Impact of hydrogen refueling configurations and market parameters on the refueling cost of hydrogen

The cost of hydrogen in early fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) markets is dominated by the cost of refueling stations, mainly due to the high cost of refueling equipment, small station capacities, lack of economies of scale, and low utilization of the installed refueling capacity. Using the hydrogen delivery scenario analysis model (HDSAM), this study estimates the impacts of these factors on the refueling cost for different refueling technologies and configurations, and quantifies the potential reduction in future hydrogen refueling cost compared to today's cost in the United States. The current hydrogen refueling station levelized cost, for a 200 kg/day dispensing capacity, is in the range of $6–$8/kg H₂ when supplied with gaseous hydrogen, and $8–$9/kg H₂ for stations supplied with liquid hydrogen. After adding the cost of hydrogen production, packaging, and transportation to the station's levelized cost, the current cost of hydrogen at dispensers for FCEVs in California is in the range of $13–$15/kg H₂. The refueling station capacity utilization strongly influences the hydrogen refueling cost. The underutilization of station capacity in early FCEV markets, such as in California, results in a levelized station cost that is approximately 40% higher than it would be in a scenario where the station had been fully utilized since it began operating. In future mature hydrogen FCEV markets, with a large demand for hydrogen, the refueling station's levelized cost can be reduced to $2/kg H₂ as a result of improved capacity utilization and reduced equipment cost via learning and economies of scale.     

Techno-economic analysis of hydrogen transportation infrastructure using ammonia and methanol

The transformation from a fossil fuels economy to a low carbon economy reshapes how energy is transmitted. Since most renewable energy is harvested in the form of electricity, hydrogen obtained from water electrolysis using green electricity is considered a promising energy vector. However, the storage and transportation of hydrogen at large scales pose challenges to the existing energy infrastructures, both regarding technological and economic aspects. To facilitate the distribution of renewable energy, a set of candidate hydrogen transportation infrastructures using methanol and ammonia as hydrogen carriers were proposed. A systematical analysis reveals that the levelized costs of transporting hydrogen using methanol and ammonia in the best cases are $1879/t-H₂ and $1479/t-H₂, respectively. The levelized cost of energy transportation using proposed infrastructures in the best case is $10.09/GJ. A benchmark for hydrogen transportation infrastructure design is provided in this study.     

Hydrogen carriers: Production,transmission, decomposition,and storage

Recognizing the potential role of liquid hydrogen carriers in overcoming the inherent limitations in transporting and storing gaseous and liquid hydrogen, a complete production and use scenario is postulated and analyzed for perspective one-way and two-way carriers. The carriers, methanol, ammonia and toluene/MCH (methylcyclohexane), are produced at commercially viable scales in a central location, transmitted by rail or pipelines for 2000 miles, and decomposed near city gates to generate fuel-cell quality hydrogen for distribution to refueling stations. In terms of the levelized cost of H₂ distributed to the stations, methanol is less expensive to produce ($1.22/kg-H₂) than MCH ($1.35/kg-H₂) or ammonia ($2.20/kg-H₂). Levelized train transmission cost is smaller for methanol ($0.63/kg-H₂) than ammonia ($1.29/kg-H₂) or toluene/MCH system ($2.07/kg-H₂). Levelized decomposition cost is smaller for ammonia ($0.30–1.06/kg-H₂) than MCH ($0.54–1.22/kg-H₂) or methanol ($0.43–1.12/kg-H₂). Over the complete range of demand investigated, 10–350 tpd-H₂, the levelized cost of H₂ distributed to stations is aligned as methanol « ammonia ~ MCH. With pipelines at much larger scale, 6000 tpd-H₂, the levelized cost decreases by ~1 $/kg-H₂ for ammonia and MCH and much less for methanol. Methanol is a particularly attractive low-risk carrier in the transition phase with lower than 50-tpd H₂ demand.     

