Uncovering the true cost of hydrogen production routes using life cycle monetisation

被引:262
作者
Al-Qahtani, Amjad [1 ]
Parkinson, Brett [1 ]
Hellgardt, Klaus [1 ]
Shah, Nilay [1 ]
Guillen-Gosalbez, Gonzalo [2 ]
机构
[1] Imperial Coll London, Ctr Proc Syst Engn, Dept Chem Engn, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, England
[2] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Dept Chem & Appl Biosci, Inst Chem & Bioengn, Vladimir Prelog Weg 1, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland
基金
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词
Hydrogen production; Monetisation; Life cycle assessment; Economic analysis; Sustainability; INDIRECT BIOMASS GASIFICATION; CO2; CAPTURE; GREENHOUSE-GAS; PERFORMANCE; TECHNOECONOMICS; ELECTROLYSIS; METHANOL; FUELS;
D O I
10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115958
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
Hydrogen has been identified as a potential energy vector to decarbonise the transport and chemical sectors and achieve global greenhouse gas reduction targets. Despite ongoing efforts, hydrogen technologies are often assessed focusing on their global warming potential while overlooking other impacts, or at most including additional metrics that are not easily interpretable. Herein, a wide range of alternative technologies have been assessed to determine the total cost of hydrogen production by coupling life-cycle assessments with an economic evaluation of the environmental externalities of production. By including monetised values of environmental impacts on human health, ecosystem quality, and resources on top of the levelised cost of hydrogen production, an estimation of the "real" total cost of hydrogen was obtained to transparently rank the alternative technologies. The study herein covers steam methane reforming (SMR), coal and biomass gasification, methane pyrolysis, and electrolysis from renewable and nuclear technologies. Monetised externalities are found to represent a significant percentage of the total cost, ultimately altering the standard ranking of technologies. SMR coupled with carbon capture and storage emerges as the cheapest option, followed by methane pyrolysis, and water electrolysis from wind and nuclear. The obtained results identify the "real" ranges for the cost of hydrogen compared to SMR (business as usual) by including environmental externalities, thereby helping to pinpoint critical barriers for emerging and competing technologies to SMR.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 72 条
[1]   CO2 capture from power plants -: Part II.: A parametric study of the economical performance based on mono-ethanolamine [J].
Abu-Zahra, Mohammad R. M. ;
Niederer, John P. M. ;
Feron, Paul H. M. ;
Versteeg, Geert F. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2007, 1 (02) :135-142
[2]   Comparative assessment of hydrogen production methods from renewable and non-renewable sources [J].
Acar, Canan ;
Dincer, Ibrahim .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2014, 39 (01) :1-12
[3]   Life cycle burden-shifting in energy systems designed to minimize greenhouse gas emissions: Novel analytical method and application to the United States [J].
Algunaibet, Ibrahim M. ;
Guillen-Gosalbez, Gonzalo .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2019, 229 :886-901
[4]   Review of methane catalytic cracking for hydrogen production [J].
Amin, Ashraf M. ;
Croiset, Eric ;
Epling, William .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2011, 36 (04) :2904-2935
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2008, DEV SET FULL COST ES
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2019, Renewable energy statistics
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2004, HYDR EC OPP COSTBA
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2019, Global energy transformation: A roadmap to 2050, V2019
[9]   The carbon credentials of hydrogen gas networks and supply chains [J].
Balcombe, Paul ;
Speirs, Jamie ;
Johnson, Erin ;
Martin, Jeanne ;
Brandon, Nigel ;
Hawkes, Adam .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2018, 91 :1077-1088
[10]  
Balcombe Paul, 2015, White Paper 1