Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Hydrogen as energy carrier: Techno-economic assessment of

decentralized hydrogen production in Germany
Ramchandra Bhandari*, Ronak Rakesh Shah
€ln (University of Applied Sciences), Betzdorfer Strasse 2, 50679
Institute for Technology and Resources Management in the Tropics and Subtropics, TH Ko
Cologne, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Political and scientific discussions on changing German energy supply mix and challenges of such energy
Received 11 November 2020 transition are already well established. At the supply level, energy storage seems to be the biggest
Received in revised form challenge ahead for such transition. Hydrogen could be one of the solutions for future energy transition if
22 May 2021
it is produced using renewable energy resources. In order to analyze the future role of hydrogen, its
Accepted 26 May 2021
Available online 8 June 2021
economic performance analysis is inevitable. This has been done in this research for a case study site in
Cologne.
The potential of hydrogen production with the use of solar electricity powered electrolyzers (alkaline
Keywords:
Surplus electricity
and proton exchange membrane (PEM)) has been analyzed. Both grid connected and off grid modes of
Solar photovoltaics solar hydrogen production are considered. Economic performance results are presented for six scenarios.
Electrolysis Hydrogen produced with the grid connected solar photovoltaics system coupled with alkaline electro-
Off grid hydrogen production lyzers was found the cheapest, with the levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH) at 6.23 V/kg. These costs are
Renewable energy comparable with the current hydrogen price at commercial refueling station in Cologne. On the other
hand, the LCOH of off grid systems with both alkaline and PEM electrolyzers is expensive as expected, the
most expensive LCOH among six scenarios reached to 57.61 V/kg.
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction environmental sustainability, together known as the energy tri-

lemma [5]. Balancing all these factors is essential to achieve energy
There are a number of scientific and political discussions on sustainability, because success in any one of them comes at the
changing the global energy supply landscape. Policies and action expense of the other.
plans are implemented to achieve energy sustainability, but the Deploying renewable sources of energy at a large scale for po-
hard fact is that we still rely more on carbon intensive sources to wer generation is the first step towards decarbonization. Falling
meet our energy needs [1]. As mentioned in Ref. [2] by Østergaard costs of renewable energy technologies have increased their share
et al. the penetration level of renewable energy sources in the in the electricity mix in some countries [6,7]. However, the tran-
electricity sector has increased in several countries but the pene- sient nature of some renewables (solar and wind) puts questions to
tration in other sectors like transport is only at an entry stage [1]. their reliability because of the associated intermittency [8]. The
The global energy demand is expected to increase by 1.3% each year incompatibility between the supply and demand characteristics
until 2040, so the path taken further is more critical amid growing limits the share of renewables and calls for proper energy man-
concerns for global warming and related environmental issues agement [9]. As the share of variable renewable energy sources
[2,3]. Decarbonization is the only thinkable solution to keep global increases, balancing of the power supply system becomes difficult,
warming below 2
C and limit it to 1.5
C as the effects of climate resulting in increasing rate of curtailment [3,10,11]. The only
change are perceptible [4]. Efforts are underway to accelerate the possible way out is the storage of surplus renewable energy to
energy transition, but the success of such transition process is match demand and supply in real time.
dependent on three factors e energy security, energy equity and Energy storage is required to unleash the power of renewables.
An electrical energy storage system takes in electrical energy as
input and releases it later when required, thus completing the
* Corresponding author. “power-to-power” conversion cycle [12]. It fills the gap between
E-mail address: [email protected] (R. Bhandari).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.05.149
0960-1481/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
).
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