Large-scale long-distance land-based hydrogen transportation systems: A comparative techno-economic and greenhouse gas emission assessment

Interest in hydrogen as an energy carrier is growing as countries look to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in hard-to-abate sectors. Previous works have focused on hydrogen production, well-to-wheel analysis of fuel cell vehicles, and vehicle refuelling costs and emissions. These studies use high-level estimates for the hydrogen transportation systems that lack sufficient granularity for techno-economic and GHG emissions analysis. In this work, we assess and compare the unit costs and emission footprints (direct and indirect) of 32 systems for hydrogen transportation. Process-based models were used to examine the transportation of pure hydrogen (hydrogen pipeline and truck transport of gaseous and liquified hydrogen), hydrogen-natural gas blends (pipeline), ammonia (pipeline), and liquid organic hydrogen carriers (pipeline and rail). We used sensitivity and uncertainty analyses to determine the parameters impacting the cost and emission estimates. At 1000 km, the pure hydrogen pipelines have a levelized cost of $0.66/kg H₂ and a GHG footprint of 595 gCO₂eq/kg H₂. At 1000 km, ammonia, liquid organic hydrogen carrier, and truck transport scenarios are more than twice as expensive as pure hydrogen pipeline and hythane, and more than 1.5 times as expensive at 3000 km. The GHG emission footprints of pure hydrogen pipeline transport and ammonia transport are comparable, whereas all other transport systems are more than twice as high. These results may be informative for government agencies developing policies around clean hydrogen internationally.     

Economic analysis of hydrogen production from wastewater and wood for municipal bus system

The levelized cost of hydrogen for municipal fuel cell buses has been determined using the DOE H2A model for steam methane reforming (SMR), molten carbonate fuel cell reforming (MCFC), and wood gasification using wastewater biogas and willow wood chips as energy feedstocks. 300 kg H₂/day was chosen as the design capacity. Greenhouse gas emissions were calculated for each for the three processes and compared to diesel bus emissions in order to assess environmental impact. The levelized cost per kilogram for SMR, MCFC, and gasification is $5.12, $8.59, and $10.62, respectively. SMR provided the lowest sensitivity to feedstock price, and lowest levelized cost at various scales, with competitive cost to diesel on a cost/km basis. All three technologies provide a reduction in total greenhouse gases compared to diesel bus emissions, with MCFC providing the largest reduction. These results provide preliminary evidence that small scale distributed hydrogen production for public transportation can be relatively cost-effective and have minimal environmental impact.     

Analyzing the levelized cost of hydrogen in refueling stations with on-site hydrogen production via water electrolysis in the Italian scenario

Hydrogen refueling infrastructures with on-site production from renewable sources are an interesting solution for assuring green hydrogen with zero CO₂ emissions. The main problem of these stations development is the hydrogen cost that depends on both the plant size (hydrogen production capacity) and on the renewable source.In this study, a techno-economic assessment of on-site hydrogen refueling stations (HRS), based on grid-connected PV plants integrated with electrolysis units, has been performed. Different plant configurations, in terms of hydrogen production capacity (50 kg/day, 100 kg/day, 200 kg/day) and the electricity mix (different sharing of electricity supply between the grid and the PV plant), have been analyzed in terms of electric energy demands and costs.The study has been performed by considering the Italian scenario in terms of economic streams (i.e. electricity prices) and solar irradiation conditions.The levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH), that is the more important indicator among the economic evaluation indexes, has been calculated for all configurations by estimating the investment costs, the operational and maintenance costs and the replacement costs.Results highlighted that the investment costs increase proportionally as the electricity mix changes from Full Grid operation (100% Grid) to Low Grid supply (25% Grid) and as the hydrogen production capacity grows, because of the increasing in the sizes of the PV plant and the HRS units. The operational and maintenance costs are the main contributor to the LCOH due to the annual cost of the electricity purchased from the grid.The calculated LCOH values range from 9.29 €/kg (200 kg/day, 50% Grid) to 12.48 €/kg (50 kg/day, 100% Grid).     

