Upload
enoch-zhao
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
1/33
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC
214th ElectrochemicalSociety Meeting
Keith Wipke, Sam Sprik,Jennifer Kurtz, ToddRamsden, John Garbak
October 13, 2008
Honolulu, HI
Fuel Cell Vehicle and Infrastructure LearningDemonstration Status and Results
NREL/PR-560-44266
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
2/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Outline
Objectives and Partners
NRELs Role in the Project and Methodology How to Access Complete Results
Analysis Results
Summary
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
3/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 3 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Fuel Cell Vehicle Learning DemonstrationProject Objectives and Targets
Objectives
Validate H2 FC Vehicles and Infrastructure in Parallel
Identify Current Status and Evolution of the Technology Assess Progress Toward Technology Readiness
Provide Feedback to H2 Research and Development
Photo: NREL
Solar Electrolysis Station, Sacramento, CA
Performance Measure 2009 2015
Fuel Cell Stack Durability 2000 hours 5000 hours
Vehicle Range 250+ miles 300+ miles
Hydrogen Cost at Station $3/gge $2-3/gge
Key Targets
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
4/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 4 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Industry Partners: 4 Automaker/Energy-Supplier Teams;Significant Number of Gen 2 Vehicles Now Deployed
Gen 1 Gen 1
Gen 1 & 2
Gen 2
Gen 2 Gen 2
Gen 1
122
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
5/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 5 Innovation for Our Energy Future
DOE Learning Demo Fleet Has Surpassed69,000 Vehicle Hours and 1.5 Million Miles
Gen 2 vehicle introduction now
appears as the 2nd bulge at
low hours/miles
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
6/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 6 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Majority of Projects Fixed Infrastructure to RefuelVehicles Has Been Installed Examples of 4 Types
Recent station addition:Santa Monica Blvd. (Shell)
16 stations now deployed
Delivered Liquid, 700 barIrvine, CA
Mobile RefuelerSacramento, CA
Steam Methane ReformingOakland, CA
Water ElectrolysisSanta Monica, CA
Total of >60,000 kg H2produced or dispensed
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
7/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 7 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Refueling Stations Test Performance in Various Climates;Learning Demo Comprises ~1/4 of all US Stations
16
Oct-09-2008
6
51
4
SF Bay Area
Los Angeles Area
DC to New York
7
Detroit Area
2
Orlando Area
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
8/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 8 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Extremely Large Data Sets Have Resulted in SophisticatedNREL-Developed Data Processing Tools
Composite
Data
Products
Detailed
Data
Products
NREL
HSDC
Data Flow
Through September 2008:
270,000 individual vehicle trips
60 GB of on-road data
http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/cdp_topic.html
Individual Team Discussions
http://www.barrysclipart.com/barrysclipart.com/showphoto.php?photo=24290&papass=&sort=1&thecat=1748/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
9/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 9 Innovation for Our Energy Future
NREL Web Site Provides Direct Access to All CompositeData Products (53), Reports, and Presentations
Dyno Range (2) Window-Sticker Range (3) On-Road Range (4)(5)0
50
100
150
200
250
300
VehicleRan
ge(miles)
Vehicle Range1
2015 Target
2009 Target
Created: Feb-27-07 4:49PM
(1) Range isbasedon fueleconomy and usable hydrogenon-boardthe vehicle. One data pointforeachmake/model.(2) Fueleconomy from unadjustedcombinedCity/Hwy perDRAFT SAE J2572.(3) Fueleconomy from EPAAdjusted combinedCity/Hwy (0.78x Hwy,0.9 x City).(4) Excludes trips< 1mile. One datapoint foron-road fleet average of each make/model.(5) Fueleconomy calculated from on-roadfuelcell stack current ormassflow readings.
http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/cdp_topic.html
http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_learning_demo.html
A subset of the 53
latest results will be
presented now
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
10/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 10 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
All OEMs
Efficie
ncy(%)
Fuel Cell System1
Efficiency2
at ~25% Net Power.