the fluctuations on generation side and the reliability required on “sector coupling”, thus mitigating carbon emissions [23].
the demand side. Apart from bridging the gap between demand In [21], Dui
c et al. concluded that hydrogen as an “energy vec-
and supply, energy storage also helps in load levelling and peak tor” can technically power small islands and can also increase the
shaving, frequency regulation, damping energy oscillations and penetration levels of intermittent renewable sources. In Ref. [24],
improving power quality and reliability [13]. Today, a number of Martín-García et al. analyzed if a combination of solar photovoltaics
technologies are available to store energy. These technologies can (PV) and hydrogen based system is able to provide the energy
be classified either based on the form of energy stored or based on needs like electricity, heating, cooling and hot water for a dwelling
the discharge duration [14]. Based on the form of energy stored, the house. They chose hydrogen instead of the batteries to store the
technologies can be categorized into mechanical (pumped hydro, variable renewables and designed and simulated the system
compressed air), electrochemical (flow batteries and secondary concluding that an energy vector like hydrogen between the source
batteries), chemical (hydrogen), electrical (super capacitor) and and the point of final consumption is essential. In Ref. [25] Old-
thermal (sensible heat) energy storage [12e14]. Based on the enbroek et al. analyzed if fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) based on
discharge duration, the technologies can be divided into either hydrogen can balance 100% renewable electric, heating, cooling and
short term response (seconds to minutes), medium term response transport system in Germany, Spain, Denmark, France and Great
(minutes to hours) and long term response (hours to days or Britain. They concluded that FCEV can power the complete
months) energy storage technologies. renewable system and demonstrated that hydrogen is a reliable
For the most off grid renewable energy projects, the preferred solution for sector coupling. In Ref. [26], Ehret et al. concluded that
electrical energy storage option today is using rechargeable batte- hydrogen can be produced competitively from wind energy and it
ries [15]. Since 2016, lithium-ion batteries dominate the energy can used as a fuel in the transport sector and as a storage medium to
storage battery market [16]. Batteries offer a number of advantages integrate renewables, thereby supporting the German energy
like quick response time, high efficiency, low self-discharging and transition. Thus hydrogen can play a substantial part in the energy
easy upscaling [17]. Battery energy storage can reduce the inter- transition process and decarbonization of all sectors. Because of the
mittency and thus help make the ancillary services more reliable flexibility and the versatility of hydrogen to be used across a
[18]. However lithium-ion batteries are still expensive to be number of energy sectors, it is an energy vector and it can be
deployed at a large scale [16]. Besides this, using a single storage considered as the “energy carrier” of future.
medium like a battery leads to oversizing of either generation or Hydrogen finds application across number of sectors. Global
storage capacity [15]. As the renewable sources become increas- demand for hydrogen in its pure form was 70 Million tons as of
ingly decentralized, today's accepted energy storage solution 2018 [27]. The major applications are in material and non-energy
(mainly battery) would be unable to meet the flexibility required to forms [28]. Material applications refer to the use of hydrogen to
support renewables [19]. In Ref. [20], Marczinkowski and produce, process or refine intermediates or end products. It is the
Østergaard evaluated two storage solutions, battery energy storage most important feed stock for chemical industry. Around 55% of
(BES) and thermal energy storage (TES) for two islands in Denmark. hydrogen produced is used for production of ammonia and other
They concluded that BES is limited to the electricity sector, but TES fertilizers. Around 25e30% is used in the refining industry, espe-
is useful to decarbonize heating sector and further provides pos- cially for hydrocracking and desulphurization of fuels
sibilities in the transport sector. [22,23,28],29]. Apart from this, hydrogen also finds its use in iron
The application of a particular energy storage option is depen- and steel, food, glass and semiconductor industries [22,23]. Energy
dent on its characteristics. The important characteristics that help applications refer to the use of energy contained in hydrogen. This
differentiate a particular technology are energy and power density, energy can be used either in heat engines or in fuel cells [28].
storage capacity and duration, power rating, discharge time and Germany is currently in the progress of “revolution” for its en-
self-discharge, round-trip efficiency, technology maturity, capital ergy supply. The achievement goals of an energy transition, so-
cost, response time and environmental impact [14]. When called “Energiewende”, result in a major change of the electricity
considering those parameters, hydrogen appears to be the perfect system in the country [30]. It implies a significant increase of the
fit. It has high power density, can be stored for days to months, and renewable energy share in the electricity consumption as well as
has negligible environmental impacts when produced using the complete withdrawal from nuclear power until 2022 and coal
renewable energy. Although such green technology is in its nascent power until 2038. Additionally, the overall electricity consumption
stage, it has significant potential for market competitiveness. And should be reduced by implementing energy efficiency measures
most importantly, because of the versatility and lower environ- [31]. Several targets have been set in the energy concept published
mental impacts, hydrogen can be used to decarbonize hard to abate by the German Government in 2010. These targets imply the in-
sectors like heat and transport. Focus now should be to find the crease of renewable energy share of the gross electricity con-
production routes that is cost effective and able to provide long sumption up to 65% until 2030 and 80% by 2050 [32]. Furthermore,
term storage solution (including seasonal storage) across a number reduction goals regarding the electricity consumption are defined
of sectors. and imply the decrease of the gross electricity consumption by 25%
Hydrogen has received greater attention recently as an energy by 2050 [32].
storage option. Hydrogen, as an energy vector, allows energy to be However, the expansion of renewable energy sources faces
carried and converted to the suitable form when required. It is fundamental challenges. The energy produced from these re-
possible to store and transfer it in a large quantity [21]. The excess sources varies with specified ambient conditions such as the irra-
energy produced by renewable sources of energy like solar and diation for solar energy or wind speed for wind energy. The
wind can be effectively stored in the form of hydrogen via elec- dependency of solar and wind on weather conditions lead to fluc-
trolysis of water, the concept also called “power-to-x” [4]. Storing tuation in the electricity production [33]. As forecasting the
energy for long periods (seasonal storage) is possible with renewable electricity generation is challenging, the expansion of
hydrogen along with transport over long distances [22]. Apart from these sources up to 80% might lead to both surplus and deficit
this, decarbonization and electrification of energy sectors like heat, situations in the grid, including high seasonal variations.
transport and industry are possible using hydrogen. Hydrogen is As the penetration shares of wind and solar increase in the
the link between power consuming sectors (heat, industry and electricity mix, the intermittency problem becomes more persis-
transport) and power producing sectors, the concept also called tent. So the expansion of renewable energy in the grid correlates
916
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

