1. A study within the Swedish national project: Future Fuels
Kan elektrobränslen i förbränningsmotorer konkurrera kostnadsmässigt med vätgas i bränsleceller?   Maria Grahn1, Selma Brynolf1, Maria Taljegård1 och Julia Hansson 1,2 (1) Chalmers tekniska högskola, (2) IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet
A study within the Swedish national project: Future Fuels

2. Different fuels and vehicle technology options are differently well suited for different transport modes Biofuels and electrofuels are suitable for all transportation modes
Rail
(train, tram)
Aviation
Shipping
Road (short)
(cars, busses, distribution trucks)
Road (long)
(long distance trucks and busses)
FCV
(fuel cell vehicles)
Liquid fuels
(petro, methanol, ethanol, biodiesel)
ICEV, HEV
(internal combus-tion engine vehicles and hybrids)
Methane
(biogas, SNG, natural gas)
Fossil
(oil, natural gas, coal)
Electrolysis
Production of electro fuels
CO2
Water
Hydrogen
BEV, PHEV
(battery electric vehicles)
Inductive and conductive electric
Electricity
Biomass
Solar, wind etc
ENERGY SOURCES
ENERGY CARRIERS
VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES
TRANSPORT MODES

3. Production of electro-fuels
CO2 from air and seawater
CO2 from combustion
Carbon dioxide CO2
CO2
€/tCO2
20-60 €/tCO2
5-10 €/tCO2
Production of electro-fuels
Other hydrogen options (H2)
Water (H2O)
How to utilize or store possible future excess electricity
Hydrogen (H2) El
Electro-lysis
€2015/kWelec
How to utilize the maximum of carbon in the globally limited amount of biomass H2
Electrofuels
Synthesis reactor (e.g. Sabatier, Fischer-Tropsch)
Heat
€2015/kWfuel
Biomass
(C6H10O5)
Biofuels
Methane (CH4)
Methanol (CH3OH)
DME (CH3OCH3)
Higher alcohols, e.g., Ethanol (C2H5OH)
Higher hydrocarbons, e.g., Gasoline (C8H18)
Biofuel production
How to substitute fossil based fuels in the transportation sector, especially aviation and shipping face challenges utlilzing batteries and fuel cells.

4. Data used in this study: Electro-hydrogen base case=116, best case=84 €/MWh
Production cost different electrofuels, assuming most optimistic (low), least optimistic (high) and median values (base)
Production costs have the potential to lie in the order of 100 €/MWh (low) or €/MWh (base) in future (similar to the most expensive biofuels).
Parameters assumed for 2030, 50 MW reactor, CF 80%.
Interest rate 5%
Economic lifetime
25 years
Investment costs:
Alkaline electrolyzers €/kWelec
700 ( )
Methane reactor €/kWfuel
300 (50-500)
Methanol reactor €/kWfuel
500 ( )
DME reactor €/kWfuel
500 ( )
FT liquids reactor €/kWfuel
700( )
Gasoline (via meoh) €/kWfuel
900( )
Electrolyzer efficiency
66 (50-74) %
Electricity price
50 €/MWh el
CO2 capture
30 €/tCO2
O&M 4%
Water
1 €/m³
Data used in this study: Electro-diesel base case=180, best case=112 €/MWh
Electrolyser
uncertainties installation & indirect costs
Fuel synthesis and CO2 capture
Electricity
Costs for electrolyser and electricity dominate
Brynolf S, Taljegård M, Grahn M, Hansson J. (2017). Electrofuels for the transport sector: a review of production costs. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. In press

5. Cost-comparison electrofuels vs hydrogen including vehicle costs

6. Background
Fuel cost and vehicle cost are two important posts when comparing non-fossil alternatives for the transport sector.
Electrofuels are preferably used in combustion engines.
Hydrogen is preferably used in fuel cells, which have a higher conversion efficiency but also a higher cost compared to combustion engines.
Hydrogen, if used as a fuel itself (and not as feedstock for an electrofuel), is less costly than electrofuels.
On annual basis the share “fuel cost” would be higher compared to the share “vehicle cost” the more the vehicle is used.
Questions
Would the lower cost for combustion engines compensate for the higher fuel production cost of electrofuels so that the total cost will be comparable with the concept hydrogen+fuel cell?
Is there a breaking point, depending on travel distance per year, where total cost would shift between the two concepts electrofuels+ICEV vs hydrogen+FC? H2
ELECTROFUEL
FUEL CELL
ICEV