Capacity assessment and cost analysis of geologic storage of hydrogen: A case study in Intermountain-West Region USA

Hydrogen is an integral component of the current energy transition roadmap to decarbonize the economy and create an environmentally-sustainable future. However, surface storage options (e.g., tanks) do not provide the required capacity or durability to deploy a regional or nationwide hydrogen economy. In this study, we have analyzed the techno-economic feasibility of the geologic storage of hydrogen in depleted gas reservoirs, salt caverns, and saline aquifers in the Intermountain-West (I-WEST) region. We have identified the most favorable candidate sites for hydrogen storage and estimated the volumetric storage capacity. Our results show that the geologic storage of hydrogen can provide at least 72% of total energy consumption of the I-WEST region in 2020. We also calculated the capital and levelized costs of each storage option. We found that a depleted gas reservoir is the most cost-effective candidate among the three geologic storage options. Interestingly, the cushion gas type plays a significant role in the storage cost when we consider hydrogen storage in saline aquifers. The levelized costs of hydrogen storage in depleted gas reservoirs, salt caverns, and saline aquifers with large-scale storage capacity are approximately $1.15, $2.50, and $3.27 per kg of H₂, respectively. This work provides essential guidance for the geologic hydrogen storage in the I-WEST region.     

Assessing techno-economic uncertainties in nuclear power-to-X processes: The case of nuclear hydrogen production via water electrolysis

Nuclear assisted low carbon hydrogen production by water electrolysis represents a potential application of nuclear cogeneration towards deep decarbonization of several fossil fuel-dependent industrial sectors. This work builds a probabilistic techno-commercial model of a water electrolysis plant coupled to an existing nuclear reactor for base load operations. The objective is to perform discounted cash flow (DCF) calculations for levelized nuclear hydrogen production cost under input parameter uncertainty. The probability distributions of inputs are used with the Monte Carlo-Latin Hypercube (MC-LH) sampling technique to generate 10⁵ input scenarios and corresponding distribution of the levelized or life cycle hydrogen production cost instead of deterministic point values. Based on current techno-economic conditions, the levelized production costs of electrolytic hydrogen using electricity from large water-cooled nuclear reactors are determined to be US $ 12.205 ± 1.342, 8.384 ± 1.148 and 6.385 ± 1.051/kg H₂ respectively at rated alkaline water electrolyser capacities of 1.25 MW(e), 2.5 MW(e) and 5 MW(e). The corresponding values for PEM water electrolysers are US $ 13.162 ± 1.356, 8.891 ± 1.141 and 6.663 ± 1.057/kg H₂. The potential for flexible nuclear reactor operation and management of power demand uncertainties through nuclear hydrogen cogeneration is also examined through a case study.     

Shipping the sunshine: An open-source model for costing renewable hydrogen transport from Australia

Green hydrogen (H₂) is emerging as a future clean energy carrier. While there exists significant analysis on global renewable (and non-renewable) hydrogen generation costs, analysis of its transportation costs, irrespective of production method, is still limited. Complexities include the different forms in which hydrogen can be transported, the limited experience to date in shipping some of these carrier forms, the trade routes potentially involved and the possible use of different shipping fuels. Herein, we present an open-source model developed to assist stakeholders in assessing the costs of shipping various forms of hydrogen over different routes. It includes hydrogen transport in the forms of liquid hydrogen (LH₂), ammonia, liquified natural gas (LNG), methanol and liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHCs). It considers both fixed and variable costs including port fees, possible canal usage charges, fuel costs, ship capital and operating costs, boil-off losses and possible environmental taxes, among many others. The model is applied to the Rotterdam-Australia route as a case study, revealing ammonia ($0.56/kg_H2) and methanol ($0.68/kg_H2) as the least expensive hydrogen derivatives to transport, followed by liquified natural gas ($1.07/kg_H2), liquid organic hydrogen carriers ($1.37/kg_H2) and liquid hydrogen ($2.09/kg_H2). While reducing the transportation distance led to lower shipping costs, we note that the merit order of assumed underlying shipping costs remain unchanged. We also explore the impact of using hydrogen (or the hydrogen carrier) as a low/zero carbon emission fuel for the ships, which led to lowering of costs for liquified natural gas ($0.88/kg_H2), a similar cost for liquid hydrogen ($2.19/kg_H2) and significant increases for the remainder. Given our model is open-sourced, it can be adapted globally and updated to match the changing cost dynamics of the emerging green hydrogen market.     

