre Taxed price: 1.70/litre CO2 price 2 Overhead contact wire network - maintenance Euro / Km / Bus Extra maintenance facility costs Bus Maintenance Fee Propulsion-related Replacement cost 0.5 Untaxed fuel Cost 0 Overhead contact wire network - Financing Hybrid FC buses Diesel buses at ~ 2030 cost (2030) (150kW & 75kW hybridisation, untaxed hydrogen cost at the pump: 4-4.5/kg Diesel hybrid buses (2030) Trolley buses (2030) Bus Financing and Depreciation Figure 32 Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis - outlook to 2030 in comparison with diesel and trolley bus technologies. Figures includes results for both 150kW and 75kW FC hybridisations at 2030 cost. The graph, which is based on untaxed hydrogen, include a comparison at two different untaxed diesel prices /litre (2010 price) and 0.90/litre - whilst the effect of taxation on the diesel is included on the top of the columns. 70

73 7 Conclusions This document analysed information available from recent international fuel cell bus demonstrations and from bilateral dialogues with the members of the Hydrogen Bus Alliance and key industry stakeholders. The study looks at historical techno-economic performance of fuel cell buses, cost structure of a hybrid fuel cell bus and the Total Cost of Ownership in comparison with alternative bus technologies. The main findings can be summarised as follows: The fuel cell bus sector is populated by a number of competitors, offering different expertise and services. The number of competitors in the market has increased over time, with at least 12 fuel cell bus providers and 9 fuel cell manufacturers competing for business in the space. The recent demonstration market has however been dominated by fewer players (in terms of number of buses deployed) Daimler, New Flyer and Van Hool within the bus builders and Ballard and UTC within the fuel cell manufacturers. Of particular note, only 2-3 out of the six major European OEMs, however, have significant demonstration experience with hydrogen buses and are actively engaged in the sector. There is a general consensus among industry players that a wider participation of the larger players would be beneficial for the sector. Demonstration activity has occurred in waves, with a major increase in deployment around 2003, followed by a next wave based on so called next generation hybrid fuel cell buses which will enter service in the period By the end of 2011, approx. 110 fuel cell buses will be in day to day service worldwide. The analysis of historical performance data indicated that fuel cell bus performance is improving in time, evolving towards 2015 targets. The table below provides a snapshot of the key metrics: 71

74 * Fuel economy depends on drive cycles. It is worth noting that there is not a standard drive cycle to date and hence these figures are indicative of best of class urban drive conditions only. ** Availability is defined as the percentage of days of actual service compared to the number of day of scheduled service (over the year). *** Best of class performance range. Among the hydrogen bus options, hybridised fuel cell designs demonstrate far better fuel economy than non-hybridised fuel cell and hydrogen-fuelled internal combustion buses. The vast majority of hydrogen buses are now being built in a hybrid fuel cell configuration and it is assumed that this will be the basis for commercialising hydrogen buses. State of the art hybrid fuel cell buses provide one of two genuinely zero emission bus options for the urban transit market (the other is an electric drivetrain - typically in a trolley bus). Depending on the source of hydrogen, the buses can provide a zero carbon solution for public transit. Even using today s production from natural gas, there are considerable carbon savings available over conventional diesel buses (up to 50%). Other advantages over diesel vehicles include: substantially higher fuel efficiency (up to twice a diesel bus on a calorific basis) reduced urban noise, and in the long term reduced maintenance requirements (due to fewer moving parts and hence less lubrication etc.) The EC s HyFLEET:CUTE project proved that hydrogen buses can be operated reliably a availability figure of 92% was achieved in this trial. It is important to note that this was a well-controlled trial (with maintenance technicians at each site) and did not involve a hybrid drivetrain. 72

75 Hybrid fuel cell bus trials, by contrast, have shown relatively poor availability (55-80%) in trials before These will need to be improved before the technology can be rolled out outside small demonstration trials. The next generation of hybrid fuel cell bus trials (starting 2010) are designed to prove that the technology can achieve availability standards over 90% which will be sufficient to begin to commercialise the technology. The next generation of bus demonstrations (such as CHIC 20 ) are also aimed at understanding the fuel economy of next generation FC buses. Initial tests suggest they will achieve the lower bound of the fuel consumption range, e.g. up to 40% improvement over an equivalent diesel route at parity of calorific content. The main technical constraints for fuel cell buses, compared to conventional diesel vehicles are: o o o Fill time which is currently around 10 minutes (best available is 7 minutes), compared to a diesel fill times of approx. 3 minutes. This creates logistical problem for bus operators. Availability equivalent availability to diesel vehicles has not yet been demonstrated for fuel cells in hybrid configurations. This is expected to be achieved in the next generation demonstrations. Lack of infrastructure meaning that dedicated hydrogen fuelling infrastructure is required at hydrogen bus depots this is bulky and also requires very high availability as there are no local back-up options available Diesel hybrid vehicles are currently gaining traction in the market for environmentally benign urban buses. These have a total cost of ownership higher than diesel buses, suggesting public authorities are prepared to fund some additional cost of operating environmentally friendly However, a Total Cost of Ownership analysis for today s fuel cell buses suggests that the cost of operating a fuel cell bus today is over three times that of a conventional diesel bus. This additional cost is not acceptable to bus operators, meaning the technology must reduce in cost to gain genuine commercial traction. There are two main approaches to cost reduction. In the first, progressive generations of fuel cell systems designed for buses are projected to reduce fuel cell system costs below 2,000/kW (from over 4,000/kW today), whilst increased volumes of fuel cell buses reduce the costs for bus builders to assemble and sell the buses. This would reduce fuel cell bus costs to a lower bound of approximately

76 500,000 (for large orders) and an upper bound o 950,000 between 2015 and This will require: o o o Next generation of fuel cell systems, with lower component costs and simpler manufacturing processes (expected to be launched ) the market experiencing standardisation in the hybrid manufacturing process, reducing labour costs and overheads for bus manufacturers An increase in fuel cell bus sales (of the order of low 100s in the period ), which leads to economies of scale for buses and fuel cells and helps reduce some of the risk premium applied to FC buses by bus builders On a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) basis, these buses are not expected to compete with diesel bus technologies by 2015/18. They may, however, be able to gain some market traction on environmentally sensitive routes which would typically be serviced by trolley buses. It is therefore likely that subsidies will be also required beyond 2015/18 to support further increases in the size of the FC bus market. Beyond 2015, there are two paths being considered for further fuel cell bus cost reduction, which differ according to their approach to the fuel cell stack. In the first, volume sales for fuel cell passenger cars (from 2015 onwards) are expected to drive the costs of automotive stacks down to very low levels (low 100 s of euros per kw for a fuel cell bus system based on a passenger car stack). These very low cost stacks can then be used in buses and offer low total costs of ownership, despite the relatively short lifetimes (automotive stacks are designed for only 5,000 hour life). Buses using passenger car based stacks have the potential to reduce costs well below 400,000 by 2022/25. The alternative approach is to continue to develop longer life fuel cell systems dedicated to the bus market. Here higher stack costs are offset by longer lifetimes. The development of these lower cost stacks is believed to require bus volumes in the 1,000 s in the 2015 to 2020 period. Again there is potential to reduce overall bus costs to an affordable level by 2022/25. Concluding, Hydrogen bus technology is expected to provide a more flexible and cost effective solution (on a total cost of ownership basis) than trolley buses for new routes in the period between 2015 and 2020, whilst it is expected to converge towards diesel-fuelled bus total ownership cost levels by approx. 2025/30. At this point the economics will be dictated by the relative cost of diesel versus hydrogen. Fuelling hydrogen buses allows very large refuelling facilities to be deployed, potentially with very long contract life. For a bus depot requiring 1,000kg/day, with a guaranteed requirement for over 10 years, the untaxed hydrogen costs at the pump (e.g. all-inclusive) could fall below 5-4/kg. When improved fuel economies for fuel 74

