US DOE Fuel Cell Technologies Office and ARPA-E

Investments in Hydrogen Technology

Advancements

September 19, 2017

NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration

House Keeping

All participants are in “Listen-Only” mode. Select “Use

Mic & Speakers” to avoid toll charges and use your

computer’s VOIP capabilities. Or select “Use

Telephone” and enter your PIN onto your phone key

pad.

Submit your questions at any time by typing in the

Question Box and hitting Send.

This webinar is being recorded

You will find a recording of this webinar, as well as

previous NEESC webinars online at:

http://neesc.org/events/past-events/

NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration

About NEESC

The Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster (NEESC) is a

network of industry, academic, government and non-governmental

leaders working together to help businesses provide energy storage

solutions. The cluster is focused on businesses that provide the

innovative development, production, promotion and deployment of

hydrogen fuels and fuel cells to meet the pressing demand for energy

storage solutions.

The cluster spans an area in the northeastern United States from New

Jersey to Maine. Its formal organization is funded by the US Small

Business Administration’s Regional Cluster Initiative. NEESC is

administered by the Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc.

(CCAT) and its local state partners:

NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration

Today’s Guest Speakers

NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration

Dr. Katherine Ayers, Vice President, Research and

Development, Proton OnSite

Dr. Madhav Acharya, Technology-to-Market Advisor,

Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E)

September 19, 2017 © 2017 Proton Energy Systems, Inc.

US DOE FCTO and ARPA–E Investments in Hydrogen Technology Advancements

Dr. Katherine AyersVice President, Research and Development

2

Outline

• Company and Technology Overview

• Importance of hydrogen• Materials and applied research• Realities of scale and product development

• Portfolio approach and federal funding

• Conclusions

3

Proton-Nel Overview

Manufacturer, packaged products, systems

Well established applications and markets

>3500 fielded units in 80 countries

Growing to address energy markets

ISO 9001:2008 certified; ~150 employees

Now the largest electrolysis company worldwide

PEM Electrolysis Cell

4

PEM application history: Why we are where we are

• Designed for life support in closed environments• Qualified for O2 generation in space and underwater

• Safer handling in confined spaces

• Optimized for high reliability; less for cost and efficiency• Shock and vibration mil specs; 50,000 hour life

• Internal $ focused on scale up

HOGEN® H

Series

HOGEN®

C SeriesHOGEN®

S Series

HOGEN®

GCM Series

5

Environmental Impact

• Only 4% of H2 globally is from non-fossil sources

• Renewable hydrogen needed for decarbonization

• Example: Ammonia is largest energy consumer and GHG emitter, largely due to reforming step

6

How do we enable more renewable hydrogen penetration?

• Electrolysis reaching relevant scale• Multiple companies concepting

multi-MW systems/plants• 1-2 MW stacks for PEM and KOH

• New technology development has a 20 year time frame

• 10 years: end of researchto developed product

• 10 years: market penetration

Need to leverage/improvewhat we have today

https://www.iea.org/media/workshops/2014/hydrogenroadmap/

13HydrogenicsRobertHarvey.pdf

Hydrogenics – 45 MW plant

(CO2 emissions)

Stolten, October 2014: “The Potential Role of Hydrogen Technology for Future Mobility. How Can this Improve Our Life?”

7

Platform Iterations: Electrolysis• 4 major platform changes over ~5 orders of magnitude• New technology has to go through similar progression

Existing PEM Electrolysis Designs

(4 active area platforms) Future Platforms:

SMR Scale

Nascent

Technolo

gy

8

Reliability and manufacturing

• Scale up is capital intensive; need reliability and market• Underutilization of equipment, high scrap, warranty exposure

• Test component fabrication ≠ manufacturing• 25 cm2 test cell vs. >1 million cm2 (4 MW, ~1500 kg/day)

• Transition from lab to assembly floor requires different mind-set

• Need error-proof instructions• Criteria for acceptability

10 years of fielded

cells: 95% still

operational

9

NSF, DOE-BES ARPA- E, USDA DOE-EERE, NASA DoD (Navy, Air Force, Army)

Collaboration and Roadmap Strategy• Clearly define long and short term directed research pathways