DOE Target
Created: Aug-29-06 4:09 PM
1 Gross stack power minus fuel cell system auxiliaries, per DRAFT SAEJ2615.
2 Ratio of DC output energy to the lower heating value of the input fuel (hydrogen).Excludes power electronics and electric d rive.
Gen 1 Baseline Dyno Tests Validated High Efficiency at Power Point Gen 2 Efficiency Results Public in 2009
Steady-State Efficiency
at power on dyno:
52.5% to 58.1%
High-efficiency point is well
matched to where most of
FCV energy is expended
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
11/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 11 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
%Time at Power Levels: DOE Fleet
%TimeatPo
werLevel
0-5%
5-10%
10-1
5%
15-2
0%
20-2
5%
25-3
0%
30-3
5%
35-4
0%
40-4
5%
45-5
0%
50-5
5%
55-6
0%
60-6
5%
65-7
0%
70-75%
75-80%
80-85%
85-90%
90-95%
95-100%
>100%
% Fuel Cell Power (Gross) of MaxCreated: Aug-28-08 5:48 PM
18.4%-43.7% of operating time at idle(Vehicle Speed = 0 & F.C. Power > 0)
While Most of FC Time is Spent at Idle,Bulk ofEnergyis at 20-50% Power
~50% time
at 100
%
% Fuel Cell Power (Gross) of Max
Cumulative%
0
20
40
60
80
100
Created: Aug-28-08 5:48 PM
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
12/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 12 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
SpecificPo
wer(W/kg)
FC System Specific Power (W/kg)
2010 and 2015 DOE MYPP Target1
Gen 1
Gen 2
Created: Sep-17-08 10:30 AM (1) Fuel cell system includes fuel cell stack and BOP but excludes H2 storage, power electronics, and electric drive.
Fuel Cell System Specific Power ShowsDramatic Improvement from Gen 1 to Gen 2
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
13/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 13 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
PowerDen
sity(W/L)
FC System Power Density (W/L)
2010 and 2015 DOE MYPP Target1
Gen 1
Gen 2
Created: Sep-17-08 10:29 AM (1) Fuel cell system includes fuel cell stack and BOP but excludes H2 storage, power electronics, and electric drive.
Fuel Cell System Power Density Remained~Same Between Gen 1 and 2
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
14/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 14 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Dyno (1) Window-Sticker (2) On-Road (3)(4)0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
FuelEconom
y(miles/kgH2)
Fuel Economy
Gen 1
Gen 2
Created: Sep-22-08 11:51 AM
(1) One data point for each make/model. Combined City/Hwy fuel economy per DRAFT SAE J2572.(2) Adjusted combined City/Hwy fuel economy (0.78 x Hwy, 0.9 x City).(3) Excludes trips < 1 mile. One data point for on-road fleet average of each make/model.(4) Calculated from on-road fuel cell stack current or mass flow readings.
Ranges of Fuel Economy from Dynamometerand On-Road Data Similar for Gen 1 & 2
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
15/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Dyno Range (2) Window-Sticker Range (3) On-Road Range (4)(5)0
50
100
150
200
250
300
VehicleRange(miles)
Vehicle Range1
2015 Target
2009 Target
Gen 1
Gen 2
Created: Sep-22-08 11:51 AM
(1) Range is based on fuel economy and usable hydrogen on-board the vehicle. One data point for each make/model.(2) Fuel economy from unadjusted combined City/Hwy per DRAFT SAE J2572.
(3) Fuel economy from EPA Adjusted combined City/Hwy (0.78 x Hwy, 0.9 x City).(4) Excludes trips < 1 mile. One data point for on-road fleet average of each make/model.(5) Fuel economy calculated from on-road fuel cell stack current or mass flow readings.