77 cell buses are included, this can lead to approximately equivalent fuel costs to diesel buses on an untaxed basis. This suggests that provided sufficient confidence is obtained in the FC buses and costs are reduced, infrastructure need not be a major barrier to increased FC bus rollout. Most of the refuelling stations for bus applications are currently based on trucked-in gaseous or liquid hydrogen, as centralized hydrogen production proved to be generally more cost effective than on-site technologies, particularly for the higher daily demands which characterize bus operation (compared with passenger cars). On-site production from electrolysis has tended to occur only where a very high priority is placed on zero carbon hydrogen as, most notably, the on-site route tends to lead to higher cost compared to the delivered hydrogen solutions (e.g. up to two or three times higher). For urban bus depots, there is often limited space for new fuelling equipment. This means station footprint can be an important factor in selecting the fuelling system of choice. Here, new designs are required for large scale fuelling (over 1,000kg/day), which will be compatible with future bus depots based on hydrogen. The refuelling time experienced by fuel cell bus operators range between 7 and 10 minutes per bus, assuming 30-40kg of on-board hydrogen storage at 350bar. As typical refuelling times for diesel buses are less than 3 minutes, the longer fill times for hydrogen buses risks causing an unacceptable level of inconvenience for transit operators when dealing with fleets of over 100 buses. This is a challenge for hydrogen buses which needs further work. Solutions could be logistical (e.g. installing additional dispensers at depots to allow simultaneous fuelling of buses), practical (e.g. altering route patterns to allow fuelling during the day), or technical (e.g. pre-cooling hydrogen to allow faster fuelling or operating 700 bar tanks to allow fuelling only every two days). It is recommended that these types of solutions are explored in the near term projects for hydrogen bus demonstration such as the CHIC project. 75

78 7.1 Next Generation of bus projects: what should be expected Based on the analysis above, the next pre-commercial activity for hybrid fuel cell bus demonstrations needs to overcome two main barriers: Demonstrate improved availability for fuel cell hybrid buses (target: 90%), at the high fuel economies expected for these drivetrains this is the main aim of the next generation of FC bus trials which is currently underway Catalyse the achievement of very low cost of fuel cell buses this is a medium term target and will be linked to the volume of demand, as well as the next generation of fuel cell system technology It is clear from the TCO analysis (Section 6.1) that the priority for hybrid fuel cell buses is to reduce the cost of the fuel cell system. As introduced in Section 4, a substantial cost reduction is expected in the next few years, thanks to an enhanced durability of the fuel cells. Thereafter, stakeholders unanimously agreed in considering achievable fuel cell system costs as low as approx. 1,000 / kw only if the market experiences sales of low hundreds of buses per year (from and afterwards). A consistent volume of sales per year would increase the confidence of the component suppliers and the bus manufacturers, and bring economy of scale benefits. More detail on suggested rollout strategies will be provided in the next NextHyLights WP3 deliverables (3.2 and 3.3). 76

79 Annex A: International framework The scope of this section is to provide a concise overview of the international policy framework in which demonstrations of fuel cell bus have been promoted, addressing the role of central governments, international authorities and local associations. In These projects are listed in Section 2, where are provided details on budgets and stakeholders. USA USA research activities on hydrogen as an alternative transport fuels started in the 1970s [DOE, 2010]. In the 1990s the central federal government initiated specific hydrogen and fuel cell research, development and demonstration programmes coordinated by the Department of Energy (DOE) [HRDDA, 1990] [HFA, 1996]. This commitment received further support from the five-year, $1.2 billion-funded Hydrogen Fuel Initiative (HFI) promoted by the president of the United States in 2003.The HFI formed the basis of the USA s long term hydrogen and fuel cell national RD&D strategy, currently undertaken by the DOE s Hydrogen Program (HP). The DOE is the leading department in the coordination of the national-wide, multi-departmental RD&D activities on hydrogen production, distribution and end-use [DOE, 2010]. USA s fuel cell bus demonstrations originate in this long-term federal interest in developing alternative transport fuels. The RD&D activities on fuel cell buses in the United States have been funded essentially by two major national agencies (the DOE and the Federal Transport Authority) and by a number of local authorities. In the national framework, California has also played a key role in rolling out alternative transport technologies. A. The Federal Transport Authority (FTA) The FTA has been the key national agency in supporting alternative transport technologies, co-funding the first American demonstration of a methanol-fuelled hydrogen fuel cell buses (FCB) in the 1980s at the University of Georgetown [NREL, 2009]. From the 1990s, the FTA worked in parallel with the DOE s hydrogen RD&D programs in funding FCB demonstrations. In 2005 the FTA undertook a $49 millionfunded National Fuel Cell Bus Technology Development Program (NFCBP) to complement and support the HFI, with the precise aim to facilitate the development of commercially viable hydrogen FCB and related infrastructures [FTA, 2006]. More details on the FTA- NFCBP are reported in Figure 33, below. In addition to this program, the FTA is funding smaller projects in a number of American universities (Georgetown, Delaware, Texas and Alabama, for a total of 6 fuel cell buses) one battery dominant fuel cell bus for the city of Burbank (California) and two hybrid fuel cell buses for Sun Line Transit (California). 77

80 Figure 33 FTA NFBP s structure and projects details B. The DOE s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) department. The Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) is the federal office responsible for DOE s hydrogen and fuel cell programs. The last two federal programs were the Hydrogen, Fuel Cells, and Infrastructure Technologies (HFCIT) program and the Fuel Cell Technology (FCT) program 21. EERE coordinates RD&D activities in partnership with academia, industry and national laboratories with the objective to demonstrate hydrogen and fuel cell technologies in real-world applications. In addition, the EERE is responsible for the collection of technoeconomic data and for performing state of art evaluations [EERE, 2010]. 21 Respectively under the former DOE s Controlled Hydrogen Fleet and Infrastructure Demonstration and Validation Project and the current DOE s Hydrogen Program [EERE, 2010][NREL, 2003] 78

81 Figure 34 EERE Fuel Cell Technologies (FCT) program RD&D structure. The Program is part of the DOE Hydrogen Program. The picture is taken from [DOE, 2009]. C. California s authorities and associations The Republic of California has played a particular role in promoting the demonstration of fuel cell technology, being the most active state so far. The first hydrogen-fuelled FCB demo fully operated by local bus operators were conducted in California in the early 2000s [NREL, 2003] and two out of the three transit agencies that are still operating hydrogen buses today are Californian (AC Transit and Sun Line Transit). In addition, the San Francisco bay area is the location of the forthcoming large scale FCB demonstration project (ZEB Area project, ZEBA, Figure 17 below) [NREL, 2009]. The Californian demonstrations are funded by a network of local authorities and associations 22 and by private consortia (such as CalSTART). California s activities on FCB demonstrations are driven by the Air Resources Board (CARB) s Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies. This rule, adopted in 2000, imposes precise emission targets for new urban vehicles and includes the so called Zero Emission Bus (ZBus) regulation. The ZBus is an obligation on the Californian bus fleets exceeding 200 buses. It requires the conversion of 15% of the bus fleet in 22 Such as the California Air Resolution Board (CARB), the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the California Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP), the California Energy Commission (CEC). 79

