2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.08.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cost assessment and evaluation of various hydrogen delivery scenarios

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
34
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 160 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Demir and Dincer [202] compared three different scenarios of hydrogen delivery, namely, pressurized tanks, cryogenic liquid hydrogen tanker, and gas pipelines. They concluded that for hydrogen production from large-scale plants, delivery with pipeline network is the most cost-effective and most environment friendly option at levelized costs of 2.73 $/kg H 2 (∼74.4 €/MWh f uel ), whereas liquefied hydrogen storage increases the capital cost significantly to 8.02 $/kg H 2 (∼218 €/MWh f uel ) and there can also be CO 2 emissions associated with the high electricity consumption by the liquefier.…”
Section: Cost Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Demir and Dincer [202] compared three different scenarios of hydrogen delivery, namely, pressurized tanks, cryogenic liquid hydrogen tanker, and gas pipelines. They concluded that for hydrogen production from large-scale plants, delivery with pipeline network is the most cost-effective and most environment friendly option at levelized costs of 2.73 $/kg H 2 (∼74.4 €/MWh f uel ), whereas liquefied hydrogen storage increases the capital cost significantly to 8.02 $/kg H 2 (∼218 €/MWh f uel ) and there can also be CO 2 emissions associated with the high electricity consumption by the liquefier.…”
Section: Cost Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analysis (a) is done either via trucks or pipeline system [Marcoulaki et al, 2012, Baufumé et al, 2013 or by including the two transportation systems in different scenarios [Demir & Dincer, 2017]. Often the cost effectiveness of the whole supply chain was improved by analysing only one part of the pathway (b) [Stojić et al, 2003, Yang & Ogden, 2007, Kim & Kuby, 2012, Bellotti et al, 2015.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The different optimisations were performed by focusing on one pressure level. For instance, [Yang & Ogden, 2007] investigate the cost of transporting hydrogen using a CGT at low operating pressure of 162 bar pressure transporting a total net capacity of 300 kg when [Demir & Dincer, 2017] investigate a higher operating CGT pressure of 486 bar but only at a fixed round-trip distance of 100 km. The middle range pressure of 200 bar was investigated as well by developing a model based on life cycle cost for implementing a general refuelling station siting [Sun et al, 2017] or along the expressway [He et al, 2017].…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Researchers have conducted adequate and detailed analyses on the different phases of the hydrogen supply chain, such as hydrogen production, 2-5 delivery, [6][7][8] and storage, [9][10][11][12] thereby providing a basis for the life cycle cost analysis of hydrogen energy.…”
Section: Prior Research On Hydrogen Life Cycle Cost Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%