Vehicle Range Based on Dyno Results andUsable H2 Fuel Stored On-Board
Gen 2 Vehicle Range Shows SignificantImprovement with 700 bar Storage
250-mile 2008
milestone met
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
16/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 16 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
Op Hours
Voltage
Voltage vs. Operation Hours at 300A: Vehicle19-Stack1
871
900
847
288
259
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Stack Weight Factors
WeightValue
Overall
DatQty
DatGap
DR1ci
DR2ci
Created: Oct-09-08 3:01 PM
warm-up time=10 min
pwr rate filt=1000 kW/s
amp rate filt=1000 A/s
ptsper fit=2500
1 data pt e very 1seconds
2
2. FC Stackvoltage decay estimate using
robust, improved segmented linear fit
instead of linear fit (follows non-lineardecay trends & early voltage decay)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Vehicle12 Stack1
Vehicle15 Stack1
Vehicle17 Stack1
Vehicle19 Stack1
Vehicle16 Stack2
EcoCars
EcoCars: Stack OpHr Projections
Op Hrs
Stack
FleetWgtAveOpTime
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Vehicle12 Stack1
Vehicle15 Stack1
Vehicle17 Stack1
Vehicle19 Stack1
Vehicle16 Stack2
EcoCars: Stack Weights
Weight
Created: Oct-09-08 1:20 PM Stacks sorted by Stack Weight
3
Fleet
Stack
3. Fleetweighted average using FC Stack
operating hour projections and weights
(based on data and confidence in fit)
Improved Method for Calculating ProjectedTime to 10% Voltage Drop for Stack and Fleet
1
1. FC Stackvoltage & current polarization fit
Note, 10% voltage drop is a DOE
target/metric, not an indicator of end-of-life
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
17/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 17 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0
200
400
600800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
2006 Target
2009 Target
Actual Operating Hours Accumulated To-Date Projected Hours to 10% Degradation
Max Hrs Accumulated (1)(2) Avg Hrs Accumulated (1)(3) Projection to 10% Degradation (4)(5)(6)
Time(Hours)
DOE Learning Demonstration Fuel Cell Stack Durability:Based on Data Through 2008 Q2
Max Projection
Avg Projection
Created: Sep-03-08 10:36 AM
(1) Range bars created using one data point for each OEM. Some stacks have accumulated hours beyond 10% voltage degradation.(2) Range (highest and lowest) of the maximum operating hours accumulated to-date of any OEM's individual stack in "real-world" operation.(3) Range (highest and lowest) of the average operating hours accumulated to-date of all stacks in each OEM's fleet.(4) Projection using on-road data -- degradation calculated at high stack current. This criterion is used for assessing progress against DOE targets,
may differ f rom OEM's end-of-life criterion, and does not address "catastrophic" failure modes, such as membrane failure.(5) Using one nominal projection per OEM: "Max Projection" = highest nominal projection, "Avg Projection" = average nominal projection.
The shaded green bar represents an engineering judgment of the uncertainty on the "Avg Projection" due to data and methodology limitations.Projections will change as additional data are accumulated.
(6) Projection method was modified beginning with 2008 Q2 data.
