Effectiveness of the Hydrogen Production, Storage and Utilization Chain

  • Wojciech Kostowski
  • Sebastian Lepszy
  • Władysław Uthke
  • Mariusz Chromik
  • Arkadiusz Wierciński
  • Marek Foltynowicz
  • Tomasz Stendera
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Energy book series (SPE)

Abstract

The paper evaluates the effectiveness of a power-to-gas hydrogen chain, comprising the production, storage and utilization sections. The production section is based on alkaline electrolyzers producing about 18.6 kg hydrogen per MWh supplied electric energy derived from renewable (wind) sources. Next, hydrogen is transported to an underground storage facility (UGF), assuming that the pressure of the produced hydrogen is sufficient to provide its transportation to the storage site. Energy demand required for hydrogen compression to the UGF is accounted for, and the maximum level of hydrogen losses is evaluated. Finally, three options for hydrogen utilization are considered: (1) hydrogen is co-fired in a gas turbine, (2) it is supplied to hydrogen vehicles, (3) it is used for process purposes replacing the existing production based on steam methane reforming. Moreover, energy effects related to the replaced oxygen production are optionally taken into account. It has been shown that the choice of a scenario (co-firing//vehicles/process application) and, to a lesser degree, the possibility of using the generated oxygen strongly affects the overall process performance which may vary between low values of 20% (energy generation), 70–80% for process application (replacement of steam methane reforming) and more than 90% for vehicle application (replacement of diesel fuel). In conclusion, the process may provide excellent energy performance for dedicated hydrogen users, and a less favorable yet still considerable option for energy storage for renewable sources.

Keywords

Hydrogen Energy storage Salt cavern Power to gas 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work has been carried out within the project ‘Hydrogen energy storage in salt caverns’, No. GEKON1/O2/214140/23/2015, supported by the National Centre of Research and Development and by the National Fund of Environmental Projection and Water Management of the Republic of Poland.

References

  1. 1.
    Bartela Ł., Dubiel K., Kotowicz J.: Impact of the technical and economic conditions on construction of energy storage systems. In: Proceedings of the 6th Scientific and Technical Conference ENERGETYKA GAZOWA 2016, vol. II, pp. 25–31. ITC Press, Gliwice (2016).(in Polish)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Witkowski A, Rusin A, Majkut M, Stolecka K.: Comprehensive analysis of hydrogen compression and pipeline transportation from thermodynamics and safety aspects. Energy, (in press) Available online 26 May 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.05.141
  3. 3.
    Tribus, M., Evans, R.B.: A contribution to the theory of thermoeconomics. Technical report, 546 Report No. 62–63; Department of Engineering, UCLA: Los Angeles, CA, USA (1962)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kostowski, W.J, Skorek, J.: Real gas flow simulation in damaged distribution pipelines. Energy 45(1), 481–488 (2012). ISSN 0360-5442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.02.076
  5. 5.
    Sanchez, R.A., Riboldi, L., Jakobsen, H.A.: Numerical modelling and simulation of hydrogen production via four different chemical reforming processes: process performance and energy requirements. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 95, 880–901 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.22758 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aneke, M., Wang, M.: Potential for improving the energy efficiency of cryogenic air separation unit (ASU) using binary heat recovery cycles. Appl. Therm. Eng. 81, 223–231 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.02.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wojciech Kostowski
    • 1
  • Sebastian Lepszy
    • 1
  • Władysław Uthke
    • 2
  • Mariusz Chromik
    • 2
  • Arkadiusz Wierciński
    • 3
  • Marek Foltynowicz
    • 3
  • Tomasz Stendera
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of Power and Envirionmental EngineeringSilesian University of TechnologyGliwicePoland
  2. 2.Chemkop sp. z o.oKrakówPoland
  3. 3.Grupa Lotos S.AGdańskPoland

Personalised recommendations