Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Team

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 7

									Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Team Transportation Fuels for the Future Initiative Western Governors Association May 3-4, 2007 Meeting Summary Attendees: Andy Abele Ray Hobbs Frank Novachek George Sverdrup John Turner

Matt Miyasato Hank Wedaa Tony Dean Ken Stroh Bob Babik1

WGA & Project Staff: Gayle Gordon Will Singleton

On the Phone and Partial Attendees: Christy Cooper John Brenner- WGA Fred Josick Alex Schroeder- WGA Alan Lloyd Heather Bergman- TKC Meeting Objectives:  Clarify the charge of the group, decision-making, and leadership with a clear plan for drafting the report over the coming two months;  Discuss short-term recommendations (that governors should pursue in the coming weeks)  Focus on barriers and recommendations as a way to establish the appropriate format for the paper. Agreements:  George Sverdrup was nominated and accepted as chair of the team;  The protocols were accepted as written and shall be used as a guideline for the team’s interactions and decision-making; Action Items: Who Whole Team NREL Section Leads What Send Gayle June recommendations Show fuel variability by region  Invite other team members to contribute as delineated below  Develop section plans  Coordinate with WGA and TKC to schedule calls When May 18 July 1—coordinate with Matt for first section. Process to be complete by July 1.

1

Bob Babik was attending on behalf of Alan Weverstad of GM

1



Write sections

Wind turbine production of H2 in the Farm Bill- George will put WGA in touch with Bob Noun at NREL The Charge of the Group: Gayle reported on the Advisory Committee meeting in April and helped to lay out the purpose of the paper. The initiative is derived from an interest among the governors to: 1). Reduce reliance on imported fuels; 2). Minimize negative environmental impacts, including carbon emissions; 3). Provide the western states with a full palette of energy options for transportation. The review of the outline shows the major emphasis of the papers. Because of the short timeline, many of the sections will need to build on reports that have already been done. The key emphasis will be on the recommendations to the governors. The major sections are: I. Description of the Alternative Fuel II. Potential Supply, Technology Progression and Markets in Western States III. Predicted Deployment/ Timeline IV. Barriers & Challenges V. Life-Cycle Environmental & Societal Impacts VI. Synergies with Other Fuels VII. Recommendations at the State, Regional, and Federal Levels VIII. Demonstration Projects A review of the protocols emphasized that the effort would need to be collaborative. A key value of the report will be the weight of the list of authors. The protocols that were accepted emphasized that decision-making by consensus means that broad agreement (but not absolute) should be reached. Participants should measure whether they can live with the ―big picture‖ rather than focusing on potential details that they don’t agree with. The timeline is to have a viable draft of each section by July 1 so that a draft can be posted on the web and sent to the Advisory Committee by July 15th. The Advisory Committee will have an opportunity to comment, but each team has the ability to determine the final contentof its own report. The Advisory Committee will seek to identify synergies and key recommendations that it will pass on in its report to the governors. Operational Highlights: The team discussed some of the logistics of how it would operate. Importantly, the team determined that it should have a chair and selected George Sverdrup. Operational details follow, including roles, timeline and paper length: Team: Team members are responsible for drafting the report through their own original work and through identifying existing work that can be included in the report. Team members will be identified as authors on the final report. Chair: Will help represent the views of the team in drafting agendas and the broader program. Will oversee the engagement of team members in drafting the report. Will represent the team to the Advisory Committee as appropriate.

2

WGA: To assist as the convener with advice on how to maximize the effectiveness of the report in the context of Western Governors and the larger initiative. WGA named the teams and is also responsible for the logistical needs of the team as appropriate. TKC: Will draft agendas, summaries and assist in the final formatting/ editing of the report. TKC will facilitate meetings and conference calls as needed and help to address disagreement if necessary. Timeline: July 1, draft sections complete July 15th- Draft for public/ Ad Com Sep/August- Revision/ finalize October- Workshop

Organization of the Paper: Length 25 pages5 for benefits 5 for challenges 7-8 for recommendations 2 for others Paper Production: The team reviewed the main sections of the paper and volunteered to help compile the sections. Section leads are in bold. Those not present are in italics. They were identified as potential contributors based on their expertise. Who Matt & Analisa, Craig Scott, Andy Date of Draft July 1 Key Sources Drivers, How H2 Applies, what is available now? Barriers

Benefits

Challenges

Recommendations OtherAdvisory Committee Questions, Sections on state of play, Reference

Dan Rabun, Frank July 1 with help from Rolf, Christy Cooper, Craig Scott, Ray Andy and Team, July 1 Craig Scott John, Ken and Ray July 1

EEE for States (what’s EEE?)