• Match with agency strategy and mission

Page 9

Adv. Materials Proof of Concept Applied R&D Deployable Prototypes

High Risk Development Stage/Risk Level High Fidelity

• Leverage key competencies of partners to extend technology

• National Labs, universities, and companies as collaborators

• Internal funding to take materials and manufacturing science to product

10

Opportunities for improvement: Implemented vs. possible

Internal $’s focused

on scale up

Where

we are

Where we

could be 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1999 2015 2016

Act

ive

area

sca

le (

m2

)

% o

f b

ase

line

(qu

anti

ty/t

hic

knes

s/co

st)

Year

Stack Progression

bipolar assembly bipolar assembly - actual

membrane membrane - actual

catalyst loading catalyst loading - actual

scale (active area)

11

R&D program portfolio: 2 case studies

• Many interacting pieces

• Small parts funded under different programs

Bipolar plate MEA

• All pieces funded together

• Able to complete full development cycle

12

Bipolar plate case study - FCTO

•Evaluated and selected manufacturing techniques

•Prototyped parts and alternate coating: improved resistance to environment and lower cost

•Stack design and analysis for strength and fluid flow

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0 100 200 300 400 500

Hyd

roge

n U

pta

ke v

s. B

ase

line

Time (h)

Baseline

Post Annealed

NitridedCoated

Accelerated embrittlement study

Computational fluid dynamics

Finite element analysis &

ORNL

Commercial stack,

40% cost reduction

13

Implementation Timeline

• Bipolar plate project initiated 2009

• Subscale components and materials development: 2010-2011

• Analysis and scale up, larger active area: 2012-13

• Proton internal funding: full scale stack and system prototyping and validation: 2014-2015

• First commercial systems 2016, sited in 2017

14

Catalyst Loading Reduction – FCTO, AMO

Page 14

3M NSTFCore shell catalystsSpray deposition - UConn

• Several methods show

promise for 10x reductions500 hours operation at

<0.1 mg/cm2 loading

Brookhaven

15

Electrode integration

3M NSTF

Core shell catalystsCathode GDL w/w/out MPL

• Need to consider impact of other cell components

• Many materials optimized for fuel cell vs. electrolyzer• Wetproofing, gas vs. liquid flow

• Manufacturing maturity needs to catch up for electrolysis• Fuel cell has demonstrated continuous processes vs. batch

Anode GDL concept, DLR

16

ARPA-E Experience

• Seeds new technology and provides pathway for reduction of high risk elements

• Rigorous program management and milestones

• Proton has successfully obtained non-ARPA-E follow on funding (including EERE-FCTO)

• Transitioning learnings to existing products along the way

• Currently involved in several programs, leading one

17

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Baseline Cathode FF

Anode FF + MEA

Labor Alkaline Baseline

Alkaline FF + MEA

Alkaline Labor

% B

asel

ine

Materials only

Materials and labor

Projected PEM progression

PEM

Projected PEM progression

PEM Alkaline

Electrolysis Example: AEM: A Long Term Option?

• Need new pathways to achieve ultimate capital cost reductions

• Anion exchange membrane provides potential lower cost Flow fields have as much or greater impact than catalyst

Less mature but gaining in understanding and stability

Potential to move to new cost curve

Capex vs. Opex scenario trade: H2@Scale

18

AEM technology status – DOE, ARPA-E

• Higher currents and more stable voltages

• Lower platinum group metal content

• Still require low differential pressure and carbonate for stability

2014

2016

2017

Performance/reliability has continued to improve

LANL, Sandia, Northeastern

IIT, Georgia Tech, Pajarito,

U. New Mexico, Penn

State, Northeastern

19

Synergistic Technologies

Grid or

Renewable

Power Input

Concept

Stack & System

Scale-up

Electrochemical Conversion of N2 to Ammonia

Carbon Dioxide Pumping/Compression/Conversion

High Pressure Oxygen and Hydrogen Generation

Flow Batteries

20

Hydrogen-Iron Flow Battery• Flow batteries: very similar to electrolyzers

• Hydrogen-based systems: common parts

• Hydrogen provides flexibility (electrical or chemical feedsource)

Flow battery

Electrolyzer

Energy

storage

H2 use

Common hydrogen

electrode

21

Other ARPA-E Program Roles

• Reversible hydrogen catalyst – no precious metals• Electrode development and benchmarking

• Anion exchange membranes (IONICS program)• Characterization of device relevant parameters

• Carbon dioxide conversion to fuels (REFUEL program)• Cell stack and system integration