7. Assumptions on currency, fuel production costs, life time and engine efficiency
Production cost electro-diesel [€/MWh] [1] Base/Low
180/112
Production cost H2 (Alkaline electrolyzer) [€/MWh] [1] Base/Low
113/81
Additional cost H2 liquefaction [€/MWh] [1] 3
Tot production cost H2 (liquid) [€/MWh] [1] Base/Low
116/84
Life time fuel cell stack [hours] [1]
65,000/5000
Average vessel engine load (factor of max capacity) [2]
0.75
Engine efficiency Diesel-IC [2]
0.40
Engine (fuel cell) efficiency H2-FC [2]
0.45
Fuel consumption heavy truck [lit/10 km]
Fuel consumption passenger car [lit/10 km]
0.5
Interest rate [%] 5
Currency USD/EUR (Forex )
0.89
Will be tested in sensitivity analyses
[1] Brynolf S, Taljegård M, Grahn M, Hansson J. Electrofuels for the transport sector: a review of production costs. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. In press (2017).
[2] Taljegård M., Brynolf S., Grahn M., Andersson K., Jonsson H. Cost-Effective Choices of Marine Fuels in a Carbon-Constrained World: Results from a Global Energy Model. Environmental Science and Technology 48 (21) (2014).

8. Assumptions regarding vehicles and vessels
The cost comparisons are made for a generalized passenger car, heavy truck and three types of vessels (short sea, deep sea and container).
Container vessel
Deep sea vessel
Short sea vessel
Heavy truck
Pass. car
Engine power [kW] [2]
23000
11000
2400
250 80
Life time [years per vehicle/vessel] [2] 30 10 15
Investment cost ICEV [1000 € per vehicle/vessel] [2]
113574
69163
15638 71 18
Annuitized investment cost ICEV [1000 € per vehicle/vessel per year] [2]
7388
4499
1017 9 2
Investment cost FC [1000 € per vehicle/vessel] [2]
201948
118309
23769
120 33
Annuitized investment cost FC [1000 € per vehicle/vessel per year] [2]
13137
7696
1546 4
Cost per fuel cell stack replacement [1000 €/replacement]
2874
1599
264 3 1 
[1] Brynolf S, Taljegård M, Grahn M, Hansson J. Electrofuels for the transport sector: a review of production costs. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. In press (2017).
[2] Taljegård M., Brynolf S., Grahn M., Andersson K., Jonsson H. Cost-Effective Choices of Marine Fuels in a Carbon-Constrained World: Results from a Global Energy Model. Environmental Science and Technology 48 (21) (2014).

9. Number of stack replacement during vessel life time (no replacement needed for trucks and cars in base case, however in sensitivity runs with shorter stack life time truck=up to 5 replacements and cars=1 stack replacement)
Days/yr 50
100
150
200
250
300
Replacements 1 2 3

10. Short sea
Shipping: Annual cost electro-diesel in ICEV (blue) vs hydrogen in FC (green)
Days at sea per year
Deep sea
Main findings
Expensive investments dominates at low use, whereas expensive fuel dominates at large use.
Electro-diesel can be competitive when vessels are used few days per year (50 days or less)
Hydrogen has advantages when vessels are used more days per year.
Stack replacements only minor post.
Days at sea per year
Container
Days at sea per year

11. Trucks and Cars: Annual cost electro-diesel in ICEV (blue) vs hydrogen in FC (green)
km per year
km per year
Common for cars
Common for long-distance trucks
Trucks: H2+FC lowest tot cost (over 30,000 km/yr)
Cars: E-diesel+ICEV lowest tot cost (up to 30,000 km/yr)
Main findings
Expensive investments dominates at low use, expensive fuel dominates at large use.
Electro-diesel can be competitive when vehicles have a short driving range per year.
Hydrogen has advantages when vehicles have long driving distances per year.
The concept of e-diesel in ICEVs seem to be cost-competitive to H2-FC for cars.

