The feasibility and component cost of hydrogen rail refueling infrastructure is examined. Example reference stations can inform future studies on components and systems specifically for hydrogen rail refueling facilities. All of the 5 designs considered assumed the bulk storage of liquid hydrogen on-site, from which either gaseous or liquid hydrogen would be dispensed. The first design was estimated to refuel 10 multiple unit trains per day, each train containing 260 kg of gaseous hydrogen at 350 bar on-board. The second base design targeted the refueling of 50 passenger locomotives, each with 400 kg of gaseous hydrogen on-board at 350 bar. Variations from this basic design were made to consider the effect of two different filling times, two different hydrogen compression methods, and two different station design approaches. For each design variation, components were sized, approximate costs were estimated for major components, and physical layouts were created. For both gaseous hydrogen-dispensing base designs, the design of direct-fill using a cryopump design was the lowest cost due to the high cost of the cascade storage system and gas compressor. The last three base designs all assumed that liquid hydrogen was dispensed into tender cars for freight locomotives that required 7,500 kg of liquid hydrogen, and the three different designs assumed that 5, 50, or 200 tender cars were refueled every day. The total component costs are very different for each design, because each design has a very different dispensing capacity. The total component cost for these three designs are driven by the cost of the liquid hydrogen tank; additionally, delivering that much liquid hydrogen to the refueling facility may not be practical. Many of the designs needed the use of multiple evaporators, compressors, and cryopumps operating in parallel to meet required flow rates. In the future, the components identified here can be improved and scaled-up to better fit the needs of heavy-duty refueling facilities. This study provides basic feasibility and first-order design guidance for hydrogen refueling facilities serving emerging rail applications.
Understanding liquid hydrogen tank fluid dynamics is key for modeling liquid hydrogen systems. The tank is the source for nearly all liquid hydrogen systems. Accurate flow modeling out of the tank is needed to predict flows through downstream components. Tank contains liquid and gas that may not be at equilibrium. Questions to be addressed are: Does heat and mass transfer between liquid and vapor affect the flow rate? Is boiling an important consideration? For what conditions is a pressure relief valve (PRV) sufficient to relieve pressure and when is the burst disc needed?
Zero-emissions hydrogen fuel cell electrical vehicles (FCEVs) have become more popular in recent years. However, the limited availability of hydrogen fueling stations is considered a critical barrier to sustainable adoption of hydrogen FCEV. To enable the widespread deployment and commercialization of hydrogen FCEV, the availability of hydrogen refueling stations needs to improve. One of the consequences of the lack of hydrogen refueling infrastructure is that consumers can suffer from “range anxiety”, meaning consumers would get anxious of running out of fuel during long-distance trip [4]. A practical solution is to provide a compact emergency hydrogen refueler that can be used if the consumer runs out of hydrogen before reaching the nearest hydrogen refueling station. A safe, compact, and user-friendly hydrogen refueler would give consumers the flexibility they need to feel comfortable using their hydrogen FCEV when planning a long-distance trip. Offering this product would alleviate range anxiety, and it would make Hydrogen FCEV a more attractive alternative to gasoline vehicles. The emergency hydrogen refueler consists of a lithium hydride bed that reacts with liquid water to produce hydrogen gas and lithium hydroxide.
Recent advances in drilling technology, especially horizontal drilling, have prompted a renewed interest in the use of closed loop geothermal energy extraction systems. Deeply placed closed loops in hot wet or dry rock reservoirs offer the potential to exploit the vast thermal energy in the subsurface. To better understand the potential and limitations for recovering thermal and mechanical energy from closed-loop geothermal systems (CLGS), a collaborative study is underway to investigate an array of system configurations, working fluids, geothermal reservoir characteristics, operational periods, and heat transfer enhancements (Parisi et al., 2021; White et al., 2021). This paper presents numerical results for the heat exchange between a closed loop system (single U-tube) circulating water as the working fluid in a hot rock reservoir. The characteristics of the reservoir are based on the Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) site, near Milford Utah. To determine optimal system configurations, a mechanical (electrical) objective function is defined for a bounded optimization study over a specified design space. The objective function includes a surface plant thermal to mechanical energy conversion factor, pump work, and an energy drilling capital cost. To complement the optimization results, detailed parametric studies are also performed. The numerical model is built using the Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) massively parallel Sierra computational framework, while the optimization and parametric studies are driven using the SNL Dakota software package. Together, the optimization and parametric studies presented in this paper will help assess the impact of CLGS parameters (e.g., flow rate, tubing length and diameter, insulation length, etc.) on CLGS performance and optimal energy recovery.
DOE has identified consistent safety, codes, and standards as a critical need for the deployment of hydrogen technologies, with key barriers related to the availability and implementation of technical information in the development of regulations, codes, and standards. Advances in codes and standards have been enabled by risk-informed approaches to create and implement revisions to codes, such as National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 2, NFPA 55, and International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Specification (TS)-19880-1. This project provides the technical basis for these revisions, enabling the assessment of the safety of hydrogen fuel cell systems and infrastructure using QRA and physics-based models of hydrogen behavior. The risk and behavior tools that are developed in this project are motivated by, shared directly with, and used by the committees revising relevant codes and standards, thus forming the scientific basis to ensure that code requirements are consistent, logical, and defensible.