Some Gen 1 FC Stacks Have Now Accumulated aSignificant Number of Hours Without Repair
(DOE Milestone)
More data requiredto make Gen 2
projections (2009)
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
18/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 18 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0 5 10 15 20 250
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Frequency(%)
Trip Length (miles)
Trip Length: DOE Fleet
DOE Fleet
NHTS
Created: Sep-03-08 11:06 AM2001 NHTS Data Includes Car, Truck, Van, & SUV day tripsASCII .csv Source: http://nhts.ornl.gov/download.shtml#2001
Learning Demo FCVs Tend to Take Many More Trips
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
19/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 19 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0-1 hr 1-6 hr 6-12 hr 12-18hr 18-24hr 1-7days 7-30days >30days0
10
20
30
40
50
60
%Trips
Time
Time between Trips: DOE Fleet
0-10 min 10-20 min 20-30 min 30-40 min 40-50 min 50-60 min0
10
20
30
40
50
%Trips
Time
0-60 min Breakdown: DOE Fleet
Created: Sep-03-08 11:06 AM
>1/3 trips occur
within 10 min of
previous trip
Examining Time Between Trips Shows Fuel CellsExperiencing Large Number of Hot Starts
>50% trips occur
within 1 hour of
previous trip
f
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
20/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 20 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Range of Average Ambient TemperaturesDuring Vehicle Operation
0 2 4 6 8 10 12-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0.9 % trips below 0oC
Max Op = 125.6oF
Min Op = -1.3oF
25.1 % trips above 28oC
Frequency [%]
Temperature[oC]
Average Ambient Trip Temperature: All OEMs
Created: Sep-03-08 10:41 AM
Fuel cell vehicles are operating in
some extreme temperatureconditions. 2nd gen vehicle tests
will determine ability to startin
cold temperatures.
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
21/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 21 Innovation for Our Energy Future
350bar 700bar
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
MassH2p
erLiter(kg/L)
Mass of Hydrogen Per Liter
2015 DOE MYPP Target1
2010 DOE MYPP Target1
2007 DOE MYPP Target1
Created: Aug-19-08 11:39 AM
1Targets are set for advanced materials-based hydrogen storage technologies.
350bar 700bar 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
WeightPercentHyd
rogen(%)
Weight Percent Hydrogen
2015 DOE MYPP Target1
2010 DOE MYPP Target1
2007 DOE MYPP Target1
Created: Aug-19-08 11:39 AM
1Targets are set for advanced materials-based hydrogen storage technologies.
700 bar On-Board H2 Storage Systems DemonstratePotential for Improved Performance Over 350 bar
2nd Gen Vehicle Storage
Data Collected;
Allows a Comparison of
350 bar vs. 700 bar
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
22/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 22 Innovation for Our Energy Future
More Detailed Data Reporting Allows a Comparison of Massand Volume of H2, Pressure Vessel, and BOP
Pressure Vessel and BOP for
700 bar Systems Take Up
Larger % of Volume, but Allowfor a More Compact Package
and Extended Range
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
23/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 23 Innovation for Our Energy Future
On-Site Natural Gas Reforming On-Site Electrolysis0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2010 MYPP Target
2015 MYPP Target
2012 MYPP Target
2017 MYPP Target
ProductionEf
ficiency(LHV%)
Hydrogen Production Conversion Efficiency1
Average Station Efficiency
Quarterly Efficiency Data
Highest Quarterly Efficiency
Created: Sep-24-08 4:17 PM
1Production conversion efficiency is defined as the energy of the hydrogen out of the process (on an LHV basis) divided by the sum of the energy into the production
process from the feedstock and all other energy as needed. Conversion efficiency does not include energy used for compression, storage, and dispensing.
On-Site Production Efficiency from Natural GasReformation and Electrolysis Compared to Targets
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
24/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 24 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
WTW
GHGE
missions(gCO2-eq/mi)
Learning Demonstration Fuel Cycle Well-to-Wheels Greenhouse Gas Emissions1
Baseline Conventional Mid-Size Passenger Car2
Baseline Conventional Mid-Size SUV2
Average WTW GHG Emissions (Learning Demo)
Minimum WTW GHG Emissions (Learning Demo)
WTW GHG Emissions (100% Renewable Electricity)
WTW GHG Probability Based on Learning Demo3
Created: Sep-24-08 4:19 PM
On-Site Natural Gas Reforming On-Site Electrolysis(4)
1. Well-to-Wheels greenhouse gas emissions based on DOE's GREET model, version 1.8b. Analysis uses default GREET values except for FCV fuel economy, hydrogen
production conversion efficiency, and electricity grid mix. Fuel economy values are the Gen 1 and Gen 2 window-sticker fuel economy data for all teams (as used in CDP #6);
conversion efficiency values are the production efficiency data used in CDP #13.