Centralized and decentralized electrolysis-based hydrogen supply systems for road transportation – A modeling study of current and future costs

This work compares the costs of three electrolysis-based hydrogen supply systems for heavy road transportation: a decentralized, off-grid system for hydrogen production from wind and solar power (Dec-Sa); a decentralized system connected to the electricity grid (Dec-Gc); and a centralized grid-connected electrolyzer with hydrogen transported to refueling stations (Cen-Gc). A cost-minimizing optimization model was developed in which the hydrogen production is designed to meet the demand at refueling stations at the lowest total cost for two timeframes: one with current electricity prices and one with estimated future prices. The results show that: For most of the studied geographical regions, Dec-Gc gives the lowest costs of hydrogen delivery (2.2–3.3€/kgH₂), while Dec-Sa entails higher hydrogen production costs (2.5–6.7€/kgH₂). In addition, the centralized system (Cen-Gc) involves lower costs for production and storage than the grid-connected decentralized system (Dec-Gc), although the additional costs for hydrogen transport increase the total cost (3.5–4.8€/kgH₂).     

Efficient STEP (solar thermal electrochemical photo) production of hydrogen – an economic assessment

A consideration of the economic viability of hydrogen fuel production is important in the STEP (Solar Thermal Electrochemical Photo) production of hydrogen fuel. STEP is an innovative way to decrease costs and increase the efficiency of hydrogen fuel production, which is a synergistic process that can use concentrating photovoltaics (CPV) and solar thermal energy to drive a high temperature, low voltage, electrolysis (water-splitting), resulting in H₂ at decreased energy and higher solar efficiency. This study provides evidence that the STEP system is an economically viable solution for the production of hydrogen. STEP occurs at both higher electrolysis and solar conversion efficiencies than conventional room temperature photovoltaic (PV) generation of hydrogen. This paper probes the economic viability of this process, by comparing four different systems: (1) 10% or (2) 14% flat plate PV driven aqueous alkaline electrolysis H₂ production, (3) 25% CPV driven molten electrolysis H₂ production, and (4) 35% CPV driven solid oxide electrolysis H₂ production. The molten and solid oxide electrolysers are high temperature systems that can make use of light, normally discarded, for heating. This significantly increases system efficiency. Using levelized cost analysis, this study shows significant cost reduction using the STEP system. The total price per kg of hydrogen is shown to decrease from $5.74 to $4.96 to $3.01 to $2.61 with the four alternative systems. The advanced STEP plant requires less than one seventh of the land area of the 10% flat cell plant. To generate the 216 million kg H₂/year required by 1 million fuel cell vehicles, the 35% CPV driven solid oxide electrolysis requires a plant only 9.6 mi² in area. While PV and electrolysis components dominate the cost of conventional PV generated hydrogen, they do not dominate the cost of the STEP-generated hydrogen. The lower cost of STEP hydrogen is driven by residual distribution and gate costs.     

