Upload
vanhanh
View
276
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 2 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of road freight transport arebecoming an increasing challenge for the decarbonization
1) Prognosticated growthin road freight transport
• Global road freight transport is going togrow by 300% between 2015 and 2050
• In Germany road freight transport grewbetween 2015 and 2016 by 2.8%
3) Reductions goals ofGHG-emissions by 2050
• Economy wide goal of the Germangovernment: reduction by 80% to 95%(basis 1990)
• Transport-sector: reduction of 98%necessary
2) Modal split of freighttransport in 2050
• German freight approx. 60% on road• By using the maximum of shift potentials,
rail freight is growing up to 30% by 2050
4) Transport sector as GHG-emitter
• 20% of all GHG-emissions generated bytransport sector
• Increase by 5.4m tons emissions inGermany`s transport sector in 2016
Sources: Klimaschutzbeitrag des Verkehrs bis 2050, Umweltbundesamt, Texte 56/2016, Juni 2016;Erarbeitung einer fachlichen Strategie zur Energieversorgung des Verkehrs bis zum Jahr 2050, Umweltbundesamt, Texte 72/2016, November 2016
ITF Transport Outlook 2017, Januar 2017Umweltbundesamt, Pressemitteilung Nr. 09 vom 20.03.2017
TheChallenge
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 3 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Compatible with existinginfrastructure
System is safe, reliable and easy tomaintain
Long lifecycle
Compatible with other alternativefuel technologies
Compatible for freight- andpassenger transport
Able to achieve 100%decarbonization
High efficiency Economical
Little to no impact on standardoperation
Scalable andinteroperable
Thesolution
Requirements for the optimal solution for decarbonizationof road freight transport
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 4 Grünjes / MO TI EH
eHighwayHow it works - Animation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV2yZkRFBK0&t=7s
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 5 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Compatible with and complementary to other alternative fueltechnology
Truck types Drive system On-board sourceof electricity
Non-electrical sourceof energy
Combustionengine
Tractor truck(2 axles)
Tractor truck(3 axles)
Rigid truck(2 axles)
Rigid truck(3 axles)
Rigid truck(4 axles)
Parallel-hybrid
Serial-hybrid
Full electric
Battery (small)
Battery (medium)
Battery (large)
Fuel cell
Engine (small)
Engine (medium)
Engine (large)
Diesel
Bio-fuel
CNG/LNG
H2
The eHighway hybrid truck can be configured to suit specific applications
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 6 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Pathway RangeCost per km
EfficiencyWTW
Examplevehicle
Electric Road Systems60 km
19 ct/km 77%
Battery48 km
20 ct/km 62%
Hydrogen24 km
55 ct/km 29%
Power-to-Gas17 km
70 ct/km 20%
Zero emission trucks are possible with renewable energy,but efficiency varies greatly
2 kWh/km
eTruck(Battery)
e- e-Grid
96 kWh10 ct/kWh
1,6 kWh/km
eTruck(Catenary-Hybrid)
e-Grid(incl.catenary)
96 kWh
e-
12 ct/kWh
1) Including storageSource: German Ministry of Environment
100 kWh6.0 ct/kWh
H2-network1)
CH2- fuelstation
Fuel celltruck
Electro-lysis ŋ =70%
e- H2 H2 CH2
65 kWh20 ct/kWh
65 kWh18 ct/kWh
65 kWh15 ct/kWh
93 kWh
5 kWh2 kWh
2.7 kWh/km
NG-network1)
CNG-fuelstation
Gas-truck
Electro-lysis ŋ =70%
e- H2 NG CNG
55 kWh22 ct/kWh
55 kWh20 ct/kWh
69 kWh15 ct/kWh
98 kWh
2 kWh
3.2 kWh/km
Methanationŋ = 80% CH4
55 kWh19 ct/kWh
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 7 Grünjes / MO TI EH
In comparison to other solutions the eHighway proves itseconomic advantages
Fl+: PtL-liquid fuels as central GHG-free energy supply optionE+: Electrical energy as central GHG-free energy supply option (plus Hybrid Fl+)CH4+: PtG-CH4 as central GHG-free energy supply optionH2+: PtG-H2 as central GHG-free energy supply option
Source: UBA: Erarbeitung einer fachlichen Strategie zur Energieversorgung des Verkehrs bis zum Jahr 2050 (2016)* The reference scenario is the Fl+ scenario but with conventional fuels. No taxes and environmental benefits are taken into consideration.