2. Baseline conventional passenger car and light duty truck GHG emissions are determined by GREET 1.8b, based on the EPA window-sticker fuel economy of a conventional
gasoline mid-size passenger car and mid-size SUV, respectively. The Learning Demonstration fleet includes both passenger cars and SUVs.3. The Well-to-Wheels GHG probability distribution represents the range and likelihood of GHG emissions resulting from the hydrogen FCV fleet based on window-sticker fuel
economy data and monthly conversion efficiency data from the Learning Demonstration.4. On-site electrolysis GHG emissions are based on the average mix of electricity production used by the Learning Demonstration production sites, which includes both
grid-based electricity and renewable on-site solar electricity. GHG emissions associated with on-site production of hydrogen from electrolysis are highly dependent onelectricity source. GHG emissions from a 100% renewable electricity mix would be zero, as shown. If electricity were supplied from the U.S. average grid mix, average GHG
emissions would be 1296 g/mile.
Learning Demonstration Vehicle Greenhouse Gas EmissionsUsing Actual Production Efficiencies and Fuel Economies
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
25/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 25 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Hydrogen Quality Index Close to Target Except forSome High Inert Gas Measurements
Ref. Elec. Del. Ref. Elec. Del. Ref. Elec. Del.99.7
99.75
99.8
99.85
99.9
99.95
100
CalculatedH
2Index(%)
H2
Calculated Quality Index by Year and Production Method
On-Site NG Reformer (Data Range)
On-Site Electrolysis (Data Range)
Delivered (Data Range)
SAE J2719 APR2008 Guideline
Calculated Data
Created: Sep-22-08 1:41 PM
Data is from Learning Demonstration and California Fuel Cell Partnership testingYear 1 is 2005Q3-2006Q2, Year 2 is 2006Q3-2007Q2, and Year 3 is 2007Q3-2008Q2
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
H d I iti S l d f All
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
26/33National Renewable Energy Laboratory 26 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Particulates
g/L
H2
Impurities
Data Range SAE J2719 APR2008 Guideline Measured Less Than or Equal To (Detection Limited)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
(N2+He+Ar)
He
(Ar+N2)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
H2O
Total HC
O2
CO2
CO
NH3
mol/mol (ppm)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Total S*
nmol/mol (ppb)Created: Sep-22-08 1:41 PM Data is from Learning Demonstration and California Fuel Cell Partnership testing*Total S calculated from SO2, COS, H2S, CS2, and Methyl Mercaptan (CH3SH).
Hydrogen Impurities Sampled from AllStations to Date
High inert gases due to detection
limits, not measured values
H d I iti b Y d P d ti
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
27/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 27 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Ref. Elec. Del. Ref. Elec. Del. Ref. Elec. Del.0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
TotalS*(nmo
l/mol)(ppb)
Total S* (nmol/mol)(ppb)H
2Impurities by Year and Production Method
On-Site NG Reformer (Data Range)
On-Site Electrolysis (Data Range)
Delivered (Data Range)
SAE J2719 APR2008 Guideline
MeasuredLess Than or Equal To (Detection Limited)
Created: Sep-22-08 1:42 PM
Data is from Learning Demonstration and California Fuel Cell Partnership testing
Year 1 is 2005Q3-2006Q2, Year 2 is 2006Q3-2007Q2, and Year 3 is 2007Q3-2008Q2*Total S calculated from SO2, COS, H2S, CS2, and Methyl Mercaptan (CH3SH).