with the increasing need for flexibility measures and a significant 2. Current hydrogen production practices
amount of backup capacities [34]. One flexibility option is the use of
storage technologies. It is distinguished between short-term and Hydrogen, the first element of the periodic table is the most
long-term storage systems; exemplary battery storage and abundant element on earth. Hydrogen is a colorless, odorless and
hydrogen storage systems. Long-term storage systems are charac- flammable gas consisting of one proton and electron each [43].
terized by the ability to compensate fluctuations from electricity Hydrogen always exists in a combined state and is found mainly in
generation for a time frame from days to years [35]. It could be even water and organic compounds [43]. It has to be extracted from
applied for seasonal balancing. In contrast to short-term storage other compounds to get it in its pure form [28]. Hydrogen has an
systems, long-term storage systems are characterized by a high energy density of 140 MJ/kg, which is much higher than the
storage volume but low cycle efficiency. With their low energy existing common fossil fuels [3]. It has the highest mass specific
related storage cost, long-term storage systems are cheaper to use energy content and the lowest volume specific energy content [44].
at high storage capacities [36]. For the utilization of seasonal stor- Due to low ignition temperature, considerable risk is involved with
age systems, a high energy-to-power ratio is necessary, as the the use of hydrogen [43]. The product of the combustion process of
system is dimensioned to store electricity for several months [37]. A hydrogen is water. Hydrogen can be produced by water electrolysis
promising example for long-term storage systems is the chemical and it can be subjected to re-electrification using a fuel cell.
storage in form of hydrogen [35]. As found in literature, the hydrogen production methods are
There are number of ways to store hydrogen. The most common classified according to the material source and the primary energy.
method to store hydrogen is by compressing it into high pressure Nikolaidis and Poullikkas did a review of the hydrogen production
gas cylinders [38]. Compressing hydrogen requires more energy processes and classified the methods based on the material sources
because of the lower relative density. Another way to store as shown in Fig. 1 [45].
hydrogen is by liquefying it at 253
C. However, this process is also Dincer and Acar reviewed the hydrogen production practices
energy intensive and up to 40% of the energy is lost in this process and classified the hydrogen production methods based on the
[39]. Hydrogen can also be stored in metal hydrides. Metal hydrides primary energy as shown in Table 1 [46]. In their study they eval-
can absorb hydrogen and desorb it while heating the tank. They uated the environmental, financial, social and technical perfor-
possess hydrogen storing capacity of 5e7%wt [40]. Another way to mance of the hydrogen production methods. The assessment was
store and transport hydrogen is by using the liquid organic done using six criteria: global warming potential (GWP), acidifi-
hydrogen carrier (LOHC). In this process, hydrogen is absorbed and cation potential (AP), social cost of carbon (SCC), production cost,
later released by an organic compound. The process in which the energy efficiency and exergy efficiency. They conclude that fossil
organic compound absorbs hydrogen at high pressure and tem- fuel reforming has the highest energy efficiency and lowest cost of
perature is called hydrogenation and the process to recover production. GWP and AP of photonic based hydrogen production
hydrogen back from the LOHC is called de-hydrogenation [39,40]. methods is zero as a result of which they have very low SCC. They
There are two possible ways to store hydrogen as large-scale stor- also highlighted the importance of the technical advancement of
age system: either in certain hydrogen storage tanks or in the the hydrogen production methods as it directly affects the energy
existent natural gas infrastructure. The storage in hydrogen could efficiency and the cost of production.
also take place in caverns, such as aquifers, salt rocks or old mines. Dawood et al. analyzed the hydrogen production pathways and
Germany has a cavern storage volume of more than 9 billion m3, concluded that the selection of hydrogen production pathway de-
which amounts to a possible storage capacity of 1763 TWh [41]. pends on three things: material that contains hydrogen, energy
Today, the challenge of mixing hydrogen in the gas infrastructure is source and catalyst material [43]. They identified that technologies
the limited possible share of hydrogen to 5% by its volume [41]. like anion exchange membrane, photocatalytic generation, dark
There is also the possibility to combine power and natural gas fermentation followed by photo-fermentation and plasma arc
network by converting hydrogen into methane through reaction decomposition have the potential to drive down the cost and
with CO2 [42]. improve the hydrogen production efficiency. Veras et al. reported
In order to assess the future role that hydrogen could play as an the existing technological routes for hydrogen production in
energy storage medium and as an energy vector at a given location, different countries and reported that 48% of the hydrogen is pro-
country or region, first its production volume and cost should be duced using steam methane reformation and 96% of the hydrogen
quantified. Thus, the objective of this study is to assess the hydrogen on the global scale is generated using fossil fuels [47]. Safari and
production potential using a decentralized approach for a reference Dincer gave an overview of the hydrogen production methods in
site in Germany using solar PV and electrolyzers under different Ref. [48]. They classified the methods based on the material source,
scenarios. The system sizing for different scenarios is derived and the type of primary energy and production capacity. The production
hydrogen production amount is obtained. Following this, the lev- capacity was classified as small scale (more than 50 t/day), medium
elized cost of hydrogen (LCOH) for the respective scenario is calcu- scale (more than 100 t/day) and large scale (more than 500 t/day).
lated. The study aims to contribute in the analysis of an appropriate Steam methane reforming, coal gasification, high temperature
long-term storage solution (i.e. hydrogen) to balance the fluctuating electrolysis and thermolysis were grouped into large scale pro-
electricity generation due to increasing renewable energy share in duction. It was interesting to note that they classified wind elec-
the future German energy market. trolysis into medium scale and grid electrolysis into small scale
The paper is organized into 5 sections. This introduction section production system. Their work reiterates the fact that although
is followed by current hydrogen production practices. Here, the steam methane reforming is the predominant hydrogen production
hydrogen production methods with special attention to hydrogen method with least cost of production and high GWP, it is important
production techniques based on electrolysis of water are discussed. to produce hydrogen with minimum GWP and environmental im-
The next one is the materials and method section, where the pacts. The emerging low emission techniques like wind based
methodology and framework used in the analysis are explained. electrolysis, photonic water splitting, nuclear and solar based
The findings of the analysis are summarized in results section. This thermochemical water splitting cycles will be the most important
is followed by first discussions and then conclusions section. hydrogen production systems in the long term. Hydrogen produc-
tion today is largely based on the use of fossil fuels as the feedstock.
Steam methane reformation (SMR) is the widely used technology
917
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

Fig. 1. Hydrogen production methods based on material source [45].

Table 1
Hydrogen production methods based on primary energy [46].

