WG1: Hydrogen Infrastructure WGWG1: Hydrogen Infrastructure WG
Vice ChairpersonVice Chairperson Prof. Masanori Monde (Saga University)
LeaderLeaderKenichiro Saito(JX Nippon Oil & Energy Ｃorporation)
Role of Hydrogen Infrastructure WGJHFC’s TargetsJHFC s Targets1．Targets for hydrogen infrastructure
①Review and proposals of future commercialized infrastructure models②O ti f h d i f t t d t l diti f d②Operation of hydrogen infrastructure under actual condition of use and
clarification of tasks involved③ Drawing up of specific plans for verifying safety of hydrogen infrastructure and
reexamining regulationsg g
2．Targets for fuel cell vehicles④Operation of fuel cell vehicles under actual condition of use and
clarification of tasks involved⑤Verification of energy saving effects (fuel efficiency) and environment impact
reduction effects
3．Targets for common areas shared by vehicle and infrastructureg y⑥Review of measures to be taken for all issues that should be addressed
jointly between the vehicle and infrastructure fields
4．Targets for dissemination of results/public relation/globalization/local validationg p g⑦Public relation and educational activities⑧Identification and proposal of overseas technologies and policy trends⑨Review ideal local validation methods
1
5．Proposals for technical tasks and next phase demonstrations to startdissemination in 2015
WG1:Hydrogen Infrastructure WG Activities
1. Commercial Infrastructure Model Sub WG・Review on infrastructure standard specificationsfor the initial phase of propagation (2015-)
２．Safety & Regulation Sub WG・Defining the agenda for reviewing safety, codes,and regulations (By who, By when, What kind of data...)
３．Hydrogen Infrastructure Demonstration Sub WG・Operation and data acquisition of JHFC hydrogen
stationE tract tasks related to h drogen ref eling・Extract tasks related to hydrogen refueling
2
1 F l ti f C i l1. Formulation of Commercial Infrastructure Model
2. Definition of Agenda for Safety and Regulation Reviewg
3. Hydrogen Station Operations and SafetySafety
4. Evaluation of Efficiency and Hydrogen FuelFuel
5. Summary
3
Review of Commercial Infrastructure
Start to spread FCV/Hydrogen Station
2015 ～2010 2011 2025 20262015 2016
•Solving technical issues and promotion of Contribute to diversity of
Phase 1Technology
Demonstration【JHFC-2】
Phase 2Technology & Market
Demonstration【Post JHFC】 【Starting Period】
Phase 3Early Commercialization
【Expansion Period】
Phase 4Full Commercialization
【Profitable business Period】
mbe
r
•Expanding production and sales of
Commercialization Scenario for FCVs and H2 Stations
2010 2011 2025 20262015 2016•Solving technical issues and promotion of Contribute to diversity of
Phase 1Technology
Demonstration【JHFC-2】
Phase 2Technology & Market
Demonstration【Post JHFC】 【Starting Period】
Phase 3Early Commercialization
【Expansion Period】【Starting Period】
Phase 3Early Commercialization
【Expansion Period】
Phase 4Full Commercialization
【Profitable business Period】
mbe
r
•Expanding production and sales of
Commercialization Scenario for FCVs and H2 Stations
Sta t to sp ead C / yd oge Stat o(Initial Phase; Early Commercialization)
Transition period till full scale
g preview regulations (Verifying & reviewing development progress as needed)
•Verifying utility of FCVs and H2 stationsfrom socio-economicviewpoint
Contribute to diversity ofenergy sources and reduction of CO2 emissions
H2
Stat
ion
Nu
r
Approx. 1,000 H2 stations*
Approx 2 million FCVs*
FCVs while maintaining convenience of FCV users•Reducing costs for H2 stations and hydrogen fuel•Continuously conducting technology development and review of regulations
Costs for H2 station construction and hydrogen reach targets, making the
g preview regulations (Verifying & reviewing development progress as needed)
•Verifying utility of FCVs and H2 stationsfrom socio-economicviewpoint
Contribute to diversity ofenergy sources and reduction of CO2 emissions
H2
Stat
ion
Nu
r
Approx. 1,000 H2 stations*
Approx 2 million FCVs*
Approx. 1,000 H2 stations*
Approx 2 million FCVs*
FCVs while maintaining convenience of FCV users•Reducing costs for H2 stations and hydrogen fuel•Continuously conducting technology development and review of regulations
Costs for H2 station construction and hydrogen reach targets, making the Transition period till full scale
commercialization is realized* Precondition: Benefit for FCV users (price/convenience etc.) are secured, and FCVs are widely and smoothly deployed
Year Note: Vertical axis indicates the relative scale between vehicle number & station number.
Veh
icle
Num
be
Determine specifications of commercial type H2 stations
Begin building commercial type H2 stations
Increase of FCV numbers through introduction of more vehicle models
Period in which preceded H2 station building is necessary
Approx. 2 million FCVs y g g gstation business viable. (FCV 2,000 units/station)
* Precondition: Benefit for FCV users (price/convenience etc.) are secured, and FCVs are widely and smoothly deployed
Year Note: Vertical axis indicates the relative scale between vehicle number & station number.