Recent advancements in the hydrogen value chain: Opportunities,challenges, and the way Forward–Middle East perspectives

This work highlights the recent advancements in the hydrogen value chain for the Middle East region by evaluating the feedstock, production technologies, storage options, delivery routes, and end-user applications. It discusses the national strategies for implementing the hydrogen value chain in the Middle East from 2020 to 2050. The challenges in the hydrogen value chain from techno-economic, safety, and social perspectives are also discussed in this study. Hydrogen production technologies are analyzed and compared. Steam-methane reforming has a high efficiency of 74% and a low hydrogen cost of $2.27/kg-H₂, making it the most dominant technology for hydrogen production. Electrolysis has a lower efficiency of 60% and a higher hydrogen cost of $10.30/kg-H_2, with more potential for further improvments.Furthermore, hydrogen storage options are compared. Compressed gas and cryogenic liquid options have the highest storage capacities of 39.2 and 70.9 kg/m³, respectively. However, they are not entirely safe due to the high flammability of hydrogen. Two hydrogen explosion incidents are also reported, the first explosion at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in 2011 and the second in the Hindenburg fire in 1937. Metal hydrides propose a safer and more effective option, but they are still under research and development. For H₂ transportation options, pipelines and cryogenic tankers are the most conventional and efficient options (above 99%). Ships have the largest capacity of 10,000 tons per shipment and the maximum investment costs of 465M - 620M$ per barge, but they are not feasible. This review paper will help researchers and practitioners analyze the hydrogen value chain in a more systematic way for further improvements toward more practical applications.     

Hydrogen as a long-term,large-scale energy storage solution when coupled with renewable energy sources or grids with dynamic electricity pricing schemes

One of the key challenges that still facing the adoption of renewable energy systems is having a powerful energy storage system (ESS) that can store energy at peak production periods and return it back when the demand exceeds the supply. In this paper, we discuss the costs associated with storing excess energy from power grids in the form of hydrogen using proton exchange membrane (PEM) reversible fuel cells (RFC). The PEM-RFC system is designed to have dual functions: (1) to use electricity from the wholesale electricity market when the wholesale price reaches low competitive values, use it to produce hydrogen and then convert it back to electricity when the prices are competitive, and (2) to produce hydrogen at low costs to be used in other applications such as a fuel for fuel cell electric vehicles. The main goal of the model is to minimize the levelized cost of energy storage (LCOS), thus the LCOS is used as the key measure for evaluating this economic point. LCOS in many regions in United States can reach competitive costs, for example lowest LCOS can reach 16.4¢/kWh in Illinois (MISO trading hub) when the threshold wholesale electricity price is set at $25/MWh, and 19.9¢/kWh in Texas (ERCOT trading hub) at threshold price of $20/MWh. Similarly, the levelized cost of hydrogen production shows that hydrogen can be produced at very competitive costs, for example the levelized cost of hydrogen production can reach $2.54/kg-H₂ when using electricity from MISO hub. This value is close to the target set by the U.S. Department of Energy.     

Catching the hydrogen train: economics-driven green hydrogen adoption potential in the United Arab Emirates

The establishment of a hydrogen economy for domestic use and energy exports is increasingly attractive to fossil fuel exporting countries. This paper quantifies the potential of green hydrogen in the United Arab Emirates, using an integrated adoption model based on global technoeconomic trends and local costs. We consider the impact of varying hydrogen, oil, natural gas, and carbon prices on the economics of green H₂ adoption. In our Business-As-Usual (BAU) scenario, we observe economic viability in UAE industries between 2032 and 2038 at H₂ prices between $0.95/kg and $1.35/kg based on electrolyzer cost assumptions, solar forecasts and learning rates. We also note rapid scale-up to large export-oriented production capacities across our scenarios. However, if cost reductions slow or gas prices return to historical lows, additional interventions such as carbon pricing would be required to fully decarbonize in alignment with the 2050 net-zero target.     