82 advanced zero emission buses (ZEB) by mid 2012 [CARB, 2010]. This target could imply that up to 380 ZEB could be deployed in California by The CARB is cofinancing the ZEB Area project, as well as a $1.4 million Proterra fuel cell bus project in the city of Burbank, and two new hybrid fuel cell buses at Sun Line Transit. Figure 35 Essential funding structure of San Francisco s bay area bus demonstration USA s existing hydrogen infrastructures has been generally commissioned ad hoc for each demonstration. However, recent USA programmes such as the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) and the DOE s Clean Cities programs allowed some transit agencies to receive extra grants for financing hydrogen infrastructures. Precisely, AC Transit received TIGER grants to finance a solar-based hydrogen production plant, and CT Transit received a Clean Cities grant for a hydrogen refuelling station [NREL, 2009b]. According to the US DOE, in mid-2009 there were 60 Hydrogen Filling Stations across the country 23, essentially based on delivered hydrogen (either liquid or compressed), onsite Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) and onsite electrolysis [DOE, 2009] [NREL, 2009c] in operation according to DOE s last presentation at IPHE Hydrogen Infrastructure Workshop, held in February

83 The FTA, DOE and CARB developed their programmes having in mind precise targets on the techno-economic performance of FCB and hydrogen infrastructures. These targets are essentially the DOE s targets for fuel cell vehicles, summarised in Table 11. Table 11 DOE s selected Fuel Cell performance targets for vehicles by Authority Efficiency FC durability Availability Fuel Econo my Vehicle Range FC cost Hydrogen fuelling rate Hydrogen costs (delivered) DOE 50% at full power 5,000 hours 85%* NA 300 miles $30 /kw** 350bar $2-3/gge Sources: [NREL, 2009c], [DOE, 2009]. * This target is intended for FC buses according to transit agencies needs [NREL, 2008]. ** This target is intended for FC light vehicles. Heavy duty fuel cells are expected to cost more. Canada Canada s hydrogen and fuel cells RD&D activities came under the umbrella of a network formed by the Canadian National Research Council (CNRC), the Canadian Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association (CHFCA) and the Canadian Department of Industry (Industry Canada, IC). Demonstration activities benefit also from local programs such as the Hydrogen Highway in the British Columbia, a voluntary network of private and public partners aiming to commercialize FC technologies in the transport sector. Although Canada has not had a large transit bus demonstration project in the recent past, the country is now hosting the world s largest hybrid FCB fleet. This demonstration is operated by a single transit agency (BC Transit) and started in time for the 2010 Olympic Winter Games for a period of four years ( ), with an initial funding of CAN$89 million provided by The British Columbia province, BC Transit and Canada s Public Transit Capital Trusts [CHFCA, 2010][IC, 2008]. The demonstration includes the world largest hydrogen refuelling station (HRS), which has a dispensing capacity of 1000kg/day [IC, 2008] [NREL, 2009b]. Canada s targets on hydrogen fuelled fuel cell vehicles have been developed by Industry Canada (IC). IC has recently published Canada s fuel cell commercialisation plan [IC, 2008], stating indicative targets on the performance of hydrogen fuel cell buses for achieving their commercialisation by These targets are summarised in Table 12, below. 81

84 Table 12 Canada s target on hydrogen-fuelled FC buses by 2015 Authority Efficiency FC durability Availability Fuel Economy Vehicle Range Bus cost Hydrogen fuelling rate Hydrogen costs (delivered) Industry Canada NA 20,000 hours 95% NA NA 850,000 US$ NA 2.5 US$/kg Sources: [IC, 2008]. Europe The European Commission (EC) has promoted some 200 hydrogen and fuel cells RD&D activities across the European Union in the past 14 years for a total contribution of over 550 million. In compliance with the commission aim to guarantee a sustainable, competitive and reliable energy future to member states, the EC co-funded hydrogen and fuel cells activities throughout the last four Framework Programmes (FP). During the 5 th FP ( ) the EC created the European Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Platform (EHFC-TP) in order to accelerate the deployment of the technology in the European market and bring together a common platform of key public and private stakeholders. With the 7 th ( ) FP s Joint Technology Initiative on hydrogen and fuel cells (HFC-JTI), the EC took the further step establishing the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH-JU) in This is intended to be the implementation of the EHFC-TP experience. The FCH-JU is a public-private partnership aiming to accelerate the deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell technology through a series of targeted projects, in strict connection with industry. The FCH-JU works as a long-term platform where the industry partners (represented by the Industry Group, IG), research partners (represented by the N.ERGHY association) and European Commission (JTI) meet for developing synergies (Figure 36, below). [JTI, 2010] [EC, 2010a] [EC, 2010b] [EC, 2010c]. 82

85 Figure 36 European Commission's Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Joint Undertaking (HFC-JU) structure. Sources: FCH-JU Stakeholders General Assembly 2009 [JTI, 2010] The EC has co-funded through its FPs the majority of the bus demonstrations across Europe, together with local governments, associations and industry partners. The demonstrations have involved some 24 cities in over 11 countries. Europe hosted the world s largest (at that time) FCB demonstration, CUTE (9 European cities with 3 buses each) and its more international extension HyFleet:CUTE (7 European cities, 1 Icelandic, 1 Chinese and 1 Australian, for a total of 33 HFCBs). Besides the EC efforts, Europe is characterised by a network of public-private associations active in promoting hydrogen and fuel cell RD&D activities on regional scale. Some of the main associations are resumed below. 83

86 Table 13 Principal European Hydrogen associations active in vehicle and infrastructure RD&D Name Clean Energy Partnership (CEP) Brief Description and website Founded in 2002, the CEP is a partnership of 12 international private firms and two public transit operators aiming to demonstrate the safety and viability of hydrogen-based road transportation, setting up multi-technology demonstrations in north Germany (Berlin, Hamburg, North-Rhine Westphalia). CEP demonstration projects are subdivided in three phases, which, among other targets, will deploy over 11 hydrogen refuelling stations and over 90 fuel cell cars by Phase I, , Berlin: two hydrogen filling stations, some 25 cars, a number of centralized and decentralized hydrogen production units. Phase II, : establishing the Hydrogen Region Hamburg-Berlin : some 40 cars, a new fleet of hydrogen buses and three new hydrogen refuelling stations; Phase III, : focus on market preparation for vehicles & infrastructures commercialization. Phase III aims to : deploy over 90 fuel cells cars, increase the share of renewably produced hydrogen to up to 50% by 2016 and connect the infrastructure network with the Scandinavian one. European Hydrogen Association (EHA) Founded in 2000, the EHA currently represents 15 national associations and 7 industry firms active in the hydrogen infrastructure development. Through its extensive network, the EHA aims to encourage the technology deployment across Europe promoting knowledge sharing, joint actions and cooperation between members. The Association is committed in keeping a direct contact with the relevant local authorities and Europe s Authorities, such as the EC, and to identify synergies with similar international associations. The EHA is currently working with HyRaMP (see below). Fuel Cell And Hydrogen Network NRW Founded in 2000 with the purpose of encouraging RD&D activities on hydrogen and fuel cell technologies, the network catalyses synergies between 350 members (private firms, public authorities and international corporations), covering the whole hydrogen and fuel cell value chain (from production to 84

