Kondhwa ( Call Girls ) Pune 6297143586 Hot Model With Sexy Bhabi Ready For ...
Hydrogen modelling in TIMES – a summary of the inputs, outputs, and best practice RES
1. Hydrogen modelling in TIMES
– a summary of the inputs,
outputs, and best practice RES
Paul Dodds
17 December 2020, ETSAP Semi-annual Workshop, Teams
UCL Energy Institute
2. Hydrogen Reference
Energy System
• Many production and delivery
options (not all are shown here)
• Uses across end-use sectors
• Centralised or decentralised
• Pressure requirements vary
between transport and other
sectors
• Purity requirements vary
between fuel cells and
combustion
• Complements and competes
with electrification
Staffell et al. (2019) The role of hydrogen
and fuel cells in the global energy system
20 bar
80 bar
850 bar
2 bar
0.075 bar
99.97%
99.9%
98%
Pressure
Purity
4. Hydrogen RES choices – mobility end-uses
ETSAP-TIAM
TIMESPanEU
JMRTJapan
TIMES_VTT
STEM_CH
TIMES-Norway
UKTIMES
IrishTIMES
TIMES_PT
EnOp-TIMES
Hydrogen use in road transport? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 90%
Hydrogen use in rail transport? No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No 30%
Hydrogen use in shipping? No No No No No Yes No No No No 10%
Hydrogen use in aviation? Yes No No No No No No No No No 10%
5. Hydrogen RES choices – pressure and purity
ETSAP-TIAM
TIMESPanEU
JMRTJapan
TIMES_VTT
STEM_CH
TIMES-Norway
UKTIMES
IrishTIMES
TIMES_PT
EnOp-TIMES
Hydrogen compression costs? No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 78%
Hydrogen purification costs? No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No 33%
6. Hydrogen RES choices – stationary end-uses
ETSAP-TIAM
TIMESPanEU
JMRTJapan
TIMES_VTT
STEM_CH
TIMES-Norway
UKTIMES
IrishTIMES
TIMES_PT
EnOp-TIMES
Hydrogen use in industry as a feedstock? No No No Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes 40%
Hydrogen use in industry decarbonisation? No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 60%
Hydrogen use for Direct Reduced Iron (DRI)? No No No Yes No 20%
Hydrogen use for synthetic jet fuel? No Yes No No Yes 40%
Hydrogen use for other synthetic liquid fuels? No Yes No No Yes 40%
Hydrogen use in the dairy industry? No Yes No No No 20%
Hydrogen use for building heat? No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No 50%
Hydrogen for electricity generation? No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No 70%
7. Hydrogen RES choices – supply side
ETSAP-TIAM
TIMESPanEU
JMRTJapan
TIMES_VTT
STEM_CH
TIMES-Norway
UKTIMES
IrishTIMES
TIMES_PT
EnOp-TIMES
Hydrogen production plants? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 100%
Decentralised hydrogen production? Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 90%
Hydrogen delivery routes? Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No 80%
Power-to-gas? No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 80%
Hydrogen storage? No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes 70%
8. Hydrogen RES choices – existing gas networks*
* Note that some countries have very limited or no natural gas networks
ETSAP-TIAM
TIMESPanEU
JMRTJapan
TIMES_VTT
STEM_CH
TIMES-Norway
UKTIMES
IrishTIMES
TIMES_PT
EnOp-TIMES
Injection of small amounts of
hydrogen into gas flows?
Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No 60%
Maximum injection rate? 15% 2% 4% 3% 7.2% 6%
Conversion of existing gas
networks to deliver hydrogen?
No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No 30%
9. Hydrogen RES choices – delivery technologies
ETSAP-TIAM
TIMESPanEU
JMRTJapan
TIMES_VTT
STEM_CH
TIMES-Norway
UKTIMES
IrishTIMES
TIMES_PT
EnOp-TIMES
Liquefaction No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No 40%
Transmission pipeline HP Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No 50%
Distribution pipeline HP No No No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No 40%
Distribution pipeline LP No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No 30%
Building pipes LP No No No No No No Yes No No No 10%
Road tanker Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes No 60%
Liquid H2 refuelling station No No No No No No Yes No Yes No 20%
Gas H2 refuelling station No No No No No No Yes No Yes No 20%
Gas H2 HRS onsite prod No No No No No No Yes No No No 10%
Gas field storage No No No No No No Yes No No No 10%
Salt cavern storage No Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No 30%
10. Hydrogen RES choices – production technologies
ETSAP-TIAM
TIMESPanEU
JMRTJapan
TIMES_VTT
STEM_CH
TIMES-Norway
UKTIMES
IrishTIMES
TIMES_PT
EnOp-TIMES
Biomass Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No 70%
Biomass CCS Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No 40%
Coal Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No No 50%
Coal CCS Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No No 50%
Waste No No No No No No Yes Yes No No 20%
Waste CCS No No No No No No Yes No No No 10%
Gas SMR Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No 70%
Gas SMR CCS Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No 60%
Electrolysis Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes 90%
11. Conclusions from the model structure comparison
• The level of modelling detail for hydrogen technologies varies widely between models.