Veh
icle
Num
be
Determine specifications of commercial type H2 stations
Begin building commercial type H2 stations
Increase of FCV numbers through introduction of more vehicle models
Period in which preceded H2 station building is necessary
Approx. 2 million FCVsApprox. 2 million FCVs y g g gstation business viable. (FCV 2,000 units/station)
Proposals for hydrogen infrastructure in Initial PhaseProposal of tasks for the implementation→ Proposal of tasks for the implementation
2009 efforts1. Review of hydrogen station specifications in initial phase 2. Review of facility costs of each hydrogen station, and
2009 efforts
hydrogen costs in initial phase
4
2010 Efforts
Review of （Review of Review of hydrogenRe-review of（2009 review)
2010 Review items
Review of Onsite ST costs
（Review of hydrogen costs）
Review of
Review of hydrogencosts (Onsite)hydrogen
ST costs・Storage cylinderSkiddiReview of
Offsite ST costs
Review of Offsite hydrogen
・Skidding・Peakless Review of hydrogen
costs (Offsite)
Basic specificationsBasic conditions (COCN* report)
y gproduction and transportation costs
(*Council on Competitiveness – Nippon)
FCVconditions
Onsite Offsite×
35MPa 70MPa×
( Council on Competitiveness – Nippon)
Number of Units
5000 ~15500Units
Yearly Hydrogen 475t
FCV fuel consumption : 100km/kg hydrogenFCV mileage (average) : 9500km/year
Hydrogen station
×300Nm3/h 100Nm3/h
×Cascade
filling
Hydrogen Demand
475tFCV hydrogen quantity per refueling : 4.8kgFCV mileage (average) : 9500km/year
Pressure 35MPa and 70MPa
Scale 300Nm3/h ** Commercial (FCV 1340Units/1ST)Direct fillingstation
conditions → Review of basic hydrogen stations
** FCV refueling : 5.6cars/h , FCV refueling peak : 11.2cars/h (1hour) 5
g100Nm3/h Mobile stationary type
Filling Method Cascade and Direct filling
g
Review of Offsite Hydrogen Ｓtation
Offsite Hydrogen Production / Transportation Infrastructure Specifications and Costs were reviewed.
Hi hCompressor Dispenser35/70MPa
Onsite Reformer High-pressureStorage cylinder
Pre-coolingOff it
Natural gas
Increased transportation loadIncreased costs
OffsiteHydrogen trailer
Increased costsLittle scale-up effects
Oil refinery hydrogen
Increased hydrogen productionReduced costs
・Review optimization ofload/costs
・Same Hydrogen costsO it t d iReduced costs
Cost reduction as a result of scale-upas Onsite are expected in delivery to several ten stations.
6
Review of Hydrogen Station Costs
Reduction of equipment costs
2009 review
・Review of Safety distance reduction
Increase raw material costs ・Improvement of
equipment efficiency
equipment costs
Hydrogenproduction
Dispenser70MPa
Onsite
70MPaRoad
Hydrogen t t ti
Offsite
C i ti
Compressor
Pre-cooler
transportation
Trailer
Communication
Storage cylinder
-40℃
・Review of safety
・For 45MPa compositetransportation cylinder
・Skidding/Packaged ・Review of safety coefficient
→Reduction of number・For 80MPa compositeStorage cylinder
・Skidding/Packaged→Reduction of
construction work costs7
Hydrogen station, Construction costs for hydrogen production / transportation
Hydrogen station
Costs
70MPa、300Nm3/hCascade filling Direct fillingCosts
(×100 million yen)Cascade filling Direct filling
Current → initial phase Current → initial phase
Station construction costs Onsite 10 → 4.2 6.3 → 3.6Offsite 8.2 → 3.3 4.4 → 2.7
Construction costs for hydrogen
Onsite ー ー
production/transportation（Per station）
Offsite 1.5→ 0.9 1.5 → 0.9
total construction costs Onsite 4.2 3.6costs (initial phase：
2015-2020) Offsite 4.2 (×100 million yen) 3.6
・Onsite and offsite construction costs are more or less the same.・The construction costs of cascade filling and direct filling will be less different.
8
g g
Hydrogen Costs
120.0
ステーションコスト（充填） 固定費
ステーションコスト(充填) 変動費
ステーションコスト(製造) 固定費
(製造) 変動費
120.0
ステーションコスト 固定費
ステーションコスト 変動費
輸送コスト 固定費
輸送コスト 変動費
製造出荷コスト（精製、圧縮） 固定費
製造出荷コスト（精製 圧縮） 変動費
HydrogenProduction
Compression at ST/Storage/Refueling
fixed costsvariable costs
fixed costsvariable costs
Compression at ST/Storage/Refueling
Transportation
Hydrogen refining, C i
fixed costsvariable costsfixed costsvariable costsfixed costsvariable costs
m3
80.0
100.0 ステーションコスト(製造) 変動費
fixed costs
80.0
100.0製造出荷コスト（精製、圧縮） 変動費
原料水素コスト（製油所水素） 固定費
原料水素コスト（製油所水素） 変動費fixed costs Fixed
costsFixed
t
Storage/Refueling variable costs
Oil refinery hydrogen
Compression variable costs fixed costsvariable costs
Yen/N
m
40.0
60.0
40.0
60.0costs costs
0.0
20.0
現在（積み上げ試算） 将来（2015～2020年 試算）0.0
20.0
現在（積み上げ試算） 将来（2015～2020年 試算）Current 2015～2020 Current 2015～2020
Onsite70MPa 300Nm3/ｈHydrogen costs of direct filling
Offsite70MPa 300Nm3/ｈHydrogen costs of direct filling
Hydrogen costs in initial phase (2015 ～ 2020)≒ 80 yen/Nm3 (900 yen/kg)
・Sharp drop in fixed costs for both onsite type and offsite type・For variable costs, raw material costs may increase
9
Analysis of Cost ChangesOnsite 300Nm3/h 70MPa Cascade filling
ステーション運転要員減
土地面積削減
Onsite 300Nm3/h 70MPa Cascade filling
-1.0Yen/Nm3
-2.7Yen/Nm3 △28 yen/Nm3・Effects of reviewingregulations
decrease in area
decrease operation staff
複合容器利用によるコスト減 （安全係数見直し含む）
ステ ション運転要員減
-23.8Yen/Nm3
8 9Y /N 3
y
M l
regulationsp
Use of CFRP storage cylinder (Review of safety coefficient)
蓄圧器コスト減
圧縮機コスト減
水素製造装置コスト減 -8.9Yen/Nm3
-2.6Yen/Nm3
-7.7Yen/Nm3
More or less the same
・Effects of technological
Reduction of reformer cost
Reduction of compressor cost
Reduction of storage cylinder cost
Fixed costs
その他機器/工事費コスト減
プレクーラーコスト減
ディスペンサーコスト減（通信含）
スキッド化
-3.8Yen/Nm3
-0.6Yen/Nm3
4 3 1 2Yen/Nm3
△28 yen/Nm3
technological progress・Mass productioneffects
Reduction of dispenser cost
Reduction of pre-cooling cost
Reduction of construction work cost
ｓｋｉｄｄｉｎｇ
機器効率向上によるコスト減
その他機器/工事費コスト減スキッド化効果によるコスト減
-4.3、-1.2Yen/Nm3
-5.3Yen/Nm3
Reduction of construction work cost