• Distributed ammonia production (REFUEL program)• Gap analysis for renewable hydrogen component

Provide early material access to us and perspective to partners on critical considerations

22

Benefits of Advanced Technologies

• Pathway to “technology after next” concepts

• Solve fundamental problems

• Develop capabilities

• Ability to leverage learnings in existing products

Related Technologies

Fundamental Research

End Goal

Building Blocks

Tailored Materials

Characterization Tools

Mechanistic Understanding

Integration

Electrode Development

Cell DesignDevice

ConfigurationOperating Conditions

Systems, Codes and Standards

DFT and Synthesis

Catalyst Structure

Porous Layers

Polymer Design

CoatingsMulti-scaleModeling

23

Conclusions

• The road to product and scale is long• Scientific and engineering challenges in complex mixtures

• Understanding both fundamental and applied perspectives accelerates technical progress

• Long term research guides short term improvements while existing technology provides stepping stones and infrastructure for new technology

• Collaborations and synergies need to be cultivated

ARPA-E Funding to Advance

Hydrogen Technology

NEESC Webinar

September 19, 2017

Madhav AcharyaTechnology to Market Advisor

A Brief History of ARPA-E

In 2007, The National Academies recommended Congress establish an

Advanced Research Projects Agency within the U.S. Department of Energy

1

…“The new agency proposed herein [ARPA-E] is patterned after

that model [of DARPA] and would sponsor creative, out-of-the-box,

transformational, generic energy research in those areas where

industry by itself cannot or will not undertake such sponsorship,

where risks and potential payoffs are high, and where success

could provide dramatic benefits for the nation.”…

2007America COMPETES Act Signed

2011 2012 2013 20142010

1

37

712

1620

23

ProgramsTo Date

Awards Announced

2015

32

$275 Million

(FY2012)

$280 Million

(FY2015)

500+

2016

39

$400M

(Recovery Act)

$180M

(FY11)

$251M

(FY13)

$280M

(FY14)

$291M

(FY16)

2017

Coming

soon

$280M

(FY15)

$275M

(FY12)$306M

(FY17)

ARPA-E Mission

Mission: To overcome long-term and high-risk technological barriers in the

development of energy technologies

2

Means:

‣ Identify and promote revolutionary advances in fundamental and applied

sciences

‣ Translate scientific discoveries and cutting-edge inventions into technological

innovations

‣ Accelerate transformational technological advances in areas that industry by

itself is not likely to undertake because of technical and financial uncertainty

Where Do ARPA-E Programs Come From?

3

ARPA-E Program Directors

If it works…

will it matter?

CHARGES NODES

GENI

GRIDS

HEATS

IONICS GRID DATA

Breadth of Program Portfolio

4

ELECTRICITY

GENERATION

ALPHA

FOCUSREBELS

GENSETSMOSAIC

IMPACCT

SOLAR ADEPT

RANGE

AMPED BEESTELECTROFUELS

MOVE

REMOTE

PETRO

TERRATRANSNET

NEXTCAR REFUEL

GRID &

GRID STORAGE

TRANSPORTATION &

STORAGE

OPEN 2009, 2012, & 2015 Solicitations

Complement Focused Programs

Ac

tive

A

lum

ni

EFFICIENCY &

EMISSIONS

DELTA

SHIELD

METALS

MONITOR ARID

ROOTS

ADEPTBEETITREACT

PNDIODES

ENLITENED

SWITCHES

CIRCUITS

REFUEL Program: Genesis

5

Reduce GHG Emissions Integrate Renewable Energy

Can we store renewable energy in a

form that can also help reduce

transportation emissions?

Chemical Storage Has Several Advantages

• Very high energy

density (vs batteries)

• Long duration storage

(months years)

• Utilizes existing

infrastructure

• Flexibility in end use

6

Source: IEC Electrical Storage Whitepaper

Potential “Carbon Neutral” Liquid Fuels

Fuel B.p., deg C Wt. %

H

Energy

density,

kWh/L

E0, V , %

Synthetic gasoline 69-200 16.0 9.7 - -

Biodiesel 340-375 14.0 9.2 - -

Methanol 64.7 12.6 4.67 1.18 96.6

Dimethyl ether (DME) -24 13.1 5.36 1.21

Ethanol 78.4 12.0 6.30 1.15 97.0

Formic acid (88%) 100 3.4 2.10 1.45 105.6

Ammonia -33.3 17.8 4.32 1.17 88.7

Hydrazine hydrate 114 8.1 5.40 1.61 100.2

Liquid hydrogen -252.9 100 2.54 1.23 83.0

Compressed hydrogen (700 bar) gas 100 1.55 1.23 83.0

G.Soloveichik, Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2014, 5, 1399

7

How do we make these fuels?

