Dec 2012

European-wide field trials for residential fuel cell micro-CHP

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union´s 7th Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) for the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking Technology Initiative under Grant Agreement Number 303462.

Dipl.-Ing. oec. Jan Hendrik Dujesiefken

Sales

Agenda

1. Brief presentation of the project

2. Overview of FC mCHP technology and its benefits

3. Technology deployed under ene.field

4. Typical agreements between ene.field manufacturers and associated field partners

2

v

Introduction to ene.field

• ene.field is the largest European demonstration of the latest smart energy solution for private homes, fuel cell micro-CHP.

• It will deploy up to 1,000 Fuel Cell heating systems in 12 key European member states.

• Project duration of 5 years. Systems will be demonstrated for 2 to 3 years.

• Outputs of the project include:

Detailed performance data, lifecycle cost and environmental assessments, market analysis, commercialisation strategy.

Countries where units are currently expected to be installed

3

The consortium brings together under a single partnership 26 partners including:

• all of the leading European FC micro-CHP developers,

• leading European utilities,

• several research partners,

• partners in charge of dissemination and coordination of the project.

ene.field is a European platform for FC mCHP

The Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU) is

committing c. €26 million to ene.field under the EU's

outgoing 7th Framework Programme for funding research

and development.

4

Agenda

1. Brief presentation of the project

2. Overview of FC mCHP technology and its benefits

3. Technology deployed under ene.field

4. Typical agreements between ene.field manufacturers and associated field partners

5

An efficient way to produce and deliver energy

Source: H2FC SUPERGEN at http://www.h2fcsupergen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Progress-

in-Fuel-Cell-mCHP-Prof-Nigel-Brandon-Imperial.pdf (illustration and data for graph),

• High electrical / thermal efficiencies. • Decentralised supply of heat / electricity. • No losses from transportation.

6

• Reduce CO2 associated with energy production at peak time.

• Less constrains for grid operation.

v

• CHP is the most efficient way to deliver / produce energy as it is based on simultaneous production of electricity and thermal energy, both of which are used.

• Micro CHP allows decentralised generation of heat and power at peak time.

v

Fuel Cell micro Combined Heat and Power systems (FC mCHP) 1/2

System description

• Produce both heat and electricity for a building using a single fuel. Primarily produces electricity with heat being produced as a by-product.

• Well suited to the retrofit market and compatible with new build properties.

• Noise and vibration free source of power.

• Low local emissions

Source: Fuel Cell Handbook (fifth edition), EG&G Services Parsons, Inc., 2000. and Fundamental

physics and chemistry of direct electrochemical oxidation in SOFC (see www.ene.field.eu)

When heat demand is too large for the system the

peak demand boiler will switch on and provide

heat. This peak demand boiler operates like a

conventional gas boiler.

7

Advanced and innovative technologies

8

v

• FC mCHP also generates less harmful emissions for the environment and for people’s health (CO2, PM, Sox, etc.).

Comparing efficiency and CO2 savings from various mCHP technologies

The efficiency % shown on this graph for FC systems are calculated as the average of the efficiency of the systems deployed in ene.field

Source: Element Energy, 2013 (Table) and data from Delta Energy & Environment (Graph) at

http://www.cogeneurope.eu/medialibrary/2013/04/23/ccf35af0/John%20Murray%20-%20Delta%20EE.pdf

• FC mCHP has a higher overall efficiency than a traditional boiler or even than other mCHP solutions.

Advanced and innovative technologies

9

v • FC mCHP also generates less harmful

emissions for the environment and for people’s health (CO2, PM, Sox, etc.).

CO2 savings potential

Source: Calux project, 2012

• FC mCHP has a higher overall

efficiency than a traditional boiler or

even than other mCHP solutions.

*) Calculated according to residual power value method

v

Fuel Cell micro Combined Heat and Power systems (FC mCHP) 2/2

Source: Fuel Cell Handbook (fifth edition), EG&G Services Parsons, Inc., 2000. and Fundamental

physics and chemistry of direct electrochemical oxidation in SOFC (see www.ene.field.eu)

Standard Fuel Cell system FC description

• Combines hydrogen produced from the fuel and oxygen from the air to produce power, heat and water through an electrochemical reaction.

• Can operate on a variety of fuels, including: • natural gas (L and H), • biofuels and • hydrogen

10

v

A growing market and interest for FC mCHP

Type of support Country

Tax support Belgium, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, UK.

Feed-in-tariff Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, UK.

Certificate scheme Belgium.