• Most models contain a basic set of technologies (electrolysis; hydrogen for transport), while some more
exotic technologies are considered in very few models. Some technologies can usefully be further
disaggregated (e.g. PEM, Alkaline and SOFC electrolysers).
• There is much diversity in the modelling of delivery technologies.
• Many models enable hydrogen to be used across several sectors. However, for transport, few models
consider potential uses in rail, aviation and shipping.
• More exotic technologies such as direct reduced iron, power-to-liquids and power-to-milk are starting to
be added to models.
• Hydrogen-based energy carriers such as ammonia are not generally considered.
16. Hydrogen production per capita in 2050
Population GJ/capita Optimal GJ/capita HighH2
Global ETSAP-TIAM 7600 4.1 8.2
Japan 126 8.5 10.1
UK TIMES 67 12.5 37.7
TIMES-Norway 5.4 3.5 11.4
Switzerland 8.6 4.5 7.5
Irish TIMES 4.9 4.3 8.0
TIMES-Portugal 10 10.7 18.2
17. Normalised total hydrogen production in the optimal case
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
2020 2030 2040 2050
ETSAP-TIAM
JMRT
UK TIMES
TIMES-Norway
STEM
Irish TIMES
TIMES-PT
18. Fraction of hydrogen production from electrolysers in the optimal case
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
2020 2030 2040 2050
ETSAP-TIAM
JMRT
UK TIMES
TIMES-Norway
STEM
Irish TIMES
TIMES-PT
19. Fraction of hydrogen from each production route in 2050
ETSAP-
TIAM
JMRT UK TIMES
TIMES-
Norway
STEM
Irish
TIMES
TIMES-PT
Biomass 10% 0%
Biomass CCS 29%
Coal 14%
Waste CCS 1%
Gas SMR 46% 0%
Gas SMR CCS 99% 24%
Decentralised electrolysis 100% 3%
Centralised electrolysis 30% 47%
Alkaline electrolyser 82% 1%
PEM electrolyser 100% 96%
Hydrogen from Refinery 6%
Hydrogen from Iron and Steel Making 12%
Number of options used 4 3 2 1 5 1 3
20. Hydrogen consumption by sector in 2050
ETSAP-TIAM JMRT UK TIMES
TIMES-
Norway
STEM Irish TIMES TIMES-PT Average
Agriculture 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Services 0% 55% 12% 0% 3% 0% 1% 10%
Industry 39% 0% 65% 52% 6% 0% 38% 29%
Residential 0% 39% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6%
Transport 61% 6% 2% 48% 52% 100% 44% 45%
Process 0% 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 14% 4%
Electricity 0% 0% 16% 0% 27% 0% 0% 6%
21. Hydrogen consumption in the transport sector in 2050
ETSAP-
TIAM
JMRT UK TIMES
TIMES-
Norway
STEM Irish TIMES TIMES-PT Average
Cars 0% 100% 0% 0% 50% 0% 0% 21%
2-wheel and 3-wheel bikes 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Light goods vehicles 0% 0% 0% 0% 8% 0% 0% 1%
Heavy goods vehicles 4% 0% 0% 100% 38% 100% 4% 35%
Buses 0% 0% 15% 0% 4% 0% 96% 16%
Trains 0% 0% 76% 0% 0% 0% 0% 11%
Ships 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%
Aviation 96% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14%
22. Best-practice hydrogen RES
Not all hydrogen is equal
• Gas or liquid.
• Gas pressure ranges from 0.075 bar to 850 bar.
• Purity ranges from 75% to 99.99%.
• Natural gas/hydrogen mixed fuel
• Hydrogen-rich compounds (methane; ammonia; methanol;
liquid-organic hydrogen compounds).
• Purity and compression requirements vary between end-uses.
• Impurities can enter the hydrogen supply in the infrastructure
system.
• Modelling hydrogen storage needs is a challenge.
• Modelling “typical” infrastructure is a geographical challenge.
Fully-detailed hydrogen RES
Typical RES
ETSAP-TIAM
26. My views on best-practice hydrogen modelling principles
1. Breadth of the hydrogen system:
1. A range of potential end-uses across several sectors, particularly non-car transport and industry.
2. Production from fossil fuels and electricity.
3. Hydrogen-derived fuels, including ammonia and synthetic jet fuel.
4. International trade of gaseous and liquefied hydrogen, and ammonia.
2. Model balance: hydrogen production costs should use a consistent methodology with electricity
generation costs. Delivery infrastructure should similarly be modelled for both hydrogen and alternatives.
3. The RES design should reflect the likely use of hydrogen and geography of the region – for example, will it
be centralised or decentralised?
4. Represent the limitations of infrastructure in the early stages of hydrogen take-up, whether through
lumpy investments or constraints. Base these on the relative cost of infrastructure compared to the rest
of the hydrogen RES through the transition.