Improvement of equipment efficiency Variablecosts
-15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
(Current hydrogen costs 138 yen/Nm3⇒ in initial phase(2015-2020) 82 yen/Nm3）
9.6Yen/Nm3Increase raw material cost
(Current hydrogen costs 138 yen/Nm in initial phase(2015 2020) 82 yen/Nm ）
Use of composite vessels had large effects of costs reduction in cascade filling 10
Summary Review of Commercial Infrastructure1 I iti l h h d t ti f iliti ifi ti / t i I l t d1. Initial phase hydrogen station facilities specification/cost review Implemented2. Offsite infrastructure hydrogen production/transportation facilities specifications/costs
review Implemented3. Hydrogen costs review based on regulations review, technological progress/mass
production effects Implemented
・Use of composite storage cylinder, review of safety coefficient・Review of distance regulations, review of operation staff・Review of skidded and packaged facilities
Review of effects
Construction costs per station：Approx. 3.6×108 yen（70MPa, 300Nm3/h）Hydrogen costs Approx 80 yen/Nm3
In initial phase(2015-2020)
Future tasks：・Steady progress of regulations review, facilities
Hydrogen costs： Approx. 80 yen/Nm3
costs reduction / improvement of equipment efficiency→Same level as overseas package station
・Review of full refueling hydrogen station based on g y goverseas refueling standards
11
1 Formulation of Commercial1. Formulation of Commercial Infrastructure Model
2 D fi iti f A d f S f t d2. Definition of Agenda for Safety and Regulation Review
3. Hydrogen Station Operations and Safetyy
4. Evaluation of Efficiency and Hydrogen FuelFuel
5. Summary
12
Progress of Hydrogen Station Regulation Review
Before review (example) 2005 -2008 2009 -Future・Safety distance・Safety distance
H2H2 H2H2Review Sub WG objectives andtasks
35MPastation
17m11.3m8m
17m11.3m8m
・Ｍulti station not permitted
6m・Ｍulti stations permitted ・ Semi-industrial,
commercial and
tasks・Organize legal issues with large
influence on dissemination・Define agenda for revising
station水素
スタンド
ガソリンスタンド
水素スタンド
ガソリンスタンド
・Only industrial
semi residential areas allowed
regulations(Who, Till When, What Data）
Establish a hydrogen i f t t th t id f
水素
スタンド
水素
スタンド
For 5 units
y(exclusive) areas
・Situation same as before 35MPa station review
infrastructure that provides safe and inexpensive hydrogen timely, at the right place.
FCVFCVFCV
・Insufficient storage
70MPat ti
Steel design coefficient ⇒ Stricter regulationcompared to overseas
For pipes Japan req ires 4 times stronger
・Conspicuous70ＭＰａ station cases Prereq: Ensured safety (refueling)
station
For 70MPa, pipes with thicker rim and more expensive steel are required.
H2
For pipes, Japan requires 4 times stronger, while other countries require 3 times stronger,,
ガソリンスタンド
水素スタンド
ガソリンスタンド
水素スタンド水素
スタンド
H2H2
Implement storage→Smaller bore increases pressure
loss. Flow rate is not maintained
Compact, etc.Implement storage cylinders at basement or on the roof?
13
Regulations Review (WG1)2009 Achievements
Key tasks in review of regulations related to hydrogen infrastructure
B i C t f K R kBasic Concept of Key Rank
・Special A;Items that will significantly interfere with the spread of infrastructure if they are not revised by 2015if they are not revised by 2015
·A;Items that will interfere with thecommercial operations, such as highcost, if they are not revised by 2015
·B;Items that may become mandatory in the spread processin the spread process
14
Results: Listed a total of 17 key tasks. Promoted common awareness between related parties , and prompted start of specific activities.
Specific Progress of Setting of Road Map2010 Achievements
JHFC “Safety and Regulations Review Committee”Selection of 【17 key tasks】, setting of road map (draft)
Setting of road map and scenario for realizing this, involving both public and private sectors
Activities were started by the following policies. Government Revitalization Unit >Government Revitalization Unit >
Regulations and Systems Reformation >Green Innovation WG （16 themes）Green Innovation WG （16 themes）
⑦Re-examination of regulations relatedto fuel cell vehicles and installation of hydrogen stations
15
◆April 2010
Activities related todrawing up of specific roadmap (Outline)
◆April 2010Launch of promotion team normally called “Leader Group”
which list up 17 key tasks specifically
Collaborated by JHFC WG1
JHFC review group members participate in leader meeting
JHFC WG1Review Committee◆June 2010
Promotion of review of regulations by cabinet
Survey of actual conditions of regulations abroadProvide hydrogen infrastructure demonstration data
NEDO projects
(Related to review of standards)
・・・・Preparation and revision of commentary and description drafts・Changes in definitions for classifying importance of 17 items
of standards)
◆December 2010
Provide regulations review work table and indicate specific work details
16
Review of Design Coefficients№3 (SpecialA)Example of summary
of road map
Objective
of road map
• Japan uses larger design coefficients than Europe and the U.S., which have caused the following problems.
Difficult to import and use overseas products– Difficult to import and use overseas products.– Difficult to reduce hydrogen station construction costs– Pipes and valves are thick and large, which causes problems in
terms of operability and performance.• Review ministerial ordinances and exemplified
standards etc to enable construction of hydrogenstandards, etc. to enable construction of hydrogen stations using design coefficients similar to the U.S. and Europe.
【Legal measures】Revision of High Pressure Gas Safety Act, general laws (ordinances), g y , g ( ),
and specific laws (ordinances), and exemplary standards.