3

Discussion: Broad Issues: The team articulated some formative questions and issues that will have an impact on the underlying approach of the report and its recommendations. Some of the questions were not answered but will drive thinking as the process moves forward. The major issues were:  Pure H2 vs. Syn Fuels and the incumbent assumptions about infrastructure;  Focus on producing hydrogen?  How far out should recommendations go if a hydrogen program will take thirty years?  Should the paper cover both internal combustion vehicles and fuel cells?  How should the challenge of changing both the type of vehicular technology and the fuel be addressed?  What is the vision for an infrastructure?  Is the goal to end up with fuel cell vehicles?  Should the report highlight the potential of hydrogen-hybrid vehicles?  Eflex = diversity? Special Western Conditions: The differentiating quality of the paper for this initiative as opposed to papers in the other reports that have been done is that it will need to consider what special aspects of the western states should be considered as deployment and use of H2 is being pursued by the states and the federal government. Some of the special qualities of the West include:  Highly populated coast that already has a relatively developed policy framework for passenger vehicle dissemination for hydrogen/FC;  Air quality is the policy driver for California but also a driver for many other states’ major metropolitan areas;  More sparsely populated states that may be more interested in how their energy infrastructure can link with hydrogen fuels than establishing an infrastructure for its retail use;  States with some major metropolitan areas that present opportunities to couple with California as it makes purchases and plans infrastructure development;  Many states may be ready for fleets and buses even if there is not enough population density for a retail infrastructure. Benefits and Deployment: Describing the process of deployment is a task for each team. The Department of Energy was asked to give a presentation of its approach to deployment. DOE presented three scenarios that represented varying burden for industry, states and the government to establish infrastructure over the next 25 years. Team members were aware of the DOE approach and used it as the basis for the following discussion.   The team should look to catalogue what is on-going (demonstrations and other programs) and seek out opportunities for governors to help as well as for states to work collaboratively; The potential of hydrogen to improve hydrocarbon fuels should be emphasized. When adding hydrogen which is produced from renewable sources, hydrocarbon fuel supplies can be extended and their climate/environmental impacts can be reduced. It may present a cleaner path to coal based liquid fuels. H2 +Coal = SNGN.

4

   

Hydrogen also has the benefit of creating a single, transparent fuel out of a wide range of carbon-based fuels, making them all transparent to the end user and those that manufacture vehicles; Hydrogen deployment can and should reflect the variability of alternative fuel supplied throughout to region and utilize the most advantageous method available. For full deployment of a hydrogen infrastructure, policy makers are going to need to have the goal of establishing a carbon free energy economy. In vehicles- ICE hydrogen engines can be an important way of addressing CAFÉ, emissions.

Discussing the special aspects of deploying throughout the western states led the group to conclude that the paper may want to approach deployment in three ways: 1. California and Highly Populated West Coast: Continue to pursue hydrogen fueled passenger vehicles (FC and ICE). Western states can help with supplying the coasts with a standard transparent fuel. 2. Other states with major Metro Areas: Deploy fleets for government, transit and other utilizations (airports, military bases). 3. Region-Wide: Pursue the role that hydrogen will play in making fuels, as feedstock.—to make fuels more transparent and vary by region. Match up where you can produce it. NREL to supply Drivers: As part of an effort to identify the major issues to be discussed in the first sections of the paper, the team was asked what the policy benefits or drivers were for building a hydrogen infrastructure. The following major points were discussed:  Uncertainty of fuel supplies & energy security through a broad portfolio  Air quality  Transportation drives GDP/ Economic well-being  Lowering climate impact of transportation sector/GHG Global warming  For states acting on their own, lack of national leadership drives action at the state level  The need to keep options open and achieve progress for all major fuel sources  Leadership in this technology means jobs- hydrogen will create high paying jobs and be transformative for the economy Barriers & Challenges: Partly to identify the major challenges to be discussed in the report but also as a preface for potential recommendations, the team discussed the major challenges to the adoption of hydrogen in its range of uses. The team also heard from the Minnesota experience. A major policy study was conducted for hydrogen deployment in Minnesota, since the study and its recommendations, relatively little progress has been made. Major points of the discussion follow:  Low density prevents investment sufficient infrastructure investment for retail level passenger vehicle use- what does that mean for small states?  Even though policy makers are enthusiastic about the potential of hydrogen, they remain largely uninformed of the necessary facts/issues to draft relevant policies. Term limits limit understanding among law makers  It is unclear who has responsibility to lead: the states, like California, or the federal government. This leads to inconsistent policies and few champions at the state level. National even international cooperation is necessary to provide vehicles. 5