87 end-use applications). So far, the network has initiated and cofunded 60+ projects for an overall value of more than 120 million (of which 74m directly provided by the network). HyCologne HyCologne is a public-private partnership of over 20 members localized in west Germany, that supports hydrogen and fuel cell projects in the area of Cologne, Dusseldorf, Aachen and Bonn providing knowledge, connections and infrastructures. HyCologne s two major current activities is the promoting of a hydrogen powered bus fleet and industrial-scale hydrogenpowered power plant in order to valorize the abundant availability of hydrogen from local chemical industries. European Region and Municipalities Partnership for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells (HyRaMP) Scandinavian Hydrogen Highway Partnership (SHHP) Founded in 2008, the partnership represents 26 European Regions and Municipalities of 7 European state members as a unique influential stakeholder in the EC s JTI FCH. The partnership aims to help the local communities to play a key role in developing the European hydrogen and fuel cell deployment strategy. Quoting SHHP s homepage, The SHHP constitutes a transnational networking platform that catalyses and coordinates collaboration between three national networking bodies HyNor (Norway), Hydrogen Link (Denmark) and Hydrogen Sweden (Sweden). SHHP partners work together with an extensive network of local authorities, research centres and private firms aiming to facilitate the creation of an integrated hydrogen infrastructure network along the three Scandinavian countries, ideally by SHHP s partners aim to realize the Europe s largest hydrogen-powered vehicle demonstration, having the ambitious target to deploy some hydrogen filling stations, 100 buses, 500 cars and 500 specialty vehicles by SHHP intends to integrate the Scandinavian network with the rest of Europe. 85

88 In the European context Germany is the leading country in promoting fuel cell and hydrogen RD&D activities. Box 1, below, summarises the German framework identifying programmes, stakeholders and some key number of the German fuel cell and hydrogen industry. Box 1 The German experience on fuel cell and hydrogen RD&D programmes As reported by Germany Trade and Invest, the foreign and inward investment agency of the Federal Republic of Germany, the German hydrogen and fuel cell market is the largest in Europe. The country has hosted the 70% of the European fuel cell demonstrations, possesses a network of some 350 companies and institutes active in hydrogen and fuel cell activities and benefits from an overall budget of 2 billion for RD&D activities throughout German hydrogen and fuel cell RD&D are promoted on a national level by the National Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Innovation Programme (NIP), initiated in The NIP aims to accelerate the commercialisation of hydrogen and fuel cell technology in Germany with the overall objective to favour the meeting of environmental targets, the creation of sustainable jobs and the strengthening of the German technological competiveness in the international market. The NIP is managed and implemented by the National Organisation for hydrogen and fuel cell technology GmbH (NOW). The NOW ensures communication, funds integration and collaborations between the regional and international projects that take place in Germany. In other words, the NOW is a program management organisation which ensures the realisation of NIP s goals. It coordinates an extensive network of public-private associations that promotes regional RD&D activities (such as CEP, Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Network NRW, HyCologne, HySolutions Hamburg, etc.). The NIP has a budget of 1.4 billion (for the period ) provided by a number of Federal Ministries and private industry partners in form of a 50/50 private-public partnership. Out of the 0.7 billion provided by the Federal ministries, 0.5 billion are explicitly dedicated for fuel cell demonstration and market preparation projects, of which 54% is for transport applications (hydrogen production and distribution included). In September 2009 the H2 Mobility Initiative was launched by a number of leading industry firms and NOW. The initiative aims to develop a comprehensive nation-wide hydrogen infrastructure network by 2015 through a three-phase plan of action. The plan aims to set Germany as the forerunning member state in the commercialisation of fuel cell vehicles. The EC s Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking has targets for achieving fuel cell vehicles commercialisation. The targets for fuel cell buses are summarised in Table 14. A recent call for funding fuel cell buses provides targets for buses deployed in (20 fuel cell buses in 3 sites). Large term targets would be developed for future calls (up to 500 buses in at least 10 European sites by 2015, according to the FCH-JU s Multi-Annual Implementation Plan ). 86

89 Table 14 JTI-JU targets for hydrogen-fuelled FC buses by 2015 Authorit y Efficienc y FC durabilit y Availabili ty Fuel Economy Vehicle Range FC cost Hydroge n fuelling rate Hydrogen costs (delivere d) JTI NA 6,000 hours > 85% < kg/100 km NA 100 Euro /kw* Sources: [JTI, 2010] *This target is intended for FC light vehicles. Heavy duty fuel cells are expected to cost more. 200kg/da y 5 vehicles hours 5 Euro/kg CUTE and HYFLEET:CUTE HyFleet:CUTE has been the largest FCB world s demonstration so far, operating 33 fuel cell buses in 10 cities, of which 7 European, 1 Icelandic, 1 Chinese and 1 Australian. The project was intended as a continuation of the CUTE (Clear Urban Transport for Europe) demonstration, an EC initiative that involved 27 buses in 9 European cities from 2003 and HyFleet:CUTE de facto extended the operational life of CUTE s fuel cell buses where possible. The demonstration received 19 million from EC s 6 th FP and 24 million from 31 Industry partners, deployed a total of 33 non-hybrid fuel cell buses and 14 hydrogen fuelled ICE buses from 2006 to end HFCBs are still operating in Hamburg till mid-2010, thanks to EC funding for a one-year project extension. The demonstration developed and tested a range of hydrogen infrastructure and delivery options, testing 4 on-site water electrolysers, 2 on-site LPG/CNG steam reforming plants and 6 liquid and gaseous externally supplied hydrogen refuelling stations (79% from renewable). CHIC CHIC - Clean Hydrogen for European Cities - builds on CUTE and HYFLEET:CUTE s success by: Deploying 26 next generation hybrid fuel cell buses in medium/small size fleets in 5 European cities (Aargau/St.Gallen, Bolzano, London, Milan and Oslo) Improve first generation hydrogen refuelling facilities and implement second generation hydrogen infrastructures. The project, meant to be the next logical step toward commercialisation after the HYFLEET:CUTE demonstration, aims at demonstrating the full suitability of next generation hybrid fuel cell bus technology and hydrogen refuelling facilities for full-time transport services. As a part of its objectives, CHIC aims therefore at: 87

90 1. Achieving a number of performance targets which will ease the integration process of the technology into todays public transport standards. The most relevant targets are summarised in Table 15, below. Table 15 CHIC s key targets for hybrid fuel cell buses and hydrogen refuelling infrastructures Targets for hybrid fuel cell buses Targets for hydrogen refuelling facilities Sources: CHIC s kick-off meeting Buses availability: 85% Buses fuel economy: 13kg/100km Hydrogen cost (OPEX) at station: < 10/kg (excluding taxes) with a target of 5/kg by project s end Fuel cells system durability: >6,000hours Refuelling station availability: 98% 2. Disseminating key learning from this project and a number of other Europe-based hydrogen bus projects into a broader number of European stakeholders, with the ultimate objective to facilitate the deployment of the technology into some 14 new European regions. The project is supported by Joint Technology Initiatives Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH-JU) and a set of industry partners. Hydrogen Bus Alliance The Hydrogen Bus Alliance (HBA) was formed in October 2006 by a number of international partners characterised by an extensive experience in hydrogen bus demonstrations and by a common commitment to deploy at least 5 buses per partner by 2012 (with a strong political support from local authorities). At present, the HBA include the transit agencies of the following: Amsterdam (GVB) Amsterdam participated both to the CUTE project and its extension Hy:FLEET CUTE. The City is now planning to continue its FCB experience deploying 2 fuel cell PHILEAS articulated bus by The city possesses one hydrogen fuelling station, still in operation. Barcelona (TNB) Barcelona participated both to the CUTE project and its extension Hy:FLEET CUTE. 88