Primary Energy Process

Electrical Electrolysis
Plasma Arc Decomposition
Thermal Thermolysis
Thermochemical water splitting
Biomass Conversion
Biomass Gassification
Biofuel Reforming
Photonic PV Electrolysis
Photo catalysis
Photo electrochemical method
Biochemical Dark fermentation
Hybrid (electrical þ thermal, photonic þ biochemical and electrical þ photonic) High temperature electrolysis
Hybrid thermochemical cycles
Bio photolysis
Photofermentation
Artificial photosynthesis
Photoelectrolysis
Coal Gasification
Fossil Fuel Reforming

globally. Coal gasification to produce hydrogen is predominantly 10.45% and 10.2% respectively. Wang et al. review different renew-
used in China. Hydrogen is also produced by electrolysis of water, able energy based hydrogen production methods [51]. They dis-
however the share of this technology is only 4% in the global cussed hydrogen production using wind, solar and nuclear energy.
hydrogen supply [22]. Hydrogen can be classified as either grey, Hydrogen production based on biomass is also discussed. Further
blue, turquoise or green, depending upon the method used to they also discuss the economics and the environmental effects of
produce it. Hydrogen produced from fossil fuels, using either SMR hydrogen production using different renewable sources. They
or coal gasification with considerable CO2 emissions is considered conclude that although renewable energy based hydrogen is clean,
as grey hydrogen. Grey hydrogen coupled with carbon capture and the high cost of production is the limiting factor for its large scale
storage (CCS) is blue hydrogen. Hydrogen produced using pyrolysis adoption. Hydrogen production based on biomass is superior to the
with natural gas as feedstock and no CO2 emissions is turquoise other renewable energy based hydrogen production methods in
hydrogen. Hydrogen produced from renewable sources of energy, terms of cost and environmental friendliness. In Ref. [52] Kakoulaki
especially using a combination of renewable electricity and water et al. determine to what level the existing carbon intensive hydrogen
electrolysis, is considered as green hydrogen [49]. production in Europe can be replaced by water electrolysis powered
There are number of ways in which green hydrogen can be pro- by different renewables like solar PV, wind and hydro power. They
duced using renewable sources of energy. Ishaq and Dincer devel- firstly calculate the renewable energy potential for different sources
oped models of renewable energy based hydrogen productions taking into consideration all the limiting factors. They then calculate
system. The different renewable energy sources considered were the hydrogen potential and determine the production capacity that
solar PV, geothermal and biomass gasification [50]. They also can be replaced with water electrolysis. They conclude that in order
analyzed the above systems using energy and exergy approach. The to switch EU's current hydrogen production of 9.75 Mt to electrol-
electrolyzer used in the study for solar PV and geothermal energy ysis, 290 TWh of electricity would be required. The renewable po-
was PEM. They conclude that the energy and exergy efficiency of tential from wind, solar and hydro is sufficient to not only cover the
solar PV based hydrogen production system was 16.95% and 17.45% current electricity demand but can also cater to the additional
respectively. For biomass gasification based hydrogen production the electricity demand for electrolytic hydrogen.
energy and exergy efficiencies are 53.6% and 49.8% respectively and Razi and Dincer comprehensively reviewed the technical routes
for geothermal based system the energy and exergy efficiencies are of solar hydrogen production [53]. The objective of the study was to

918
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

evaluate and assess different techniques of solar hydrogen pro- copper e chlorine plant. They concluded that 5.5 MWp geothermal
duction using two criteria: Environmental impact and cost of pro- and 12.97 MWt solar system can produce 296.9 tons of hydrogen
duction, energy and exergy efficiency. They classified the methods $2.84/kg [56]. The energy and exergy efficiencies were found to be
based on the type of solar energy used to generate the hydrogen. 27.4% and 17.3% respectively [56]. In Ref. [57] Sui et al. proposed a
The categories are as follows: thermal energy based methods, new hybrid concept of hydrogen production based on thermo-
electrical energy based methods, photonic energy based methods chemical and electrochemical routes using the full spectrum of
and hybrid methods which uses the combination of the previously solar energy. They argued that if in the methane steam reforming, if
mentioned methods [53]. The different methods based on the the concentrated sunlight is used to provide the thermal energy,
categories are summarized in Table 2. The thermal energy based the CO2 emissions related to the thermal energy can be bypassed.
methods are used to drive the heat based process without depleting The limitation of solar based water electrolysis is that the solar e to
the fossil fuels and creating CO2 emissions. Solar energy is con- e hydrogen efficiency is only 30% and there is more room for
verted into electricity which is then used for electrolysis. In pho- improvement [57]. In order to fully utilize the solar spectrum, they
tonic based options, the photo-effect of the sun is used to drive the proposed a system in which solar spectral splitting is used to assign
light dependent hydrogen production methods. The conclude that sunlight with wavelength suitable for PV conversion to PV system
photonic energy based methods and thermochemical CueCl and and the remaining to the thermal part of the integrated system.
Se I water splitting cycles have the least environmental impact They conclude that the solar e to e hydrogen efficiency of the
(GWP range 0.4e2 kg CO2/kg H2 and AP range 0.8e2.5 kg SO2/kg proposed hybrid system is 54.6%. Wang et al. reviewed and
H2) and Coal gasification is the most cost effective [53]. High compared different solar e to e hydrogen technologies like ther-
thermal energy consuming processes are energy and exergy effi- mochemical water splitting, water electrolysis, and photo-
cient but not sustainable environmentally as compared to photonic electrochemical and photochemical methods [58]. They
and biochemical based processes. Ngoh and Njomo also reviewed concluded that water electrolysis powered by solar energy is
the hydrogen production methods from solar energy [54]. Their mature than other technologies. They reported that the solar-to-
main conclusions were that the solar to electricity efficiency needs hydrogen efficiency of water electrolysis is below 30% and an
to be improved in order to improve the overall hydrogen produc- improvement in the efficiency depends on the improvement in the
tion efficiency. Solar powered electrolysis, photoelectrochemical solar-to-electricity efficiency which is limited to 20% at most [58].
and photochemical routes of hydrogen production are ideal to be The solar-to-hydrogen efficiency of photo-electrochemical and
used for hydrogen fueling stations as they involve lesser number of photochemical system is below 16% and 10% respectively [58]. Falco
steps in the process. et al. modelled the steam methane reforming using molten salts as
Badea et al. did the technical analysis of hydrogen production heat transfer fluid and validated the results with available experi-
using solar energy in Romania [55]. The paper undertook a case mental data [59]. They investigated the effects of process param-
study on hydrogen production using water electrolysis with energy eters like steam-to-carbon ratio, molten salt inlet temperature and
provided by solar under different scenarios. They concluded that sweep gas flow rate on plant performance. Their model had an
maximum solar energy can be converted to chemical energy in the absolute error of less than 2%.
form of hydrogen if the entire process chain used a combination of Table 3 shows the currently deployed common methods to
electrical and thermal energy in the form of steam to produce produce hydrogen.
hydrogen. In Ref. [56] Temiz and Dincer thermodynamically
analyzed a concentrated solar and geothermal based system to
produce hydrogen, space heating, electricity and fresh water. The 2.1. Hydrogen production via electrolysis of water
system considered for hydrogen production was a thermochemical
Hydrogen is produced by the electrolysis of water since 19th
century. However, today the share of hydrogen produced by elec-
Table 2 trolysis of water on global scale is limited. If the electricity is
Different methods of solar hydrogen production based on the type of solar generated by renewable sources, then hydrogen can be produced
energy used [53]. with almost zero carbon emissions (during electrolyzer operational
Solar Energy route Technology phase). Hence hydrogen production using electrolysis of water is
set to play a pivotal role in the energy transition process. There are
Thermal energy Solar only
Water thermolysis
different technologies for the electrolysis of water: alkaline, proton
Thermochemical cycles exchange membrane (PEM) and solid oxide electrolysis (SOE).
H2S splitting
Hybrid with fossil fuels
Reforming (with CO2 sequestration)
2.1.1. Alkaline electrolysis
Gasification (with CO2 sequestration)
Cracking (with C sequestration) It is a mature technology and electrolyzers are commercially
Electrical energy PV - Electrolysis available in MW scales [68]. It was developed to operate at a con-
Photonic Energy Photocatalysis stant load mainly for industrial application [22]. The process takes
Photo-electrochemical place at 60
Ce80
C with KOH or NaOH as the electrolyte. The
Hybrid Electrical þ thermal
Steam/high temp electrolysis
electrodes are made up of nickel and are separated by a diaphragm
Hybrid thermochemical water splitting cycles [3,62,68]. This technology is readily available and has lower capital
Solar thermal power generation & electrolysis cost and longer durability [69]. The alkaline electrolyzers operate at
Electrical þ photonic energy a current density of 0.2e0.4 A/cm2 [3,68]. The power consumption
Photoelectrolysis
is about 4.5e5.5 kWh/Nm3 of hydrogen produced [3]. The efficiency
Biochemical þ thermal
Thermophilic digestion of such process lies at 50%e60% and the purity of hydrogen pro-
Biochemical þ photonic duced is at 99.5e99.9% [3,62,63]. The major challenges of this
Artificial photosynthesis process are its poor part load efficiency and slower response time,
Photofermentation so that this technology is not easily able to adapt to the fluctuations
Biophotolysis
of renewables [3,68].
919
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