17
Review of Design Coefficients№3 (Special A)Example of summary of
road map
In the U S and Europe design coefficients ＊） smallerCurrent situation of regulations
road map
• In the U.S. and Europe, design coefficients ＊） smaller than Japanese standards are used.
Storage Pipe・Cross-section
i fStorage cylinder
Pipe
Domestic 3.5 ~ 4 4 Overseas Domestic
view of storage cylinder
４３
U.S./Europe 2.4 ~ 3.5 3＊ ti）The greater the value, thicker the pipe,
Overseasproduct
Domestic product
• Reduction of hydrogen station costs
Expected effects Germany70MPa
Design coefficient：3
Domestic70Mpa
Design coefficient：4y gusing overseas products.
• Improvement of performance required (refueling speed), and construction of ( e ue g speed), a d co st uct o osatisfactory hydrogen stations
18
1 Formulation of Commercial1. Formulation of Commercial Infrastructure Model
2 D fi iti f A d f S f t d2. Definition of Agenda for Safety and Regulation Review
3. Hydrogen Station Operations and Safetyy
4. Evaluation of Efficiency and Hydrogen FuelFuel
5. Summary
19
Hydrogen Stations Operational Results
14 hydrogen stations are operated safely.
Hydrogen refueling results by December 2010 (For details, y g g y ( ,refer to the reference materials)
April to December 2010 JHFC cumulativeDispensed H 2 510 kg 52 447 kgDispensed H2 2,510 kg 52,447 kgNo. of refueling 1170 times 21,039 timesOperates at high availability of 95 7％（ JHFC station average in April toOperates at high availability of 95.7％（ JHFC station average in April to December 2010： Percentage of number of days unintended stopping did not occur.
2 5
1.5
2
2.5
充填
量[kg/
回]
FCV 35MPa
FCV 70MPa
Dispensed hydrogen per refueling during 2008 and 2010 of
0.5
1
回あ
たり
の水
素充 2008 and 2010 of
70MPa vehicles was about 1.4 times that of
20
0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
１
事業年度
35MPa vehicles
Safety Reports（1）Th t f h d h i l d （A）（1）There were no report of human and physical damage （A）
minor malfunctions which did not affect operations（B2）：53％malfunctions affecting operations （B1）：17％malfunctions of accessories（B3）:12%malfunctions of accessories（B3）:12%human error （C）:4%
（2）By major equipment, malfunctions were: Hydrogen production equipment 31%, dispenser 28%,
15%compressor15%（3）By cause,
operation methods and aging degradation accounted for 67%, technical causes for 18%, management causes 15%tec ca causes o 8%, a age e t causes 5%many malfunctions were from operation methods & degradation from aging
Percentage of key equipment
52 517.3 0.0
B2B1A
Percentage of Malfunction Categories
（2006～2010年）14.9 Administrative factor
Percentage of cause
（2006～2010）Hydrogen production
high‐pressure
Liquid hydrogen equipment
2%
others6%
4.3 12.2 13.7
52.5
CB4B3B2
18.2
66.9
Technical factor
Operational factor
production equipment
31%
compressor15%
accessories12%
storage cylinder
6%
21
0 20 40 60 80 100 （％）0 20 40 60 80 100
（％）
dispenser28%
（2006～2010）
1 Formulation of Commercial1. Formulation of Commercial Infrastructure Model
2 D fi iti f A d f S f t d2. Definition of Agenda for Safety and Regulation Review
3. Hydrogen Station Operations and Safetyy
4. Evaluation of Efficiency and Hydrogen FuelFuel
5. Summary
22
Definition of Station Efficiency
E f d (H )
Energy for hydrogen generation, compression, refueling.
Energy of product (H2 gas)fed to fuel tank. (EH )
η =Whole energy input to hydrogen
station (E0＋Σen)
η =
35 MPa,70MPa25 ℃
e1 e2 en25 ℃
Station Tank
E0 EH
FCVHydrogen station
23
Station Efficiency (Onsite type FY2009 to 2010 result)
Station Name Production Method
35MPaefficiency HHV (LHV) %
70MPaefficiency HHV (LHV) %
Asahi Naphtha reforming 66.0（58.9）% 63.1（56.2）%Daikoku Desulfurized
Gasoline reforming 63.1（56.5）% 61.4（54.9）%Senju
N t l G64.0（60.0）% 62.1（58.0）%
e
Alk li W t
Natural Gas reformingCentrare 64.6（60.5） % －
Osaka 63.2（59.0）% －
On-
Site
Sagamihara Alkaline Water Electrolysis 70.9（60.5）% －
Kawasaki Methanol reforming 74.3（70.7）% －
O
PEM W t
• 70MPa Efficiency drops 2 – 3 points due to high pressure compressor and pre-cooler
Kyushu-Univ. PEM Water Electrolysis 43.1（36.8）% －
• Efficiency of Methanol reforming is higher due to lower reforming temp. and its property.
• Lower Efficiency of PEM W.E. to be caused by indivisual low performance (normally above 60 70%）60～70%）.
Note：These efficiencies not include the energy for starting, stopping, and standby of station functions. Include hydrogen generation, compression, and refueling per 1 kg hydrogen. 24
Breakdown of Energy Consumption
250
300g‐H2
On-site type hydrogen stations
200
for H
2 ling pe
r 1kg Pre‐cool
Compression(70MPa)
100
150
sumption f
sion
, refue
lJ](LHV) Compression(35MPa)
H2 Generation
50
Energy co
nsn,compress
[M
Utilities
F d t kh ti0
Egene
ration Feedstock heating
value
g
On‐site typeHydrogen StationOn site type Hydrogen Station・Percentage of heating value of feedstock for H2 generation : Approx 80～90%・Percentage of power for compression： Approx.: 5～10%
25
Station Efficiency (Offsite type FY2009 to 2010 result)
KasumigasekiHi h
－ 96.2（95.3）%
Station Name Production Method
35MPaefficiency HHV (LHV) %
70MPaefficiency HHV (LHV) %
High pressure hydrogen storage
Funabashi 96.0（95.3）% －
Kansai Airport 99.9（99.9）% －
Site
Off-
S
Ariake(moved) Liquid hydrogen storage 73.0（70.8）% －
Nikko High pressure 89.6（88.0）% －
• Offsite type’s Efficiency is higher than On-site type because it stores hydrogen f t d t id ( d f h d ti )
hydrogen storage
（ ）
Kita-kyushu 88.4（86.7）%
manufactured outside (no need for hydrogen generation).