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Hydrogen Impurities by Year and ProductionMethod Total Sulfur
Most sulfur measurements
continue to be detection-limited
A t l V hi l R f li Ti d A t f
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
28/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 28 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Amount Fueled (kg)
NumberofFue
lingEvents
Histogram of Fueling AmountsAll Light Duty Through 2008Q2
Average = 2.24
Created: Sep-02-08 4:21 PM
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 200
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Time (min)
NumberofFueling
Events
Histogram of Fueling TimesAll Light Duty Through 2008Q2
Average = 3.23%
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
29/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 29 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 20
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Avg Fuel Rate (kg/min)
NumberofFuelingEvents
Histogram of Fueling RatesAll Light Duty Through 2008Q2
5 minute fill of5 kg at 350 bar
3 minute fill of
5 kg at 350 bar
11594 EventsAverage = 0.80 kg/min
25% >1 kg/min
2006 Tech Val Milestone
2010 MYPP Adv Storage Materials Target
Created: Sep-02-08 4:10 PM
Actual Vehicle Refueling Rates from >11,500Events: Measured by Stations or by Vehicles
Average rate: 0.80 kg/min
25% of refueling events exceeded 1 kg/min
Includes Communication and
Non-Communication Fills
Communication H2 Fills Achieving
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
30/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 30 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 20
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Avg Fuel Rate (kg/min)
NumberofFuelingEvents
Histogram of Fueling RatesComm vs Non-Comm Fills - All Light Duty Through 2008Q2
5 minute fill of
5 kg at 350 bar
3 minute fill of
5 kg at 350 bar
Fill Type Avg (kg/min) %>1------------- ------------------ -------Comm 0.94 36%Non-Comm 0.68 17%
Comm
Non-Comm
2006 Tech Val Milestone
2010 MYPP Adv Storage Materials Target
Created: Sep-02-08 4:59 PM
Non-Comm Has aPeak at ~0.2 kg/min
Comm Fills CanAchieve Higher
Fill Rates
Communication H2 Fills AchievingHigher Fill Rate than Non-Communication
Examining Refueling Data by Year Shows
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
31/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 31 Innovation for Our Energy Future
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 20
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Avg Fuel Rate (kg/min)
NumberofFuelingEvents
Histogram of Fueling RatesAll Light Duty by Year Through 2008Q2
5 minute fill of5 kg at 350 bar
3 minute fill of
5 kg at 350 bar
Year Avg (kg/min) %>1------- ----------------- -------
2005 0.66 16%2006 0.74 21%2007 0.81 26%2008 0.86 28%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2006 Tech Val Milestone
2010 MYPP Adv Storage Materials Target
Created: Sep-02-08 4:21 PM
Examining Refueling Data by Year Shows0.2 kg/min Rate Phased Out
Includes Communication and
Non-Communication Fills
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
32/33
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 32 Innovation for Our Energy Future
Summary
Learning Demo project is ~60% complete 122 vehicles and 16 stations deployed
1.5 million miles traveled, 60,000 kg H2 produced or dispensed
270,000 individual vehicle trips analyzed Project to continue through 2010 with additional vehicles & stations
Many new results in the Fall 2008 composite data products 50 new/updated results, 3 unchanged for a total of 53
Several Gen 1 vs Gen 2 vehicle comparisons Hydrogen production efficiency related results
Vehicle greenhouse gas estimates using actual productionefficiencies
Fuel cell system W/kg and W/L Hydrogen impurity breakdown by year and production technology
All results available on web site
Roll-out of 2nd generation vehicles continues
Most of remaining vehicles to be deployed this year Additional 700 bar stations coming online soon
8/4/2019 DOE Fleet Learning Demonstration
33/33
Questions and Discussion
Project Contact: Keith Wipke, National Renewable Energy Lab
303.275.4451 keith_wipke nrel.gov
All public Learning Demo papers and presentations are available
online at http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_tech_validation.html
Systems
Integration&
Analysis
Basic Research & Applied R&D
DELIVERY
FUEL CELLS
STORAGE
PRODUCTION
Education
Ma
rketTransform
ation
Mar
ketTransform
ation
Mar
ketTransform
ation
Tech
nology
Validation
Safety, Codes & Standards
Manufacturing R&D
@