Table 3
Different methods of hydrogen production [1,27,28,45,60e67].

Method Source Principle Advantage Disadvantage Maturity Efficiency

Steam Methane Fossil Two step endothermic High efficiency and low High CO2 production - Commercial 74e85%
Reformation (SMR) reaction between operation cost 7.05 kg CO2/kg H2
hydrocarbon (methane, Higher quality H2
natural gas, naphtha) (99.99% pure) is
and steam in presence obtained
of catalyst to yield H2
and carbon oxides
Partial Oxidation (POX) Fossil Conversion of No catalyst required Capital intensive Commercial 60e75%
hydrocarbon to H2 by Wider range of process
partial oxidation in an hydrocarbons can be High processing
exothermic reaction used temperature
Auto-thermal Fossil Combination of SMR No dependence on Requires air or oxygen Near term 60e75%
Reforming and POX where POX external source of heat
provides the heat and
SMR increases the H2
yield
Hydrocarbon Pyrolysis Fossil Hydrogen production No need of water or High chance of fouling Commercial _
by the thermal oxygen by carbon formed
decomposition of the Significant emissions
hydrocarbon itself reduction
Any hydrocarbon can
be used
Coal Gasification Fossil Series of Synthesis gas obtained High CO2 emission - Commercial _
thermochemical could be used to power 19 kg CO2/kg H2
reactions taking place a combined cycle
at high temperatures power plant allowing
between coal and H2 and electricity
gasification agent like production
oxygen, steam, air simultaneously
Plasma Reforming Fossil Same as conventional High conversion Dependence on Long term Close to 100%
reforming, but energy efficiency, fast response electricity and
and free radicals used time, low cost and problems arising due to
for the reforming operation with broad high pressure
reaction are provided fuel range
by a plasma typically
generated with
electricity or heat
Electrolysis Electricity from When a direct current is No greenhouse gas Higher energy demand Commercial 50e70%
renewables, water passed through emissions for the process
electrodes in water, the Oxygen produced can
chemical bonds are have further
broken into hydrogen applications
and oxygen
Photo Electrolysis Water A hybrid electrolysis The required electrical Life time of the Early development 18% in laboratory
cell is used with photo- energy is reduced equipment is low as
electrodes that absorb because of the photonic water corrodes the
the photonic energy radiation electrolyte
and drive the
electrolysis process.
Water Thermolysis Water, Renewable heat In this process, thermal Single step process Dissociation reaction Early development e
dissociation of water with high conversion takes place at high
takes place into its efficiency temp (2500 K)
constituent elements
Photocatalysis Water, Solar Radiation Water dissociates into Visible light and UV Lack of suitable Early development e
H2 and O2 in presence light can drive the materials with
of photocatalysts under process sufficient band gap
the action of solar
radiation
Biomass Gasification Biomass A variation of pyrolysis; Mitigates CO2 Low thermal efficiency Near term 35e50%
based upon partial emissions High handling costs
oxidation of the Replaces fossil fuel with
feedstock material into sustainable biomass
a mixture of hydrogen,
methane, higher
hydrocarbons, carbon
monoxide, carbon
dioxide and nitrogen
Bio-photolysis Biomass, solar energy Biochemical hydrogen This process produces Technology is not yet Early development e
production from water, hydrogen from water in developed at
where certain micro- an aqueous commercial scale
organisms sensible to environment at
light are used as bio- standard temperature
converters and pressure
Dark Fermentation Biomass Early development e