91 Berlin (BVG) Berlin participated both in HyFLEET:CUTE, and is still operating hydrogen-fuelled ICE buses of the latter demonstration. BVG is a partner of the "Clean Energy Partnership" (CEP), active together in testing car, bus and fuel station operations in Berlin and Hamburg area. The city possesses one hydrogen fuelling station still in operation, and expects three new stations by British Columbia (BC Transit) BC Transit is currently running the world largest FCB demonstration in a single transit region, in occasion of the 2010 Winter Games. This four-year ( ), 20-bus demonstration includes the world s largest hydrogen fuelling station (HFS). Cologne - Regionalverkehr Köln (RVK) The Regionalverkehr Köln hosts the HyCologne programme. The programme acts in the area of Cologne, Düsseldorf, Aaachen and Bonn and aims to deploy a hydrogen bus fleet as well as industrial-scale hydrogen-powered power plants. RVK will deploy 2 fuel cell PHILEAS articulated bus by 2011 (in partnership with the City of Amsterdam), as an outcome of the joint venture between North Rhine Westphalia and the Dutch government. The RVK possesses a 100km hydrogen pipeline that could be used for the creation of local hydrogen distribution network. Hamburg (Hamburger Hochbahn) The Hamburger Hochbahn participated both in the CUTE project and its extension Hy:FLEET CUTE, which 6 FCB will be operated till mid The city possesses one hydrogen fuelling station with on-site electrolysers-based hydrogen production, powered by certified green electricity. In autumn 2009 Daimler announced a contract with Hamburger Hochbahn to deliver 10 new hybrid fuel cell buses in the city from London (Transport for London) London participated to the CUTE project, its extension Hy:FLEET CUTE and now it is one of the five European cities partner in the CHIC project. Under CHIC, Transport for London (TfL) will be running 8 hybrid fuel cell buses which will be refuelled in a new refuelling facility. Madrid (EMT) Madrid participated both to the CUTE project and its extension Hy:FLEET CUTE. 89

92 Oslo (Ruter) Oslo, one of the key cities of the Norwegian hydrogen highway project (HyNor), has joint the Alliance in Through the CHIC project, the city will be running five hybrid fuel cell buses for 5 years. South Tyrol - Bolzano The Italian region of South Tyrol benefits from a local public-private partnership, the institute for Innovative Technologies (IIT), which aims to encourage local deployment of green technologies. The region intends to exploit its abundant hydroelectric power to produce hydrogen for a local fleet of fuel cell vehicles. The region aims to operate fuel cell buses in Bolzano is one of the five European cities partner in the CHIC project under which will run five hybrid fuel cell buses for a minimum of 5 years. Western Australia - Public Transport Authority of Western Australia The State Government of Western Australian conducted a demonstration of three hydrogen fuel cell buses in Perth, known as EcoBuses. The trial ran from September 2004 to September 2007, in collaboration with CUTE and ECTOS, becoming then a partner of the HyFLEET:CUTE project. The HBA is committed to operate up to 50 per partner by 2015, aiming to act as leader in encouraging FCB commercialization through the commercial benefit of a joint demand. To date, the Alliance possesses a fleet of over 14,000 buses and an average yearly purchase of 1,400 buses. The Alliance shares knowledge amongst members and industry in order to encourage cost reductions. Finally, it is committed to assist new partners in developing their own demonstrations. In this framework, the HBA published a strategic plan where techno-economic targets and commitment scenarios for achieving FCB commercialization are discussed. HBA s targets are summarized in Table 16, below. Table 16 HBA s key targets to achieve fuel cell buses commercialisation Authority Efficiency FC durability Availability Fuel Economy bus cost Hydrogen fuelling rate Hydrogen costs (delivered) HBA NA >25,000 NA < 8kg /100km US$ 1m or lower 1,000kg per day US$3-5/kg Sources: [HBA, 2008] 90

93 Australia Australia s hydrogen and fuel cells programs are promoted by the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism (RET), the Australian Central and Regional Governments and by private partners. However the country does not possess a dedicated platform for the coordination of national RD&D activities. In 2008 RET published the Hydrogen Technology Roadmap for Australia, a vision on the future role of hydrogen and fuel cells in helping Australia s reduction of Green House Gases emissions. The document was developed for the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) and had the scope to identify the potential role of the Australian Governments, industries and research centres in developing a hydrogen economy. The roadmap is intended to be a vision and does not identify precise milestones or targets. In 2004 the Australian Government, the National Heritage Trust s Air Pollution programme, the Australian Greenhouse Trust, the Government of West Australia and various private partners supported the demonstration of three FCB in Perth (project known as EcoBus, initial budget of AUD$5 million from the public authorities) as the flag of the Sustainable Transport Energy for Perth (STEP) project. The demonstration was successfully extended to three years of duration in collaboration with CUTE, becoming a member of HyFLEET:CUTE. The EcoBus HyFLEET:CUTE project has been the first and, so far, the sole public demonstration of FCB for transit services in Australia [RET, 2008] [GWA, 2010]. Brazil Brazil s government launched the Brazilian Fuel Cell Program in 2004, administrated by the Ministry of Science and Technology (Ministerio de Ciencia e Tecnologia, MCT). The Brazilian Action Plan for the Hydrogen Economy (Plano de Ação de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação para a Economia do Hidrogênio) is currently run by the MCT under the national programme for Electric Energy, Hydrogen and Renewable Energy [MCT, 2010]. Brazil is currently experiencing its first FCB demonstration project under the United Nation Development Programme s Global Environment Facility (UNDP-GEF) Fuel Cell Bus Programme, a US$21 million budget project with the scope to operate 8 24 FCBs in the metropolitan area of São Paulo. The buses are co-founded by the UNDP-GEF, the Brazilian Ministry of Mines and Energy (GoB), the Empresa Metropolitana de Transportes Urbanos de São Paulo (EMTU/SP) and by private partners [UNDP, 2010]. 24 According to a private communication, only 4 buses out 8 initially programmed will be constructed by

94 China The Chinese government initiated R&D activities on hydrogen in fuel cells in the 1970 s, although a precise Chinese road map for hydrogen and fuel cell technologies was shaped only from late 1990 s. Since then, hydrogen and Fuel Cells RD&D activities are coordinated by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), receiving increasing attentions and funds. During the 10 th Five Year Plan for economic development ( ), the MOST dedicated 40% of the energy research programme budget for hydrogen, fuel cells and electric vehicles RD&Ds. As a consequence some 60 Chinese research centres and firms were working on hydrogen and fuel cells RD&Ds in In occasion of the current 11 th Five Year Plan ( ), the MOST gave a clear priority to the development of alternative transport technology in urban areas, planning 100 FC vehicles in forthcoming demonstration projects and aiming to commercialise ~1,000 fuel cell vehicles by Figure 37 China's most active firms and research centres in hydrogen and fuel cell RD&D programmes. Chinese RD&D demonstrations are promoted by two major channels: MOST s Five-year Plans (top) and the UNDP-GEF programme (left). Chinese FCB demonstration projects started in 2001 with the 10 th Five Year Plan, with China s first public demonstration of a (shuttle) bus prototype (Tsinghua University, Beijing). From 2002, the MOST collaboration with local governments (Beijing and Shanghai) and with international authorities produced a number of FCB projects, notably the phase I UNDP-GEF three-bus demonstration in Beijing (started in 2005 and then 92