• Kansai Airport receives 40MPa hydrogen, so compression is not required there.
• Liquid hydrogen storage： Power consumption for collecting BOG※ s causes lower efficiency than other off-site type stations.※BOG：Boil Off Gas
26
Note：These efficiencies not include the energy for starting, stopping, and standby of station functions. Include hydrogen generation, compression, and refueling per 1 kg hydrogen.
Breakdown of Energy Consumption
250
300ression,
Pre‐cool
Off-site type hydrogen station
200
ation,compr
MJ](LHV)
Compression(70MPa) / LH2 Pump※3
100
150
or H2 gene
raer 1kg‐H
2[M
Compression(35MPa) / BOG Collection (35MPa)※2
50
nsum
ption fo
refueling pe Utilities
HeatingValue：HighPress.H2 / Liquid H2※1
0
Energy con
※1～3：in case of Ariake Station(moved)
Off‐site type Hydrogen Station
・Percentage of power for compression： Approx. 5% (Ariake station is about 20% because of BOG collection and compression.）
27
Prediction of Station Efficiency in the Future
When results of other NEDO projects are applied to the future stations. Prediction of improvement in efficiency based on Natural gas steam reforming.
Natural Gas
Production method
35MPaEfficiency HHV（LHV）%
70MPaEfficiency HHV（LHV）%
Natural Gas reforming 64.0（60.0）% → 78.3（73.2）% 62.1(58.0)% → 76.8（71.8）%
※ The improvement prediction is calculated based on the actual average value measured in January and September 2009 at Senju.
Breakdown of efficiency improvement
◆Hydrogen production efficiency (natural gas steam reforming & PSA purification)：60～65%HHV（Senju results） ⇒ 80%HHV expected
◆O ll di b ti ffi i f◆Overall adiabatic efficiency of compressor ：52%（Senju 70MPa results) ⇒ 73% expected
28
Note：These efficiencies not include the energy for starting, stopping, and standby of station functions. Include hydrogen generation, compression, and refueling per 1 kg hydrogen.
Hydrogen Fuel Constituents
Continue to measure impurities level in hydrogen and check that JHFC standards and ISO international standards (draft) are satisfied. (Including CO continuous analysis）
⇒Closely connected to devising of international standards（NEDO project）
JHFC stations measured value / Draft ISO standard value / Analysis determination limit
CO Mode value 0.01 ppm 0.2 ppm 0.01 ppmCO Mode value 0.01 ppm 0.2 ppm 0.01 ppmTotal sulfur Mode value 0.0001ppm 0.0004 ppm 0.0001 ppmAmmonia Mode value 0.001 ppm 0.1 ppm 0.001 ppmMoisture Mode value 0.5 ppm 5 ppm 0.5 ppmParticulates 0.040～0.055 mg/kg 1 mg/kg 0.0004 mg/kg
In addition, data on total hydrocarbons (methane), formaldehyde, formic acid, oxygen, argon, nitrogen, helium, methanol, acetaldehyde, acetone was also accumulated.
Analysis results need to be accumulated from JHFC2 onwards as well.y
29
1 Formulation of Commercial1. Formulation of Commercial Infrastructure Model
2 D fi iti f A d f S f t d2. Definition of Agenda for Safety and Regulation Review
3. Hydrogen Station Operations and Safetyy
4. Evaluation of Efficiency and Hydrogen FuelFuel
5. Summary
30
2010 Summary
R i i h d i f t t ifi ti
1. Commercial Infrastructure Model Sub WG・ Review various hydrogen infrastructure specifications
in initial phase of dissemination・ Evaluate hydrogen cost for various type of hydrogen stations
2. Safety & Regulation Sub WG2. Safety & Regulation Sub WGMore specific scenario for revision and implementation plans
3. Hydrogen Infrastructure Demonstration Sub WG・Summary of JHFC hydrogen station operations and dataacquisition activities
・ Conclude and summarize final fiscal year regardingy g gmalfunction (durability), efficiency, cost, etc
31
Reference MaterialsReference Materials
32
JHFC Stations Currently OperatingT t l 13 h d t ti i tiTotal 13 hydrogen stations are in operation;Tokyo: 7, Chubu: 1, Kansai: 2, Kyushu: 2,Nikko: 1 (as of Dec.2010)
ChubuChubu1) Centrair (Jul 2006)
NikkoNikko1) Nikk (S / 2009)1) Centrair (Jul. 2006)
TokyoTokyoKyushuKyushu1) Nikko (Sep/ 2009)
1) Kyushu Univ (Sep 2009)
1) Yokohama Daikoku (Mar.2003, 70MPa: Dec.2008)2) Y k h A hi (A 2003 70MP
1) Kyushu Univ. (Sep. 2009)2) Kitakyushu (Sep. 2009)
KansaiKansai
2) Yokohama Asahi (Apr.2003, 70MPa: Feb.2009) 3) Senju (May 2003, 70MPa: Sep.2008)4) Kawasaki (Aug.2003)KansaiKansai
1) Osaka (Aug.2007)2) Kansai airport (Mar.2007)
4) Kawasaki (Aug.2003) 6) Kasumigaseki (Dec.2002, 70MPa:Feb.2009)7) Funabashi (Jun.2007)8) A i k (M 2003)8) Ariake (May 2003) Sagamihara (Apr. 2004, ended operations as of November 2010)