920
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

Table 3 (continued )

Method Source Principle Advantage Disadvantage Maturity Efficiency

Conversion of Hydrogen is produced Biomass should be

biochemical energy of at relatively low available in large
organic substances into temperatures (30
C quantities, must have
useful energy in the e80
C) high carbohydrate
absence of light content and should be
easily degradable

2.1.2. Proton exchange membrane electrolysis hydrogen to the bitumen industry. In Ref. [72], Abuşog lu et al.
This technology is relatively new and those electrolyzers are evaluated the hydrogen production potential of a municipal waste
available for small-scale applications. PEM electrolyzers use plat- water treatment plant by considering different hydrogen produc-
inum black, iridium, ruthenium, and rhodium for electrode catalyst tion methodologies. Boudries evaluated the hydrogen production
and a Nafion membrane for separating the electrodes [68,70]. The using hybrid solar parabolic trough gas power plant electrolysis
maximum temperature at which the process takes place is limited system [83]. Gu et al. analyzed the cross regional and onsite green
to 80
C [68]. The key advantages are flexible operation, high cur- hydrogen supply for a refueling station in China [73]. Armijo et al.
rent density (0.5e2 A/cm2), highly compressed (30 bar) and pure did the techno-economic modelling of flexible hydrogen and
hydrogen production [68,69]. They can operate with more flexi- ammonia production using a PV wind hybrid system [74]. Mallap-
bility and can respond quickly, which makes them a suitable ragada et al. carried out the scenario modelling to supply industrial
candidate to be used in conjunction with renewables [22]. The scale green hydrogen in 2030 [78]. Zhao et al. performed the life
major bottlenecks for this technology are related to its cost, system cycle cost analysis of hydrogen production [79]. Ayodele et al.
complexity and high water purity requirements [3,68,69]. investigated the hydrogen production potential using the wind
energy in South Africa [80]. Yates et al. made the techno-economic
2.1.3. Solid oxide electrolysis analysis of hydrogen production using solar PV [75]. Go €kçek et al.
It is also a relatively new technology and is still being used at determined the optimum renewable energy system that could
laboratory scale. It is basically the solid oxide fuel cell operating in supply hydrogen to the hydrogen refueling station onsite [84].
the backward direction [63]. These electrolyzers use a solid ion- These different objectives of the studies under consideration reit-
conducting ceramic as the electrolyte, which allows operations at erate the fact that hydrogen is an energy vector and it can play a
700e900
C [69,70]. System operation at high temperature gives substantial role in decarbonizing different sectors.
higher efficiencies (85%e90%) than those of alkaline or PEM elec- There can be a number of different green energy sources to
trolyzers because of improved reaction kinetics [68,70]. Another supply the electricity to produce hydrogen. The most common
advantage is the possibility to operate as fuel cell in reverse mode combination is either wind or solar PV and water electrolysis.
or in co-electrolysis mode producing syngas [69]. The apparent However, Abuşog lu et al. considered the scenario in which biogas
disadvantage of operating the system at high temperature is the from the municipal waste water plant was used to generate the
material degradation [69]. “green electricity” [72]. Boudries used concentrated solar power as
In order to understand the current hydrogen production prac- the heat source for the Rankine cycle based power plant, which
tices in depth, a semi-systematic review of the available literature would generate the electricity to power the PEM electrolyzer [83].
on hydrogen production using electrolysis was performed for the Some studies like [74,84] used a hybrid wind and PV system to
period of 2016e2020 using the Science-direct database. A total of power the electrolyzer. There is no reported best method or the
10 papers were thoroughly reviewed. The results of the number of cheapest method of coupling the electrolyzer with the renewable
authors per technology are shown in Fig. 2 [71e83]. As it can be source. It depends on the region and its resources potential, the
seen, alkaline and PEM are the most common technologies. Interest system parameters and the cost of the components in that region.
for the new technologies like SOE, dark fermentation and hydrogen It was observed that although alkaline electrolysis is a preferred
sulphide is emerging, the number is limited to one each. technology, PEM electrolysis is slowly catching the attention of
Fig. 3 shows the number of studies related to a particular researchers. Olateju et al. chose alkaline electrolyzer because of its
technology and year. It is interesting to see that studies focusing on technological maturity, high flow rates and low capital costs [71].
PEM electrolyzer are growing over the years. In 2016, Abuşog lu Boudries selected PEM electrolyzer as it can be operated at high
et al. wanted to determine the most appropriate electrolysis tech- pressure and high current density, which ultimately increases the
nology to be used in conjunction with a municipal waste water efficiency [83]. In Ref. [84], the authors selected PEM electrolyzer
plant in terms of the quantity of hydrogen produced and its cost. because of its flexibility and ease of operation with the intermittent
They studied hydrogen production using alkaline, PEM, high tem- renewables. Ayodele et al. selected PEM electrolyzer as it over-
perature water electrolysis, alkaline hydrogen sulphide electrolysis comes the limitations of alkaline electrolyzer like low current
and dark fermentation [72]. Hydrogen production using alkaline density and low operating pressure. Besides this, they also selected
elctrolyzer is commonly found in literature because of the tech- PEM, as it uses platinum as electrode and it is found in abundance
nology maturity and readily available data. in their study region in South Africa. PEM also offers other advan-
Considering the geographical distribution of the reviewed pa- tages like dynamic response, large operational ranges and high gas
pers, studies were performed for different locations like Canada, purity [80]. In Ref. [72] the authors concluded that the hydrogen
Turkey, Algeria, China, Chile, Argentina, USA, Scotland, South Africa production rate is directly affected by the electrolysis temperature.
and Australia. Studies related to hydrogen production from As the operational temperature rises, the hydrogen production rate
different parts of the world highlight the role hydrogen is set to play increases. They found that the SOE has the highest efficiency and
in the future energy systems globally. correspondingly the highest hydrogen production rate. But SOE is
The papers considered here had different research objectives. In still in its early stage of development. The high temperature in-
Ref. [71], Olateju et al. performed the techno-economic assessment creases the efficiency, but it also degrades the electrolytic cell
of large scale wind hydrogen production in order to supply clean material faster. So the results of the review indicate that PEM
921
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