95 extended through the partnership with the HyFLEET:CUTE) and the recent deployment of three buses for the Beijing Olympic Games (2008). The UNDP-GEF II phase will introduce up to 6 new buses in Shanghai from 2010, for a two years demonstration. Beijing has permanent hydrogen refuelling station operative from 2006, whilst Shanghai is developing its own by The collaboration with international projects is intended by the MOST as additional to the domestic demonstration programmes [CFCB, 2010] [IDRC, 2008][UNU-MERIT, 2006]. The Tsinghua University and the Nanyang Technological University (Singapore) recently unveiled a new hybrid fuel cell bus, jointly developed by the two universities. The bus will provide shuttle services in occasion to the Youth Olympics in Singapore. Finally, the Clean Energy Automotive Engineering Centre (CEAEC) of Tongji University announced 50 fuel cell buses in shuttle service in occasion of 2010 Asian Games and Asian Para Games in Guangzhou City [FCW, 2010]. Japan Japan is one of the world leaders in hydrogen and fuel cell research and development activities, having an extensive national research program (mainly focused on basic research). The Japanese program involves a large number of authorities and research centres in an extensive network of RD&D activities. Figure 38, below, reports the structure of the national program for fuel cell vehicle, a ~ $250 million/year program throughout The Japan Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Demonstration project (JHFC) is responsible for vehicles technology test and demonstration with the ultimate scope to facilitate their commercialisation. The JHFC was initiated in 2002 by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) in collaboration with public authorities and private firms (international and Japanese), and is organised in two coordinated branches: a) Fuel Cell Vehicle Demonstration Study; b) Hydrogen Infrastructure Demonstration Study. In JHFC s phase I (FY ), the project s objectives were focused on vehicle and hydrogen production & dispensing efficiencies. In the current phase II ( ), the project s objectives are focused on data collection, public awareness and identification of actual use conditions. JHFC aims to mature a comprehensive knowledge on vehicle performances, production & distribution characteristics and environmental impacts to help develop a Japanese roadmap for mass-scale commercialisation. From 2009 the JHFC has been subsided by the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO). The Japan two FCB demonstrations have been promoted under the JHFC programme (Toyota/Hino, a total of 8 buses). 93

96 Japanese targets on vehicle FC techno-economic performances can be identified in the NEDO s targets, summarised in Table 17, below. Table 17 JHFC s key targets to achieve hydrogen-fuelled FC vehicle mass-scale production by Authority Efficiency FC durability Availability Fuel Economy FC cost Hydrogen fuelling rate Hydrogen costs (delivered) JHFC >60% >5,000 hours NA NA <4,000 / kw* NA NA *This target is intended for FC light vehicles. Heavy duty fuel cells are expected to cost more Figure 38 Japan's hydrogen and fuel cell national project s structure for vehicle applications. The figure is taken from JHFC s official brochure [JHFC, 2010]. South Korea South Korea s RD&D activities on hydrogen and fuel cells started in 1988, through the Alternative Energy Promotion Act ( , US$91.5 million fund in total). In 2004, the Korean government took a further step launching a new programme with a total budget of US$586 million through to 2011 (US$46.6 million for the Domestic Transit Fleet demonstrations throughout , half of which provided by private partners 25 ). At this occasion, the government created the National RD&D Organization 25 According to Hyundai s presentation held at IPHE Hydrogen Infrastructure Workshop held in February According to the same source, US$ 17.6 million (30% from government) are 94

97 for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells (whose objective is the validation, demonstration, and commercialization of the technology) and the Hydrogen Energy R&D Centre (whose scope is to promote the development of hydrogen production and storage technologies). Both organizations are sponsored by the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (MEST) and the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE), and promote demonstrations through strategic public-private partnerships with key industrial partners (mainly Korean firms). South Korea has ambitious targets in moving toward a hydrogen economy, planning the commercialisation of 50,000 fuel cell vehicles by Short-term targets plan 10 hydrogen refuelling stations and 20 FCBs by 2012 (IPHE 2010 workshop data). So far, the National RD&D Organization for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells opened 8 hydrogen refuelling stations 26 in major Korean cities and ran several Fuel cell vehicle demonstrations. In this framework, Hyundai-KIA Motors ran the first Korean FCB demonstration (4 buses, from 2006 to present) [ERC, 2010][NREL, 2009][KEI, 2008]. Table 18 MKE s key fuel cell vehicle targets by 2015 Authority Efficiency FC durability Availability Fuel Economy Stack cost Hydrogen fuelling rate Hydrogen costs (delivered) MKE NA 5,000 hours NA Range of 500km US$ 41/kW NA NA United Nation Development Program Green Environment Facilities The UNDP initiated an international Fuel Cell Bus programme in 2000 through the Environmentally Sustainable Transport programme of UNDP s Green Environment Facility project. The FCB programme had the scope to support commercial demonstration of FCB and hydrogen facilities in the largest markets of the developing world: Brazil (Sao Paulo), China (Beijing), Egypt (Cairo), India (New Delhi) and Mexico (Mexico City). The project was ultimately realised only in Brazil (still in progress) and in China (phase I completed; phase II in progress in Shanghai). The UNDP-GEF programme is an international partnership co-funded by national governments, the UNDP, local and international industry firms [UNDP, 2010]. dedicated for the Domestic Validation Program (80 FC cars, 5 industry partners) throughout , and up to US$77 million for the second phase of Domestic Fleet Demonstration (>2,000 vehicles throughout ). 26 According to Hyundai s presentation held at IPHE Hydrogen Infrastructure Workshop held in February 2010, there are 8 refuelling stations currently in operation and 12 by

98 Annex B: Hydrogen refuelling stations for bus applications four case studies The hydrogen refuelling station in Hürth, Cologne Location: Hürth / Cologne / Germany Timeline: In service mid-2010 Project Summary: One small refuelling station (dispensing capacity of 100kg H2 /day) based on trucked-in gaseous hydrogen for the refuelling of two 18m articulated hybrid fuel cell buses Project Manager: HyCologne ( ) Project Partners: Air Products, City of Hürth, German Federal State, region of North Rhine-Westphalia, Praxair Refuelling Station Specifications: Refuelling station capital cost Capacity Hydrogen purchase price (note that this excludes the capital and operational cost of the fuelling station) Hydrogen source Refuelling concept On-site storage design ~ 1.3 millions(overhead costs included) 100 kg H2 /day (upgradable to 300 kg H2 /day) Approx. 1.6/kg) if delivered through pipeline; approx. 5.5/kg if delivered through tube-trailer. By-product fromthe local chemical industry (from chloride electrolysis). The hydrogenis trucked-in in gaseous phase at 200bar. 350bar cascade refuelling no precooling The on-site storage system uses two storage pressures, 150bar and 400bar, and one compressor (GreenField, 20kg H2 /hour of peak capacity, air cooled). The compressor is designed to operate from hydrogen pressures as low as 8bar. 96

99 Refuelling time Peak performance: 90g H2 /second 350bar only Expected refuelling time: ~ 9 minutes / bus (40kg of onboard hydrogen capacity) for two buses in sequence Location and footprint Location: Industrial / chemical area. Footprint: 200 m 2 Safety distances Large fire walls used to minimise hazardous zones 30cm thick concrete walls, 3.6m high required. Distance from bus depot 2.5km Discussion: The refuelling station will start its activity with 100kg H2 /day capacity and 350bar refuelling, being sized for refuelling two buses. The refuelling station can be easily upgraded to higher dispensing capacities (up to 300kg H2 /day if required) as it is designed to accommodate extra on-site storage capacity. In addition, the existing compressor and IT management system can manage up to 6 dispenser units at either 350bar or 700bar - this latter option could be used to accommodate car refuelling in the same infrastructure. 97