Liquid pump-enabled hydrogen refueling system for medium and heavy duty fuel cell vehicles: Station design and technoeconomic assessment

Recent progress in submerged liquid hydrogen (LH₂) cryopump technology development offers improved hydrogen fueling performance at a reduced cost in medium- and heavy-duty (MDV and HDV) fuel cell vehicle refueling applications at 35 MPa pressure, compared to fueling via gas compression. In this paper, we evaluate the fueling cost associated with cryopump-based refueling stations for different MDV and HDV hydrogen demand profiles. We adapt the Heavy Duty Refueling Station Analysis Model (HDRSAM) tool to analyze the submerged cryopump case, and compare the estimated fuel dispensing costs of stations supplied with LH₂ for fueling Class 4 delivery van (MDV), public transit bus (HDV), and Class 8 truck (HDV) fleets using cryopumps relative to station designs. A sensitivity analysis around upstream costs illustrates the trade-offs associated with H₂ production from onsite electrolysis versus central LH₂ production and delivery. Our results indicate that LH₂ cryopump-based stations become more economically attractive as the total station capacity (kg dispensed per day) and hourly demand (vehicles per hour) increase. Depending on the use case, savings relative to next best options range from about 5% up to 44% in dispensed costs, with more favorable economics at larger stations with high utilization.     

Techno-economics of novel refueling stations based on ammonia-to-hydrogen route and SOFC technology

This paper presents the economic assessment of novel refueling stations, in which through advanced and high efficiency technologies, the polygeneration of more energy services like hydrogen, electricity and heat is carried out on-site.The architecture of these polygeneration plants is realized with a modular structure, organized in more sections.The primary energy source is ammonia that represents an interesting fuel for producing more energy streams. The ammonia feeds directly the SOFC that is able to co-generate simultaneously electricity and hydrogen by coupling a high efficiency energy system with hydrogen chemical storage.Two system configurations have been proposed considering different design concepts: in the first case (Concept_1) the plant is sized for producing 100 kg/day of hydrogen and the power section is sized also for self-sustaining the plant electric power consumption, while in the second one (Concept_2) the plant is sized for producing 100 kg/day of hydrogen and the power section is sized for self-sustaining the plant electric power consumption and for generating 50 kW for the DC fast charging.The economic analysis has been carried out in the current and target scenarios, by evaluating, the levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH), the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), the Profitability Index (PI), Internal rate of Return (IRR) and the Discounted Payback Period (DPP).Results have highlighted that the values of the LCOH, for the proposed configurations and economic scenarios, are in the range 6–10 €/kg and the values of the LCOE range from 0.447 €/kWh to 0.242 €/kWh.In terms of PI and IRR, the best performance is achieved in the Concept_1 for the current scenario (1.89 and 8.0%, respectively). On the contrary, in the target scenario, thanks to a drastic costs reduction the co-production of hydrogen and electricity as useful outputs, becomes the best choice from all economic indexes and parameters considered.     

An economic investigation of the wind-hydrogen projects: A case study

Hydrogen as an energy carrier can play a significant role in reducing environmental emissions if it is produced from renewable energy resources. This research aims to assess hydrogen production from wind energy considering environmental, economic, and technical aspect for the East Azerbaijan province of Iran. The economic assessment is performed by calculation of payback period, levelized cost of hydrogen, and levelized cost of electricity. Since uncertainty in the power output of wind turbines may affect the payback period, all calculations are performed for four different turbine degradation rates. While it is common in the literature to choose the wind turbine based on a single criterion, this study implements Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques for this purpose. The results of Step-wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis illustrates that economic issue is the most important criterion for this research. The results of Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment shows that Vestas V52 is the most suitable wind turbine for Ahar and Sarab cities, while Eovent EVA120 H-Darrieus is a better choice for other stations. The most suitable location for wind power generation is found to be Ahar, where it is estimated to annually generate 2914.8 kWh of electricity at the price of 0.045 $/kWh, and 47.2 tons of hydrogen at the price of 1.38 $/kg, which result in 583 tons of CO₂ emission reduction.     