1) indicates the month/year when operation started. 2) Nikko and Kyushu are JHFC co-operative from 2009
33
Operation Results (dispensed hydrogen (1) )Di d H d T t l 52447k *(D 2002 t D 2010)
Including JHFC Co-Operative Hydrogen Stations
Dispensed Hydrogen：Total 52447kg*(Dec. 2002 to Dec. 2010))
EXPO2005 (Aichi)
Centrair Airport boarding bus
Tokyo commuter
bus
onth
(kg) bus
2500
3000
50000
60000
累積
n pe
r mo
g)
2000
2500
40000
50000
hydr
ogen
lativ
e (k
g
1500 30000
pens
ed h
Cum
ul
500
1000
10000
20000
Dis
p
2003 2004 年
0
500
0
10000
20092002 2003 2004 2005年 20072006 2008 2010
JHFC1 JHFC234
Operation Results (dispensed hydrogen (2))Refueled quantity：kg
FY2010(Apr-
Dec.'10)
Kasumigaseki Dec.‘02 234 758 1007 883 694 886 716 706 343 6227
FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 Opening TotalFY2007 FY2008 FY2009Staion FY2002
Refueled quantity：kg
**
Daikoku Mar.'03 65 354 597 511 409 406 472 543 157 3513Asahi Apr.'03 - 171 184 253 236 176 148 318 132 1619Senju May.'03 - 279 376 424 383 308 355 390 280 2794Ariake May.'03 - 1670 1540 736 515 1050 486 305 383 6684
Kawasaki Aug '03 50 104 98 116 156 213 401 169 1307Kawasaki Aug. 03 - 50 104 98 116 156 213 401 169 1307Tsurumi Dec.'03 - 14 21 15 4 - - - － 53Hadano Apr.'04 - - 160 145 - - - - － 304
Sagamihara Apr.'04 - - 20 36 16 52 32 35 15 206Ome &
Jun '04 19 271 88 220 200 91 18 908Funabashi
Jun. 04 - - 19 271 88 220 200 91 18 908
Seto-North Feb.'05 - - 445 5866 - - - - － 6312Seto-South Feb.'05 - - 547 6183 - - - - － 6730
Centrair Jul.'06 - - - - 3075 4387 3793 2145 499 13899
Kansai Airport Mar.'07 - - - - 2 62 60 46 44 213
Osaka Aug.'07 - - - - 0 214 153 130 97 595Ichihara Dec.'06 - - - - 70 159 72 33 － 334
Nikko Sep.'09 - - - - - - - 61 50 110Kit k h S '09 211 169 380
**
*Kitakyushu Sep.'09 - - - - - - - 211 169 380Kyushu
UniversitySep.'09 - - - - - - - 106 154 260
Total 299 3294 5019 15420 5607 8076 6701 5521 2510 52447
* JHFC Co-Operative Hydrogen Station**
*
*
35
JHFC Co-Operative Hydrogen Station** Total may vary from the simple sum of each station, due to essential figure.In addition to above, cumulatively 30.8 kg of hydrogen has been supplied to small mobile vehicles by hydrogen cylinder stocker.
Operation Results (refueling number (1))R f li N b T t l 21039 ti * (D 2002 t D 2010)
EXPO2005 (Aichi))
Centrair Airport boarding bus
Tokyo commuter
bus
Refueling Number：Total 21039 times* (Dec. 2002 to Dec. 2010)Including JHFC Co-Operative
Hydrogen Stations
bus
700
800
20000
25000
h (k
g)
500
600
15000
20000
Cumulativeper m
ont
g)
300
40010000
15000
umbe
r p
lativ
e (k
g
200
300
5000
uelin
g N
u
Cum
ul
2003 2004 年
0
100
0
Ref
u
20092002 2003 2004 2005 20072006 2008年 2010
JHFC1 JHFC236
Operation Results (refueling number (2))FY2010(Apr-
Dec.'10)
Kasumigaseki Dec.‘02 136 379 466 462 486 640 466 385 158 3578D ik k M '03 48 316 466 388 275 316 309 238 100 2456
FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 TotalFY2007 FY2008 FY2009Staion Opening FY2002
Daikoku Mar.'03 48 316 466 388 275 316 309 238 100 2456Asahi Apr.'03 - 141 106 167 146 121 84 131 68 964Senju May.'03 - 246 298 313 263 210 183 190 105 1808Ariake May.'03 - 569 557 549 435 559 335 168 195 3367
Kawasaki Aug '03 - 60 66 72 74 114 99 136 77 698Kawasaki Aug. 03 60 66 72 74 114 99 136 77 698Tsurumi Dec.'03 - 15 16 12 3 - - - － 46Hadano Apr.'04 - - 107 106 - - - - － 213
Sagamihara Apr.'04 - - 17 32 17 41 25 29 16 177Ome &
Jun '04 - - 11 158 75 152 119 70 17 602Funabashi
Jun. 04 11 158 75 152 119 70 17 602
Seto-North Feb.'05 - - 88 1136 - - - - － 1224Seto-South Feb.'05 - - 105 1244 - - - - － 1349
Centrair Jul.'06 - - - - 727 1020 882 607 119 3355
M '07 1 40 39 32 31 143Kansai Airport Mar.'07 - - - - 1 40 39 32 31 143
Osaka Aug.'07 - - - - 0 114 129 106 90 439Ichihara Dec.'06 - - - - 48 101 56 30 － 235
Nikko Sep.'09 - - - - - - - 43 35 78Kit k h S '09 103 86 189
**
*Kitakyushu Sep. 09 - - - - - - - 103 86 189Kyushu
UniversitySep.'09 - - - - - - - 45 73 118
Total 184 1726 2303 4639 2550 3428 2726 2313 1170 21039
*
37
* JHFC Co-Operative Hydrogen StationIn addition to above, hydrogen has been supplied cumulatively 347 times to small mobile vehicles by hydrogen cylinder stocker.
Results of Remodeling Senju 70MPa Station (1)Remodeling was carried out targeting the average flow rate of 1 7 kg/minRemodeling was carried out targeting the average flow rate of 1.7 kg/min（5kg/3min）.Flow rate simulation was carried out prior to remodeling.