electrolyzer is a promising technology and offers numerous ad-

vantages in comparison to alkaline electrolyzers. They may soon
achieve parity in terms of capital costs with alkaline electrolyzers.

3. Materials and methods

In order to obtain the climate data for renewable energy

resource (i.e. solar radiation) and market data for pilot plant costs, a
specific site needs to be chosen. Therefore, the case study site
selected for this study is at Cologne in Germany. In Cologne there
are a number of industries that produce and consume hydrogen,
and there is also a growing demand of hydrogen at refueling sta-
tions. There are number of hydrogen refueling stations in and
around the city like at Ko € ln/Bonn airport, Frechen, Leverkusen and Fig. 3. Number of studies related to a particular technology per year.

Aachen. The hydrogen demand at each of these four stations is

about 17.28 kg/day on average [85]. Among the electrolyzer sizes
source of energy and the energy deficit is covered from grid elec-
available in the market, an electrolyzer with a rated production
tricity. The system runs at full load (10 Nm3/h) for 24 h and 365 days
capacity of 21.36 kg/day is specifically selected to match the de-
of the year. The electrical energy generated by the solar PV is fed
mand of a refueling station [84]. Hydrogen production using alka-
directly to the electrolyzer. When the solar PV is unable to generate
line and PEM electrolysis is considered. The specifications of the
the required energy to power the electrolyzer, the deficit is covered
selected electrolyzers are shown in Table 4. The hydrogen pro-
from the Grid. The system diagram is shown in Fig. 6.
duction potential using a combination of solar PV and water elec-
trolysis under different scenarios is analyzed for this site.
The electricity need of the electrolyzer is supplied by solar PV. 3.4. Grid connected PV þ PEM electrolyzer
Different scenarios are considered and based on these assumptions
the system sizing, hydrogen production and the LCOH are calcu- In this case, the alkaline electrolyzer of scenario 3 is replaced by
lated. The analyzed scenarios are described as follows: a PEM electrolyzer, while all other operating conditions remain the
same as in scenario 3. The system diagram is shown in Fig. 7.
3.1. Off grid PV þ alkaline electrolyzer
3.5. Off grid PV þ alkaline electrolyzer limited operation
In this case, the selected alkaline electrolyzer is powered by an
off grid PV system with battery backup. The system runs at full load In this case, the alkaline electrolyzer is powered by an off grid PV
(10 Nm3/h) for 24 h and 365 days of the year. It is operated in fully system with battery backup. Except the operating hours, the
decentralized mode. The electrical energy generated by solar PV is working principle is similar to scenario 1 above. The system runs at
fed directly to the electrolyzer. The surplus energy produced by the full load (10 Nm3/h) for limited hours per day in different seasons. It
solar PV is then used to charge the batteries. When the solar PV is is assumed that in a day the system runs for 6 h in winter
unable to generate the required energy to power the electrolyzer, (DecembereFebruary), 10 h in spring (MarcheMay), 12 h in sum-
the deficit is supplied from the batteries. The system diagram is mer (JuneeAugust) and 8 h in autumn (SeptembereNovember).
shown in Fig. 4. The system diagram is shown in Fig. 8.

3.2. Off grid PV þ PEM electrolyzer

3.6. Off grid PV þ PEM electrolyzer limited operation
In this case, the alkaline electrolyzer of scenario 1 above is
replaced with the PEM electrolyzer. Remaining operating condi- In this case, the alkaline electrolyzer of scenario 5 is replaced by
tions are similar. The system diagram is shown in Fig. 5. the PEM electrolyzer. All other operating conditions are similar to
that of scenario 5. The system diagram is shown in Fig. 9.
3.3. Grid connected PV þ alkaline electrolyzer The solar radiation data for the location was obtained using
Meteonorm software (Version 8). The azimuth angle was consid-
In this case, the alkaline electrolyzer is powered by a PV system ered at 0
(south facing). The inclination angle of 30
was chosen
that is connected to the grid. Electricity produced by PV is the main for the given site. After analysing the radiation data, the maximum,
minimum and the average values of the global radiation were found
to be 8.75 kWh/m2/day, 0.07 kWh/m2/day and 3.23 kWh/m2/day
respectively [89]. Fig. 10 shows the daily radiation values for the
chosen site.
Required PV system size is calculated using equation (2.1).

  
Ed ðkWhÞ*Istc kW m2
Ppeak ðkWÞ ¼
    (2.1)
G kWh m2 *Q

Where.

Ppeak - Required solar PV capacity in kW.