12. Sensitivity analyses Uncertainties connected to
Production cost of fuels (assuming case ”low”)
Life time of fuel cells (5000h instead of 65,000h)

13. Results for trucks and cars assuming lower fuel production costs Assuming case ”low”, i.e. H2=84 €/MWh, Electro-diesel=112 €/MWh
Trucks
Cars
km per year
km per year
Trucks: H2+FC lowest tot cost (over 30,000 km/yr)
Cars: E-diesel+ICEV lowest tot cost (up to 30,000 km/yr)
Main findings
Relative results roughly remain when assuming lower fuel production costs

14. Results for trucks and cars assuming shorter life time of fuel cells Assuming 5,000 h instead of 65,000 h
Trucks
Cars
km per year
km per year
Trucks: H2+FC lowest tot cost (over 30,000 km/yr)
Cars: E-diesel+ICEV lowest tot cost
Main findings
Although stepwise additional cost for fuel cell stack replacement, relative results roughly remain

15. Results for trucks and cars assuming both lower production cost of fuels and shorter life time of fuel cells Assuming case ”low”, i.e. H2=84 €/MWh, Electro-diesel=112 €/MWh. FC life time=5000h.
Trucks
Cars
km per year
km per year
Trucks: E-diesel+ICEV lowest tot cost
Cars: E-diesel+ICEV lowest tot cost
Main findings
When fuel cost is low, the stack replacements are more dominant in total cost. Electro-diesel here cost-competitive to hydrogen for both trucks and cars.

16. Conclusions
Electro-diesel can be competitive to hydrogen when vehicles and vessels operate only part time of the year (or short annual driving range).
Hydrogen has advantages when vehicles and vessels are more intensively used over the year.
Cars is the category showing the most positive results on electro-diesel.
Electro-diesel become cost-competitive also for long-distance trucks if assuming both
production costs of hydrogen and electro-diesel in the lower range, and
life time of fuel cells in the lower range

17. The efuel team Maria Grahn, Research leader Energy and environment
Chalmers University of Technology
Selma Brynolf, Postdoc
Energy and environment
Chalmers University of Technology
Julia Hansson, Postdoc
Energy and environment
Chalmers University of Technology
Maria Taljegård, PhD student
Energy and environment
Chalmers University of Technology
Karin Andersson, Professor
Shipping and Marine Technology
Chalmers University of Technology
Sofia Poulikidou, Postdoc
Energy and environment
Chalmers University of Technology
Stefan Heyne, Researcher
CIT
Roman Hackl, Researcher
IVL

18. EXTRA

19. Insights
If electrofuels are used as drop-in fuels, although they may offer a solution for a fast transition away from fossil fuels, there is a risk that they may contribute to a prolonged era of fossil fuels.
Policy measures that continuously encourage increased shares of low-emitting drop-in fuels (up to finally 100%) would reduce this risk.
Effects on human health from local emissions (e.g., NOx and soot), from combustion engines would remain if using electrofuels in conventional combustion engines
Local emissions would be slightly lower with electrofuels in the form of, e.g., e-dimethyl ether, e-methanol or e-methane, than with e-gasoline or e-diesel, however, never as low as with hydrogen used in fuel cells.
The majority of local emissions can, on the other hand, be reduced with exhaust after treatment technologies.

20. Production cost electro-methanol depending on capacity factor (using data from case ”base”)
Total production cost per MWh produced electrofuels high, if only running the plant parts of the year.
Electricity cost differs when using the elec from 10% vs 90% of the cheapest hours over a year.
Production costs for e-methanol may lie in the order of €/MWh in 2030 (180 €/MWh for FT-liquids at CF 80%.)
Brynolf S, Taljegård M, Grahn M, Hansson J. (2017). Electrofuels for the transport sector: a review of production costs. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. In press