8

N N H HO OO C O

Air: N2, O2, CO2 Water: H2, O2

N H

H

H C

H

H

H O H

x

C

H

H

H C

H

H

HO

AMMONIA

(M)ETHANOL DIMETHYL ETHER

REFUEL: Renewable energy storage and

delivery via carbon neutral liquid fuels

Direct use (blending) in

ICE vehicles (drop-in fuel)

Direct use in stationary

gensets

Medium to long term

energy storage

Seasonal energy storage

Air

Water

Hydrogen

generation for

fueling stations

Synthesis of liquid fuels Fuels transportation Application space

• Energy delivery from remote locations

• Energy delivery from stranded sources

• Energy storage and delivery combined

Energy storage comparison

30,000 gallon underground tank

contains 200 MWh (plus 600

MMBTU CHP heat

5 MWh A123 battery in Chile

1,000kg H2 Linde storage in Germany

=

40 x

or

Capital cost ~$100K

Capital cost $50,000 - 100,000K

10Liquid fuels provide smallest footprint and CAPEX

6 x

Energy transportation capacity and losses

5.5

3.5

1.5

0.7 0.1

OHVAC HVDC Truck Train Pipeline

Electricity Liquid ammonia

Energy transmission losses (% per 1000 km)

Energy transmission capacity

(at the same capital cost)

Power

line

Compr H2

(350 bar)Liquid

NH3

Capacity 1.2 GW 6.5GW 41GW

Protective

zone

50-70

m

10 m 10 m

D. Stolten (Institute of Electrochemical Process

Engineering), BASF Science Symposium, 2015

11

Liquid pipelines have highest capacity and efficiency

Overall energy efficiency (2,000 km)

12

Electricity Ammonia

55.3% 55.4%

38.1%

Electricity transportation is more efficient…if we can use it directly

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

20

40

60

80

100

Cost of energy storage and transportation

Case study

Solar PV array 500 MW

8 hrs active, storage capacity 50%

4 GWh electricity or 120,000 kg H2

or 860 ton NH3

Delivery from Utah to East Coast

(2000 miles)

Power line capital cost $16.2M/mile

DuraTrack™ PV array

13

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

1 2 3

Deliv

ery

co

st,

$/d

ay

Sto

rage

vo

lum

e, m

3

Storage volume and energy delivery cost(including storage)

Storage volume Daily delivery cost

Electricity Compr H2 Ammonia

Hydrogen fueling station cost breakdown

Hydrogen Station Compression, Storage,

and Dispensing Technical Status and Costs.

NREL report BK-6A10-58564, 2014Possibilities for cost reduction

Liquid fuels for H2 refueling

• Smaller storage CAPEX

and footprint

• Compressor downsizing

• Modular design for

increased reliability

Liquid fuels can enable H2 refueling stations

REFUEL Awardees

15

Chemtronergy

Total Funds Allocated: $ 33M

Summary‣ Liquid fuels are ideal candidates for long term energy storage and long

distance energy delivery from renewable intermittent sources

- high energy density

- infrastructure for storage and delivery technologies in place

- can be used in fuel cells and thermal engines

‣ Hydrogen rich liquid fuels may enable hydrogen fueling infrastructure

- inexpensive, compact and safe storage

- dehydrogenation methods known

‣ Technical (reaction rate, conversion efficiency, production down scaling),

economical (electricity and capital costs) and societal (policies and public

acceptance) challenges ahead

16

17

https://arpa-e.energy.gov

Contact: Madhav.Acharya@hq.doe.gov

Questions

Alexander Barton

Energy Specialist

NEESC

abarton@neesc.org

Dr. Katherine Ayers

Vice President, R&D

Proton Onsite

kayers@protononsite.com

NEESC is funded through a contract with the U.S. Small Business Administration

Dr. Madhav Acharya

Technology-to-Market Advisor

ARPA-E

Madhav.Acharya@hq.doe.gov