100 Figure 39 The hydrogen refuelling station in Hürth, Cologne. On the left side of the picture there is the dispensing unit (one dispenser for 350bar refuelling). In the background there are the compressor unit (enclosed in a container, left side) and the low pressure (150bar) storage tanks. The gaseous hydrogen is currently delivered to the refuelling station by tube trailers, which are connected to the system behind the yellow concrete wall. The low capital cost of the refuelling station is a consequence of its simple design, possible thanks to the local availability of hydrogen as a by-product from the chemical industry. The hydrogen is currently trucked-in in gaseous form at 200bar, but the refuelling station could be easily retrofitted to accommodate a hydrogen pipeline directly connected with the production plant (some 450m away). Figure 40, below, captures the benefits coming from the simple refuelling station design and cheap hydrogen price in terms of hydrogen price at the pump. The model considers three dispensing capacities (100kg H2 /day, 200kg H2 /day and 300kg H2 /day), a discount period of ten years, a discount rate of 3.5% and a yearly maintenance fee equivalent to the 3% of the capital cost of the refuelling station. The hydrogen is assumed to be delivered through a short pipeline, whose cost is also included, and by tube-trailer. Finally, the figures include the extra capital cost for additional on-site storage capacity for dispensing capacities over 100kg/day, quantified as ~ 25% of the initial capital cost of the infrastructure. 98

101 12 Hydrogen fuel price at the pump versus dispensing volume ( 10 year contract, delivered gaseous hydrogen ) Average EU taxed and untaxed diesel fuel price (~ 1.15 and 0.58/ litre) Hydrogen price contribution Pipeline cost contribution Refueling station cost contribution / kg Assumptions: Refueling station cost: 1.3million (100kg/day); 1.6million (200 and 300kg/day) Hydrogen purchase price: 1.6/kg (piped), 5.5/kg (trucked-in) Station maintenance fee: 40,000/year Discount rate: 3.5% Discount period: 10 years Pipeline cost: 800,000 (450m) 100 kg/day 200 kg/day 300 kg/day Figure 40 Projections on the hydrogen fuel price at the pump as for the refuelling station in Cologne. The figures exclude the cost for operating the refuelling station (notably the electricity sourced by the compressor). Figures assume 356 days of utilisation per year. Figure 40 suggests that the hydrogen price at the pump is likely to be higher than the taxed diesel price (on a calorific equivalence basis), for the maximum dispensing capacity of the refuelling station (300kg H2 /day). That same analysis, however, suggests that price parity can be achieved for dispensing capacities of kg H2 /day, assuming little change in the refuelling station capital cost and same pipeline. 99

102 The hydrogen refuelling station project in Leyton, London Location: Leyton / London / UK Timeline: In service by late 2010 Project Summary: One medium/small refuelling station (dispensing capacity of 320kg H2 /day) based on trucked-in liquid hydrogen for the refuelling of up to 8 hybrid fuel cell buses. Project Manager: Transport for London (TfL) ( Project Partners: Air Products, City of London, FCH JTI, First Group Refuelling Station Specifications: Refuelling station capital cost Approx. 3 million 27 staff training) (including all logistics costsand Capacity Hydrogen purchase price Hydrogen source Refuelling concept On-site storage design Refuelling time Location and footprint 320kg H2 /day (upgradable) Confidential Steam methane reforming from Air Product s production plant in Rotterdam (the Netherland, some 470km away from London). The hydrogen is liquefied and trucked to the refuelling station through a special tanker Hydra Cascade refuelling no precooling The storage system is directly provided by the Hydra tanker itself. The Hydra tanker stores up to 3.5 tonnes of hydrogen in liquid form and dispense it in gaseous phase at pressures up to 440bar through an integrated vaporiser and compressor. The tanker will be parked in the refuelling area and connected to two dispensers. Once empty, it will be simply replaced by a full tanker. Expected refuelling time: 10 minutes / bus (30kg of onboard hydrogen capacity) for 8 buses in sequence within a refuelling windows of 4 hours The refuelling site is located within an existing bus depot 27 Source: 100

103 Footprint: < 400 m 2 Safety distances Distance from bus depot Standard safety requirements for liquid H2 (EIGA requirements). A safety distance of 20m from occupied buildings is maintained. The refuelling facility is within the bus depot Discussion: The refuelling station consists of the Hydra tanker itself, high pressure hydrogen storage tanks and two dispenser units. The daily capacity can be easily upgraded as the Hydra tanker designed to store up to 3.5 tonnes of hydrogen; this is enough fuel for over 100 buses per day. If more hydrogen were required, additional-site liquid hydrogen could also be added. Additional expansion would require additional on-site equipment, notably additional high pressure hydrogen storage. Figure 41, below, provides an overview of the refuelling site (in the background) and the maintenance depot (foreground). Hydra tanker Refuelling area Figure 41 Computer graphic of the refuelling site in London (in the background), and the alongside bus maintenance depot. Courtesy of Transport for London (TfL) The hydrogen fuel will be produced in the Netherlands by steam methane reforming and trucked to the refuelling area by road and ferry. It is worth noting, however, that the contract with the hydrogen supplier includes provision to source hydrogen from more 101

104 environmental friendly sources in future. Figure 42, below, captures the economics of the refuelling station in terms of final hydrogen price at the pump, considering a discount period of ten years, a discount rate of 3.5% and three different prices for the liquid hydrogen ( 1/kg H2, 3/kg H2, 6/kg H2 ). The figures refer to two dispensing capacities, 320kg H2 /day and 1,000kg H2 /day. In this higher capacity case it is estimated that a refuelling station has a capital cost 25% higher, due to extra equipment. Hydrogen fuel price at the pump versus liquid hydrogen price and dispensing capacity ( delivered liquid hydrogen) kg/day 1,000 kg/day Average EU taxed and untaxed diesel fuel price (~ 1.15 and 0.58/ litre) / kg-h Assumptions: Discount rate: 3.5% Discount period: 10 years Dispensing capacity 320kg/day: Refueling station capital cost: 3million Station maintenance fee: 90,000/year 1 0 Liquid hydrogen price 6/kg Liquid hydrogen price 3/kg Liquid hydrogen price 1/kg Dispensing capacity 1,000kg/day: Refueling station capital cost: 3.7million Station maintenance fee: 115,000/year Figure 42 Estimation of the hydrogen fuel price at the pump for the refuelling station in Leyton, London. The figures refer to three different purchase prices of the liquid hydrogen and two dispensing capacities. Figure 42 suggests that for dispensing capacity of 320kg H2 /day the hydrogen fuel price is likely to be higher than the average taxed diesel price in the European market, even for low liquid hydrogen prices. In this latter case the major cost component is the capital cost of the refuelling station itself. The figure also suggest that the price at the pump can be substantially lowered moving toward larger dispensing capacities, to the point that it is possible to reach a cost parity with the taxed diesel price for a dispensing capacity close to 1,000kg H2 /day and a liquid hydrogen price close to 1/ kg H2 (break-even at 850kg H2 /day and 2/ kg H2 ). 102

105 The hydrogen refuelling station project in HafenCity, Hamburg Location: HafenCity / Hamburg / Germany Timeline: First trial expected in August 2011 Project Summary: One large refuelling station (capacity of 750kg H2 /day) based on onsite hydrogen production (from electrolysis) and trucked-in gaseous hydrogen for the refuelling of ten 12m hybrid fuel cell buses (plus a number of fuel cell cars) (beginning 2013 twenty fuel cell buses shall be refuelled). Project Manager: Vattenfall Europe Innovation GmbH ( Project Partners: Shell Associated Partners: Hamburger Hochbahn, CEP, City of Hamburg, Daimler, German Federal State Contractors H2-Hardware: Linde Subcontractor Electrolysis: Hydrogenics Refuelling Station Specifications: Refuelling station capital cost Capacity Hydrogen purchase price ~ 7.5 million (all investment costs included) 750kg H2 /day For trucked-in hydrogen only hydrogen supplier still to be defined Price at the pump will be CEP-Price - around 8 /kg Hydrogen source Refuelling concept 50% of the hydrogen required by the refuelling station will be trucked-in in gaseous phase (overnight) whilst the remaining will be produced on-site through electrolysis. There will be initially two Hydrogenics HySTAT-60 alkaline electrolysers (hydrogen production capacity of up to 60 Nm 3 /hour at 10bar of output pressure) with the possibility to add an extra unit by The electrolysers will be powered exclusively with renewable energy. Cascade refuelling 103