Capital grant Italy, Netherlands, UK.

Other Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain.

The last 5 years have seen a steep increase in sales worldwide as well as the implementation of numerous schemes to incentivise the uptake of mCHP.

Source: Code project at http://www.code-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/231210-European-Summary-Report-on-CHP-

support-schemes.pdf (table) and data from Delta Energy & Environment at

http://www.cogeneurope.eu/medialibrary/2013/04/23/ccf35af0/John%20Murray%20-%20Delta%20EE.pdf (Graph). 11

Countries with incentives for mCHP FC mCHP sales worldwide

Why are policy makers and industry pursuing CHP?

1. compared with a natural gas condensing boiler and European grid mix electricity 12

Carbon savings, reduced local emissions & energy efficiency

• FC mCHP can achieve carbon savings of up to 50%1.

• FC mCHP transfers electricity generation to the local level and alleviates transmission losses.

• FC mCHP can address renewable intermittency and nuclear inflexibility.

In the EU, the building sector is responsible for:

• 40% of energy consumption

• 36% of total CO2 emissions.

Challe

nges

Benefits

Agenda

13

1. Brief presentation of the project

2. Overview of FC mCHP technology and its benefits

3. Technology deployed under ene.field

4. Typical agreements between ene.field manufacturers and associated field partners

v

Technical characteristics of systems in ene.field

14

The systems deployed in ene.field present a good coverage of various type of requirements thanks to a wide range of technology, size and fuels.

v

Cost savings • High overall efficiency and displaced cost of electricity leading to savings in energy

costs for end-users (average est. between €800 and €1,200*). • Additional savings thanks to national grants for low carbon technologies.

Carbon savings (CO2 emissions) • Can achieve carbon savings of up to 50%* when compared with a natural gas

condensing boiler. • No soot / PN and limited nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions.

A cost effective solution for a low carbon energy production

15 * Depending on household characteristics, location, national prices and grants

+ Capital grant also available but not include in calculation.

Average savings compared to traditional boiler

DE

NL UK

Carbon saving (kgCO2/year) >1,260 > 1,000 > 1,200

Cost savings (€/year) >1,410 +

>460 > 1,000

Based on 1 kWel system, 30 – 35% electrical efficiency, 50 – 60% thermal efficiency, 4,500 running hours. Based on national prices and carbon intensity levels for gas and electricity between 2010 – 2012.

DE: Germany, NL: Netherlands, UK: United Kingdom.

Savings varies depending on national energy mix and local

utilities prices.

Agenda

1. Brief presentation of the project

2. Overview of FC mCHP technology and its benefits

3. Technology deployed under ene.field

4. Typical agreements between ene.field manufacturers & associated field partners

16

Detail of typical services included in commercial offer*

17

Ene.field manufacturer(s) Associated field partner

Production delivery and installation

• Manufacture • Delivery

• Supply of the connections

• Site selection e.g support for integration in existing building infrastructure • Installation of FC

Training

• Provide training for local for installation and troubleshooting

• Professional training of staff

• Attend training

Service & maintenance

• Deal with trouble shooting (2st level repair)

• 24h emergency hotline (2nd level support)

• Online supervision incl. 24h message system

• Deal with trouble shooting (1st level repair)

• Broadband for issues with customers (1st level support)

Marketing • Support for partner-marketing Operation • Optimization of system operation

(depends on the system

• Monitoring activities Decommissioning • Decommissioning

* Please note that the details of the commercial offer will vary between manufacturers. Details of agreements should be discussed with each manufacturer.

v

ene.field – coordination team contact details

18

• Please do not hesitate to contact us if you wish to get additional information about the ene.field systems or would like to be put in contact with one or several of the FC mCHP manufacturers involved in the project.

• COGEN Europe is the project co-ordinator and the leader of the dissemination Work Package.

• Element Energy is the work package leader coordinating the implementation of the demonstration sites under ene.field.

Fiona Riddoch (ene.field Coordinator)

Email: fiona.riddoch@cogeneurope.eu

Direct line: +32 2 772 82 90

Lisa Ruf (Field trial management)

Email: lisa.ruf@element-energy.co.uk

Direct line: +44(0)330 119 0986

Thank you for the attention!

BAXI INNOTECH GmbH

Dipl.-Ing. oec. Jan Hendrik Dujesiefken

Sales

Phone: +49 40 730 981 214

Mobile: +49 172 569 8687

E-Mail: j.dujesiefken@baxi-innotech.de