Dispencer
FCV tank
DispencerHigh pressurestorage cylinder1
High pressurestorage cylinder2
Flowmeter
Heat exchanger
NozzleFlowContr
ol
Receptacle
storage cylinder2
High pressurestorage cylinder3
meter exchangerolvalve
Enlargement of pipe inner
diameter①φ2.5→6.4 ②φ3.1→6.4 ②φ3.1→4.8 ②φ1.6→2.2Bank
upgrading
Other reduction methods
③Flow control valve
C t l
②Divided into two parallels
①High pressurization
40→41MPa80→82MPa methods Control
softwareparallels
△P reduction 1/43 1/18 1/46 1/3.8
80→82MPa
High pressure cylinders②4→5②4→5③5→8
Note）Figures in the figure indicate the time of remodeling①：1st remodeling （Feb 2009）②：2nd remodeling （Jun 2009）③：3rd remodeling (Feb 2010)
38
Results of Remodeling Senju 70MPa Station (2)A hi d fl t f 1 7 k / i （ f l d 5k i 3 i ）Achieved average flow rate of 1.7 kg/min（refueled 5kg in 3min）.
Average flow rate after modifications3rd modification modifications
Before modification0.4kg/min
1 t difi timin
-1
Max:2.6kg/min2nd modification Max:2.0kg/min
1st modification0.7kg/min
2nd modification1 0k / iat
e／
kg・
g1st modificationMax:1.1kg/min
Before modification 1.0kg/min
3rd modification1.6kg/minFl
ow ra
Before modificationMax:0.9kg/min
Note 1 1st bank 40Mpa class up to 2nd remodeling Note 2 1st bank also 80Mpa l i 3 d d li
0 100 200 300 400 500 600Time elapsed ／s
class in 3rd remodelingChange in refueling flow rate by remodeling （100ℓ tank）
39
Confirmed 5 kg/3min on actual vehicle→ Achieved improvement of flow rate
Malfunction CategoriesC t D fi itiCategory Definition
A．Disaster Cases of human damages, physical damages
B．Equipment malfunctionsB1．Operational malfunctions
Malfunctions of equipment causing severe problems in the operation of stations other than A.
B2．Minor malfunctions not
b t ti ti
Malfunction of hydrogen facility equipment other than B1
obstructing operationsB3．Malfunctions of accessories other than hydrogen
Malfunction of accessories, etc. (instrumentation air, cooling water, hydrogen facilities etc )other than hydrogen
facilitieshydrogen facilities, etc.)
B4．Phenomenon preventing
Phenomenon in which changes in facilities were detected and acted uponPhenomenon preventing
malfunctionsfacilities were detected and acted upon before malfunctions or problems occurred.
C．Human error Problems cause by misoperations and inadequate maintenance etcinadequate maintenance, etc.
D．Survey reports, etc. Knowledge from survey on facilities, not problems and malfunctions.
40
Problems of Key Equipment (By Categorization)
high‐pressure storage
others4%
Percentage of key equipment（B1）Liquid
hydrogen equipment
Percentage of key equipment（B2）
Hydrogen production equipment
25%
compressor13%
storage cylinder
4% Hydrogen production equipment
compressor19%
high‐pressure storage cylinder
4%
4%
dispenser54%
44%
dispenser29%
4%
54%
（2006～2010） （2006～2010）
Percentage of key equipment（B3）
hi h others
Percentage of key equipment（B4）
others16%
Hydrogen production equipment
high‐pressure storage cylinder18%
others6%
accessories
equipment23%
dispenser23%
accessories12%
41
accessories84%
（2006～2010）
23%compressor
18%
（2006～2010）
Causes of ProblemsFactor Details
Administrative f t
Related to work guidelines or work procedures, d b i kfactor or caused by improper work.
Operational factor
Caused by operation method, caused by changes or effects with years, or caused by accidental factors.
Technical factor Caused by technical problems such as selection of material, structural design, etc., g ,
Percentage of cause Percentage of cause
B1 B2 B3 B4
66 9
14.9
Operational factor
Administrative factor （2006～2010）
16.7 21.1
8.9
53 8
7.7
i l
Administrative factor
B1 B2 B3 B4
（2006～2010）
18.2
66.9
Technical factor
Operational factor
16 7
66.7
5.3
73.7
16.5
74.7
38.5
53.8
Technical factor
Operational factor
42
0 20 40 60 80 100 （％）
16.7
0 50 100
（％）
Malfunction Case 1Leakage from Compressor, discharge, absorption valves
1. Situation・ Hydrogen gas alarm installed inside the
Longitudinal polishing marking
y g gbuilding sounds directly after compressor is started.Facilities automatically stop after the alarm.
2 Cause leakage path 2. Cause・Polishing is carried out in the longitudinal direction on the
joined face of the discharge and absorptionvalves which are metal touch
Flow Channel
valves which are metal touch.・Affecting also the temperature and vibration duringoperations, polishing marks form a leakage path fromth t f th l t th t l d
Valve seat
Valve body Leakage path
sealed face
sealed face
the center of the valve to the outer sealed area, resulting in leakage from the flange.
3．Measures/improvements Circular polishing marking
・Polished the valve joined area in the Circumferential Direction and attached.
・In the future, manufacturers are planning to
Polishing marking not reach
the outside, so leakage path
not made.
, p guse a polishing method with higher density in the circumferential direction.
43
Flow Channnel
H d f i i lf i
Malfunction Case 2Hydrogen manufacturing unit malfunction1. State
・Through open inspection of the reaction tube, checkg p p ,for damage of the aluminum ball, deformation of the reaction pipe, and cracks near the elbow.
・Through the micro and fractured surface inspectionThrough the micro and fractured surface inspectionof cracked area, check for intercrystalline cracks andstriation.
2 CausesReaction
pipe2. Causes・The structure was one where thermal shrinkage at start/stop was
absorbed by the up/down movements of the reaction pipe, however the /d t i d d h th i t b i d b th
pipe
up/down movements are impeded when the inner tube is covered by the catalyst and heat exchange alumina ball.
・The repetition of start/stop in this state causes deformation of the top part of the inner tube, resulting in defects.