106 On-site storage design Refuelling time Location and footprint The site will be equipped with two ionic compressors, one being used for redundancy or for matching peak demand. The storage system is composed of two hydrogen middle pressure storage tanks at 50bar (of 50m 3 each) and 120 bottles (nominal volume of 50 litres) at 830bar, in order to perform both 350bar and 700bar refuelling. The system is designed to store up to 720kg of hydrogen. Expected refuelling time: 60-80g H2 /second at 350bar (peak: 120 g H2 /second for buses) and 5 kg H2 /3 minutes at 700bar (SAE). Location: rural mixed area close to a water channel, bridge, roads and office buildings. Footprint: 700 m 2 Safety distances Distance from bus depot The location of the refuelling station allows to maintain a safety distance from hazards in compliance with the German regulations ~ 15km (indicative distance between the bus depot in Hamburg Hummelsbüttel and HafenCity) Discussion: The refuelling station will be the second hydrogen station in the city of Hamburg. The refuelling station has been designed for bus and car demonstrations and includes two separate dispenser units for performing 350bar and 700bar refuelling simultaneously. The station will be suitable for 24/7 unmanned refuelling operations. The station has little room for extra on-site storage, being placed alongside a river and two bridges. The facility, however, has been designed to accommodate an extra electrolyser if required. 104

107 Figure 43 Computer graphic of the refuelling station in HafenCity, Hamburg. Source: Clean Energy Partnership website The refuelling station is a demonstration prototype within the city of Hamburg, which aims to demonstrate the concept and the viability of green on-site hydrogen production. This justifies the high capital cost of the project. It is worth noting that the concept design will be not promoted in other demonstrations. Figure 44, below, summarises the economics of the refuelling station in terms of the hydrogen price at the pump, considering a fixed dispensing capacity (750kg H2 /day), a discount period of ten years, the capita cost of this (demonstration) site, a discount rate of 3.5%, a yearly maintenance fee equivalent to the 3% of the capital cost of the refuelling station and: 50% of the hydrogen being produced from electrolysis assuming three different prices for the sourced electricity ( 0.05/kWh, 0.2/kWh, 0.3/kWh) 50% of the hydrogen being trucked-in at, for example, 4/kg H2 105

108 Hydrogen fuel price at the pump versus three elctricity prices ( 50% electrolysis, 50% trucked-in gaseous hydrogen ) 18 Refuelling station maintenance cost Refuelling station financing cost Cost for the hydrogen (50% delivered and 50% produced from electrolysis) Average EU taxed and untaxed diesel fuel price (~ 1.15 and 0.58/ litre) Assumptions: Refueling station capital cost: 7.5million, Hydrogen purchase price: 4/kg Station maintenance fee: 225,000/year Discount rate: 3.5% Discount period: 10 years 2 0 Electricity price: 0.05/kWh Electricity price: 0.2/kWh Electricity price: 0.30/kWh The figures assume two electrolysers with a capital cost of 300,000 each. The conversion efficiency of the process, including gas continioning and compression, is assumed close to 65kWh/kg H2 Figure 44 Estimation of the hydrogen fuel price at the pump for the refuelling station in HafenCity, Hamburg. The figures refer to three different electricity prices. The cost of the hydrogen is the arithmetic average between the hydrogen purchase price and the production cost from electrolysis. Figure 44 suggests that the hydrogen fuel price at the pump is likely to be at least three times higher than the average taxed diesel price in the European market, even assuming subsidised electricity prices (e.g. as low as 0.05/kWh). This result is influenced by the high capital cost of the refuelling station and, most notably, by the cost of the hydrogen itself, i.e. excluding financing and maintenance costs. This latter is the key cost component and is influenced by the poor economic performance of the electrolysers. There is, however, scope for substantial cost reductions for these kind of refuelling station designs over time. Particularly as the constrained location and prototype nature of this project have increased costs significantly. 106

109 The hydrogen refuelling station project in Whistler, British Columbia Location: Whistler / British Columbia / Canada Timeline: In service since November 2009 Project Summary: One large refuelling station (dispensing capacity of 1,000kg H2 /day) based on trucked-in liquid hydrogen for the refuelling of twenty 12m hybrid fuel cell buses Project Manager: BC Transit ( Project Partners: Air Liquide Canada, Government of British Columbia, Canada s Public Transit Capital Trust, Government of Canada Refuelling Station Specifications: Refuelling station capital cost Capacity Hydrogen purchase price Hydrogen source Refuelling concept On-site storage design Confidential. BC Transit awarded in December 2007 CAD $20 million contract (approx. 14 million) to Air Liquide Canada for the construction of the refuelling station in Whistler, a small mobile refueler and the provision of hydrogen for refuelling twenty buses for five years 1,000 kg H2 /day Confidential. The hydrogen purchase price was negotiated by BC Transit and Air Liquide as part of the 5-year liquid hydrogen supply contract The hydrogen is produced from electrolysis (powered by hydroelectricity), liquefied and trucked-in in liquid phase on weekly basis from Bécancour, Quebec (some 5,000km away from Whistler) Cascade refuelling The on-site storage system is characterised by two storage tanks, which can store up to 10 tonnes of hydrogen in liquid phase, and the necessary equipment for refuelling from liquid hydrogen (hydrogen compressor, vaporisers, etc. see Error! Reference source not found., below). The refuelling station is designed to ensure 99% availability 24/7 107

110 Refuelling time Location and footprint Safety distances Distance from bus depot Refuelling time: ~ 10 minutes / bus at 350bar (45kg of on-board hydrogen capacity) for up to eighteen buses in sequence Location: rural area, within a Transit Centre (which includes sheltered stalls for up to 50 buses, a 6-bay maintenance depot, an automatic bus wash, a diesel refuelling station and operational building). Footprint: 700m 2 The location of the refuelling station allows to maintain safety distances from hazards in compliance with the Canadian regulations The bus depot is located alongside the refuelling site Discussion: The refuelling station in Whistler is the world largest hydrogen refuelling station, being able to dispense up to 1,000 tonnes of hydrogen per day. The refuelling station has been designed to ensure 99% availability and 24/7 operation, having redundant equipment and up to 10 tonnes of hydrogen stored on-site in liquid form. In addition, the station can be remotely controlled from Vancouver (some 130km away). Figure 45, below, illustrates the small footprint of the refuelling station, which is one of the main advantages of liquid hydrogen fuelling. 108

111 Entrance for bus refuelling Figure 45 The refuelling station in Whistler, British Columbia. The station is located within a Transit Centre, which includes the bus depot and other functional buildings. On the right side of the figure there are the two hydrogen storage tanks, which cumulative storage capacity is up to 10 tonnes of hydrogen in liquid form. Picture source: The refuelling process has demonstrated excellent availability to date: over 1,300 refuelling had been performed by April 2010, delivering some 33 tonnes of hydrogen. The station is provided with one dispenser for 350bar refuelling only, being commissioned to support the hydrogen bus demonstration in Whistler. 109