           

The states must play a key role in creating infrastructure but knowledge and resources are low. Private sector involvement and potential is limited ―silo‖ effect. Manufacturers’ desires to produce hydrogen vehicles vary. Auto makers focus on CA, NY & government. There is noise in the policy environment. The myriad choices of future transportation fuels confuse consumers and policy makers. Private sector is unwilling to look at disruptive technologies over their current investment. The chicken and egg infrastructure problem, which should come first, the cars or the infrastructure? How do you invest in one without the other? Deriving pure and acceptable hydrogen from different fuels. Making the switch from predominantly fleet use to consumers at the retail level is a difficult transition. Natural gas is a good case study. Passenger vehicles may be hardest application to pull off. Varying codes and standards make deployment across local, state boundaries difficult. Requires large amounts of money. Requires consistent long-term policies and implementation by government. Siting is difficult because of lack of understanding and inconsistent standards. Lack of understanding also leads to costly risk mitigation.

Recommendations: Based on the barriers, recommendations were suggested for inclusion in the paper. Some recommendations will end up being more relevant for this initiative than others. A filter for recommendations can be: what is actionable by a governor or group of governors? The first group is potential recommendations that might be advanced before the report is complete. Recommendations for June 2007 Education & demonstrations Desirable changes in EPAct DOE 2009 budget inclusion to grow and maintain a robust program Maintain robust demonstration in CA- DOE 2009 budget/ CA Wind turbine production of H2 in the Farm Bill Recommendations for the Report  Accelerate adoption of national standards  Provide double renewable energy credits for hydrogen produced by renewable sources  Don’t defer H2 investments/ incentives  Educate legislators  Implement additional demonstration projects – EPAct, military bases, metro corridors, and national parks. Demonstrations should also be oriented towards education of local services (such as fire and emergency preparedness).  Pursue an east-west national infrastructure corridor as north-south corridors are being pursued.  Help accelerate siting of electric transmission  Develop state legislation that creates a plan and assigns responsibility to a specific agency. Link those state plans to a regional approach (ie. CA to WA)  Train fire marshals with respect to hydrogen

6

     

Foster interstate cooperation to lower per unit costs in purchasing of fleets by pooling resources for bigger buys. Additionally create a regional insurance pool Define hydrogen as a transportation fuel not a hazardous chemical Make fleet stations accessible and attractive for consumers to use Invest outside main stream: small producers who produce hybrid H2-ICE vehicles Develop modular packages that can be used in broad infrastructure conditions Educate- develop university programs that will develop a skilled hydrogen work force

FLIP CHART Model for the West? Fuel Cells & Pas Veh CA & Others  Ultimate clean machine  AQ  Aggressive infrastructure development  Already employed and can be used more High efficiency, CAFÉ and Present technology Cleans fuels alleviate supply issues States with Cities States with Energy Where H2 is available- KEN? can work better than DOE thinks, AQ

Fleet / Fuel Cell ICE ICE w/ blends

Great way to build infrastructure and address AQ ----------------------------

Clean H2 for vehicles Ray

---------------------------

Can be applied in may towns & cities. H2 can be supplied Can supply in many existing facilities with broad range of fuels Stretches reserves

7


								
To top