⋅ Recently published Umweltbundesamt (UBA) reportcompares different energy scenarios and options for agreenhouse-gas-neutral transport sector in 2050
⋅ To reach greenhouse gas (GHG) neutrality in thetransport sector by 2050 scenarios four different energysupply strategies are developed and compared witheach other
⋅ For long haulage the scenario E+ assumes a wideutilization of OC-GIV (Overhead Catenary Grid-Integrated Vehicle)
The report verifies that the E+ scenario (correspondingto the eHighway) has approx. 50% less difference
cost (CAPEX + OPEX) to the next proposed scenario(FL+) in comparison with the reference scenario*.
Acc
umul
ated
cost
s(2
010
–20
50)i
nbi
llion
€(c
ompa
red
tofo
ssil
fuel
s)
Energy supply Energyinfrastructure
Vehicles Total costs
Figure 3-3: Long haul road transport
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 8 Grünjes / MO TI EH
German industry association (BDI) recommends 4.000 to 8.000 kmof overhead catenary lines as a cost-effective climate action for HDVs
• BDI commissioned an independent BCG and Prognos report looking at all sectors of the economy
• Investigated the most cost effective ways to reach German climate goals: -80% and -95% GHG
• Involved 68 BDI-member associations and companies, 200 industry experts and 40 workshops
Background
Source: https://bdi.eu/publikation/news/klimapfade-fuer-deutschland/
• Building overhead catenary is the cheapest solution for HDVs, despite high infrastructure costs.
• Recommends building 4.000 km overhead contact line in the 80% scenario and 8.000 km in 95%
• Based on DE perspective. EU solution brings large synergies and is even more cost-effective
• Investment decision needs to be made by 2025, leading to first 400 km in operation by 2028.
eHighway
• Shift to rail leads to an increase by 88% of ton-km of freight activity on rail by 2050
• No additional biofuels for transport (other sectors will need biomass more and out-bid transport)
• PtX only in 95% scenario (due to high expected costs of fuel)
Transport highlights
• Reaching the 80% reduction is possible by pushing existing technologies to the max. Haseconomically positive effects, even if Germany acts alone.
• Reaching the 95% reduction goal touches the limit of what can be expected from technology andcitizens. Only in joint action with G20 economies would this be economically manageable
Major findings
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 9 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Funded research projects supplement the projects onpublic roads in Los Angeles and Sweden
⋅ Los Angeles – Port Application ⋅ Sweden – Highway Application
• One mile demonstration as connectionto near-dock rail terminals for cargovehicles for 6 months
• Primary goal is to promote theimplementation of zero emissiongoods movement technologies
• Cooperation with Volvo trucks andlocal truck converter
• Two kilometer demonstration on apublic road between industrial areaand port for 2,5 years
• Overall aim is to evaluate ElectricRoad System options prior tointroduction on road network
• Cooperation with Scania trucks
Projects on Public RoadsResearch Projects
⋅ ENUBA (Germany)• First research project with BMUB• Duration: 05/2010 – 09/2011
⋅ ENUBA 2 (Germany)• Second research project with BMUB• Duration: 05/2012 – 12/2015
⋅ ELANO (Germany)• Third research project with BMUB• Duration: 01/2016 – 09/2019
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 10 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Ausbauszenario am Beispiel SchwedenERS Ambitionen 2020
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 11 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Field Trials in Germany are the next step for the development ofthe system
Information and routing
• Federal State of HesseProject: ELISA
• A5 Zeppelinheim-Weiterstadt
FS of Schleswig HolsteinProject: FESHA1 Reinfeld - Lübeck
• FS of Baden-WuerttembergProject: eWay-BW
• B462 Kuppenheim-Gaggenau
Unrestricted © Siemens AG 201820.04.2018Page 12 Grünjes / MO TI EH
Thank you for your attention
Hasso Georg GrünjesHead of eHighway
Siemens AGMobilityTechnology & InnovationeHighway
Erlangen, Germany
Mobile: +49 (173) 277 838 7E-mail: [email protected]
www.siemens.com/ehighway#eHighway