Cost evaluation of two potential nuclear power plants for hydrogen production

Hydrogen is recognized as one of the most promising alternative fuels to meet the energy demand for the future by providing a carbon-free solution. In regards to hydrogen production, there has been increasing interest to develop, innovate and commercialize more efficient, effective and economic methods, systems and applications. Nuclear based hydrogen production options through electrolysis and thermochemical cycles appear to be potentially attractive and sustainable for the expanding hydrogen sector. In the current study, two potential nuclear power plants, which are planned to be built in Akkuyu and Sinop in Turkey, are evaluated for hydrogen production scenarios and cost aspects. These two plants will employ the pressurized water reactors with the electricity production capacities of 4800 MW (consisting of 4 units of 1200 MW) for Akkuyu nuclear power plant and 4480 MW (consisting of 4 units of 1120 MW) for Sinop nuclear power plant. Each of these plants are expected to cost about 20 billion US dollars. In the present study, these two plants are considered for hydrogen production and their cost evaluations by employing the special software entitled “Hydrogen Economic Evaluation Program (HEEP)” developed by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which includes numerous options for hydrogen generation, storage and transportation. The costs of capital, fuel, electricity, decommissioning and consumables are calculated and evaluated in detail for hydrogen generation, storage and transportation in Turkey. The results show that the amount of hydrogen cost varies from 3.18 $/kg H₂ to 6.17 $/kg H₂.     

Optimum energy evaluation and life cycle cost assessment of a hydrogen liquefaction system assisted by geothermal energy

In this study, analyses of the thermodynamic performance and life cycle cost of a geothermal energy-assisted hydrogen liquefaction system were performed in a computer environment. Geothermal water at a temperature of 200 °C and a flow rate of 100 kg/s was used to produce electricity. The produced electricity was used as a work input to liquefy the hydrogen in the advanced liquefaction cycle. The net work requirement for the liquefaction cycle was calculated as 8.6 kWh/kg LH₂. The geothermal power plant was considered as the work input in the liquefaction cycle. The hydrogen could be liquefied at a mass flow rate of 0.2334 kg/s as the produced electricity was used directly to produce liquid hydrogen in the liquefaction cycle. The unit costs of electricity and liquefied hydrogen were calculated as 0.012 $/kWh and 1.44 $/kg LH₂. As a result of the life cycle cost analysis of the system, the net present value (NPV) and levelized annual cost (LAC) were calculated as 123,100,000 and 14,450,000 $/yr. The simple payback period (N_spp) and discount payback period (N_dpp) of the system were calculated as 2.9 and 3.6 years, respectively.     

A specific exergy costing assessment of the integrated copper-chlorine cycle for hydrogen production

In this study the specific exergy costing (SPECO) approach is employed on a four-step integrated thermochemical copper-chlorine (Cu Cl) cycle for hydrogen production for a second-law based assessment purposes. The Cu–Cl cycle is considered as one of the most environmentally benign and sustainable options of producing hydrogen and is thus investigated in this study due to its potential of ensuring zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Several conceptual Cu–Cl cycles have been exergoeconomically examined previously, however this study aims at investigating the four-step integrated Cu–Cl cycle developed at the Clean Energy Research Laboratory (CERL) at the Ontario Tech University thereby contributing to the thermo/exergoeconomic assessments of the thermochemical hydrogen production. In this study, the cycle is first thermodynamically modeled and simulated in a process simulation software (Aspen Plus) through exergy and energy approaches. The basic principles of the SPECO methodology are applied to the system and exergetic cost balances are performed for each cycle component. The exergetic costing of each cycle stream is then performed based on the cost balance equations. The purchased equipment cost and the hourly levelized capital cost rates for each cycle component is also obtained. The exergoeconomic factor, relative cost difference and exergy destruction cost rate for various cycle components are also evaluated. Moreover, the effect of several parameters on the total and hourly levelized capital cost rates is analyzed by performing a comprehensive sensitivity analysis. Based on the analysis, the exergy cost, the unit or specific exergy cost, and the unit costs of hydrogen are evaluated to be 6407.55 $/h, 0.042 $/MJ, and 4.94 $/kg respectively.