This
work analyzes quantitatively the energy and exergy efficiencies
of storing intermittent renewable energy in chemical fuels. In the
future energy system, chemical fuels provide a very effective approach
for long-term storage and long-distance transport of renewable electricity.
For the sake of completeness and simplicity, we consider both carbon-free
fuels, namely, hydrogen and ammonia, and carbon-rich fuels, i.e.,
methane and methanol, synthesized using CO2 as the precursor.
The latter are called CCU fuels as they constitute an application
of CO2 capture and utilization (CCU), which is often advocated
to be an effective approach toward climate change mitigation (though
no consensus exists). Instead of focusing on the CO2 conversion
step, we apply a system-oriented perspective, grounded in the net-zero-CO2-emission framework, to quantify merits and drawbacks. In
such a framework, we consider eight systems and technology chains
where, in the spirit of a circular economy, the only input is renewable
electricity and the only output is a service, consisting in delivering
either electricity to the grid on demand (power–fuel–power)
or a fuel to propel a means of transportation (power–fuel–propulsion);
no fossil carbon is used, and no net CO2 release to the
atmosphere occurs. Providing the service of storing renewable electricity
in chemical fuels obviously results in a loss of primary energy, which
differs in the eight cases considered, depending on the chemical nature
of the chemical fuel and on the number and efficiency of the individual
steps to synthesize them. Power–CCU fuel–power systems
exhibit an energy loss from 65% to 86%, whereas the energy loss of
power–CCU fuel–propulsion systems increases to 83–94%.
The energy loss of the corresponding systems using ammonia as fuel
is similar, whereas that obtained when using hydrogen is significantly
smaller, namely, 50–65% and 57–69% in the power–fuel–power
and the power–fuel–propulsion case, respectively. Compared
to hydrogen, the other energy carriers suffer from increased system
complexity and consequently lower efficiency. Exergy analysis has
shown low efficiency improvement potential for especially the fuel
synthesis step, while the other steps in the chain (electrolysis,
extraction from air of CO2 or nitrogen, fuel utilization,
and associated compression) still exhibit higher improvement potentials.