3．Measures/Improvements・Reduce the filling amount of the alumina ball to reduce covering of theg ginner tube.
・Increase material strength to reduce inner tube deformation and damage.44
Definition Of Energy
Electric energy: 3.6 MJ/kWh
Material energy: For high pressure gas,Estimated by Heating ValueEstimated by Heating Value+ Pressure Energy
Pressure energy of hydrogen gas (Epf)Epf = R tf ln (pf/p0)p (p p )
R Gas Constant (8.31510 Jmol-1K-1) tf Temperature of (K) f p
Hydrogen Gas( )
p0 Atmospheric Pressure (101.325 kPa ) p Pressure of Hydrogen (kP )
45
pf Pressure of Hydrogen Gas
(kPa)
P t ti l f h d (25ºC b i )Potential Energy Of Hydrogen
Potential energy of hydrogen (25ºC basis)Potential energy per 1 kg hydrogen gas
Unit Higher Heating Value basis(HHV)
Lower Heating Value basis(LHV)(HHV) (LHV)
70 MPa（Gauge
MJ/kg 150 128g
pressure） MJ/Nm3 13.5 11.535 MPa MJ/kg 149 127（Gauge
pressure）
g 149 127MJ/Nm3 13.4 11.4
Atmospheric pressure
MJ/kg 142 120MJ/Nm3 12 8 10 8MJ/Nm 12.8 10.8
■Hydrogen unit conversion factor： 0.0899 [kg/Nm3]46
Heating Value of Feedstock forHydrogen Generation
LHV（Unit Converted）
Unit conversionfactor
Higher HeatingValueHHV
Lower HeatingValueLHV
HHV（Unit converted）
Natural gas(Kanto/Kansai) 0.817 [kg/Nm3] 45.0 [MJ/Nm3] 40.5 [MJ/Nm3] 55.1 [MJ/kg] 49.6 [MJ/kg]
Natural gasNatural gas(Chubu) 0.847 [kg/Nm3] 46.0 [MJ/Nm3] 41.4 [MJ/Nm3] 54.3 [MJ/kg] 48.9 [MJ/kg]
M th l 0 796 [k /L] 18 1 [MJ/L] 15 8 [MJ/L] 22 7 [MJ/k ] 19 8 [MJ/k ]Methanol 0.796 [kg/L] 18.1 [MJ/L] 15.8 [MJ/L] 22.7 [MJ/kg] 19.8 [MJ/kg]
Naptha 0.723 [kg/L] 33.6 [MJ/L] 31.9 [MJ/L] 46.5 [MJ/kg] 44.1 [MJ/kg]
Desulfurizedgasoline * 0.733 [kg/L] 34.6 [MJ/L] 32.9 [MJ/L] 47.2 [MJ/kg] 44.9 [MJ/kg]
* For the heating value of desulfurized gasoline, the value of gasoline is adopted.・ The station efficiency calculated in 2009 was based on the values above.・ Ref.: Report of March 2006 “JHFC General Efficiency Review”
(Edit by JHFC General Efficiency Review Committee・JARI) P.7・ Condition of gas fuel: 0ºC・1 atm (the previous STP condition)・ Condition of liquid fuel: 15ºC
47
Station Efficiency (Future/Flow Chart)【F t 】N t l f iWhen hydrogen 1.0 kg [ 11.1 Nm3 ] is supplied【Future】Natural gas reforming (70MPa/with pre-cooling)
(Breakdown)40MPa compressor 2.80 kWh80MPa compressor 0.32 kWh
Electricity2.41 kWh
Electricity3.12 kWh
Natural gas3.04 kg(3.72 Nm3)
151 MJ(LHV)
Urban gas
Electricity(Utilities, etc．)
1.00 kWh
151 MJ(LHV)168 MJ(HHV)
Hydrogen generator
40MPacompressor
40MPastorage cylinder
Dispenser70 MPaPower consumption of Pre-
cooler（－40℃） not include starting and keeping up
70 MPa system
80MPa compressor
Pre-cooling
Electricity1.02 kWh
temperature.80MPa
storage cylinder
Hydrogen temperature : -40 ℃
48
【 】 f
Station Efficiency (Future/Details)
Station input energy per hydrogen 1 kg (Fuel tank)
(70MPa/with pre-cooling)【Future】 Natural gas reforming
Type of energy Energy input unitEnergy input unit
LHV HHV
p gy p y g g ( )
LHV HHV
Natural gas3.04kg 151 MJ 168 MJNatural gas
3.72 Nm3 151 MJ 168 MJ
Electricity 7.55 kWh 27.2 MJ Potential energy of hydrogen gas : 128 MJ/kg (LHV) , 150 MJ/kg (HHV)
(Hydrogen gas condition : Temperature 25ºC, Pressure 70 MPa))
y
Energy efficiency η 71.8 %(LHV) 76 8 %(HHV)76.8 %(HHV)
49
Review of CO2 Capture & Storage in Hydrogen Stations
Review on-site natural gas reforming 300Nm3/h, 35MPa station
CO2 capture PSA and CO2 liquefaction unit is added for usual station.
CO2PSA
CO2liquefaction
Reformer exhaust
gas
LiquidCO2
99%CO2 gas
ReformerCO Shift
HydrogenPSA
Natural gasPure hydrogen
99 99％99.99％
300Nm3/h-scale station Captured liquid CO2 amount=110kg/hp q 2 gCO2 capture ratio=50％
Change in hydrogen station energy efficiency 68.2%(LHV)→65.6%(LHV）（No CO2 capture) (CO2 capture ）2 p ) ( 2 p
Energy for CO2 capture 1.17GJ/ton-liquidCO2CO2 PSA unit cost： 35 million yen, CO2 liquefaction unit cost： 57.6 million yenHydrogen costs adding CO capture units 79 yen/Nm3Hydrogen costs adding CO2 capture units： 79 yen/Nm3
（approx. 12 yen/Nm3 increase）CO2 capture cost： approx. 32,000 yen/ton-liquidCO2
50