Ed - Energy demand in kWh per day.
Istc - Radiation at standard test condition in kW/m2 (value 1 kW/
Fig. 2. Number of articles per technology. m2 )
922
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

G - Global solar radiation in kWh/m2/day (values taken from Ereq - Energy to be supplied from the battery
meteonorm 8.0).
Q - Quality factor or performance ratio (for this study, assumed The delta between generation and demand for daily values is
values are: 0.5 for off grid system and 0.8 for grid connected used for battery sizing. To find the value of Ereq, the days where the
system. The value for grid tied system is based on practical delta is negative (energy deficit) are filtered. Then the continuous
observations in Germany for the lately installed systems. Rela- days when there is an energy deficit are identified and the cumu-
tively low value of 0.5 for off-grid system is assumed to lative sum of the deficit values is calculated for all the sets of
compensate the possible mismatch of surplus generation and continuous days throughout the year. The dataset with the
demand at either electrolyzer or storage system. The average maximum value is then selected as Ereq.
values of performance ratio have been improved over the past To validate these results, the battery charging and discharging
years with maturity in technology and experiences as reported cycles are calculated. When the PV system produces surplus and
in Ref. [90] for different parts of the world. the battery is not fully charged, the surplus is stored in the battery
(charging of the batteries). When the PV system is unable to pro-
The system sizing was started initially with daily values (de- duce the required energy, the deficit is provided by batteries (dis-
mand and radiation). But this led to extreme Ppeak values as shown charging of the batteries). To observe the charging and discharging
in Fig. 11. Selecting a value from here will ultimately lead to system of the battery bank for all 365 days, equation (2.5) was used in MS
oversizing. As a next step, the system sizing is done using weekly Excel. If there is some energy in the battery ‘eday1’ and some
values. The weekly average values for energy demand and radiation surplus on day 2, then the battery will be charged and surplus will
are considered and equation (2.1) is used. The Ppeak calculated using be stored in the battery. The sum of the ‘eday1’ and ‘day2’ will be
weekly values is shown in Fig. 12. The extreme peaks are now the new energy in the battery, represented as ‘eday2’. If the sum of
dropped and the Ppeak values are also reduced. From this, a Ppeak ‘eday1'and ‘day2’ exceeds the battery size, then no more energy can
value is selected and further considered to estimate the energy be stored and the ‘eday2’ will be equal to ‘battery size’. And for the
generation from this system. next set of days, i.e. day 2 and day 3, if there is a deficit on day 3,
The energy generated is calculated using equation (2.2). then the energy will be withdrawn from the battery and corre-
spondingly ‘eday3’ will be lesser than ‘eday2’. The ‘eday’ values for
h    i all 365 days of the year are checked. If all the values are positive, it
Ppeak ðkWÞ*G kWh m2 *Q
Egen ðkWhÞ ¼    (2.2) means the battery can store the excess energy and cover the deficit
Istc kW m2 as well.
Charging/discharging ‘eday2’ ¼ if [sum (eday1,day2)  ‘batter-
The point where the generation curve is above the demand
size’, ‘batterysize’, ‘sum (eday1,day2)’] (2.5).
curve, is selected as the Ppeak for the given scenario considering the
Here ‘eday1’, ‘eday2’ and ‘day2’ mean the amount of energy in
weekly values (as shown in Fig. 13 later). Then the energy generated
the battery on day 1, amount of energy in the battery on day 2 and
is also calculated for daily values using the same Ppeak value. For off
either the surplus or the deficit of day 2.
grid systems, the battery size is calculated using equation (2.3).
The LCOH (in V/kg H2) is calculated using equation (2.6) [91].

Eavg ðkWhÞ*Autonomy days

Battery size ðkWhÞ ¼   (2.3)
DOD*hsys

Where. P
I þ nt¼1 At t
ð1þiÞ
Eavg e Daily average energy demand LCOH ¼ Pn (2.6)
H
t¼1 t
Autonomy days e Number of days the battery has to supply
power independently. Where.
DOD e Depth of discharge of the battery (assumed value at 50%)
hsys e Overall battery system efficiency (assumed value at 80%) I - Initial investment for the system in V
At - Annual costs (operation and replacement) in year t in V
Equation (2.3) is the general equation used to do battery sizing. Ht - Hydrogen produced in year t in kg
Using these equation often leads to large battery sizes. So in order i - Discount rate in % (assumed to be 4% for Germany based on
to optimize the battery size, equation (2.4) is used. [91]).
n - System lifetime in years (20 years for all the scenarios).
Ereq ðkWhÞ t e Time in year
Battery size ðkWhÞ ¼   ð2:4Þ
DOD*hsys
The cost data used for calculating LCOH are summarized in
Where. Table 5.

Table 4
Details of the selected electrolyzer [86,87].

Parameter Alkaline electrolyzer PEM electrolyzer

H2 production rate 10 Nm3/h 10 Nm3/h

Output pressure 9.9 bar 29.9 bar
Energy consumption 4.9 kWh/Nm3 6.2 kWh/Nm3
Installed power 49 kW 62 kW
Water requirement 2 L/Nm3 0.9 L/Nm3
H2 production in 24 h 21.36 kg 21.36 kg
Fig. 4. System sketch for off grid PV þ alkaline electrolyzer [88].

923
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

operation and it is a stepped curve in case of limited operation

scenario. The systems are sized and optimized in such a way that
the generation curve nears the demand curve. Figs. 13 and 14 show
the demand and generation profiles for the off grid þ alkaline and
off grid þ alkaline limited operation scenarios respectively.
When the electrolyzers are operated for limited hours in a year
in an off grid mode, the system size (PV and battery backup) is
reduced considerably, but this also reduces the hydrogen yield. The
Fig. 5. System sketch for off grid PV þ PEM electrolyzer [88]. energy consumption of PEM per Nm3 of hydrogen produced is
higher than that of alkaline electrolyzer, as a result it requires a
larger PV system. But the pressure at the outlet is 30 bar in PEM,
which might avoid the need for hydrogen compression either for
storage or for other end use application.
The calculated system sizes and H2 production are summarized
in Table 6. As expected, the PV size required to power the electro-
lyzers for 24 h of operation in off grid mode is higher than grid
connected system. The PV size required in grid connected system is
smaller because of the higher quality factor. The battery storage
system bridges the gap between generation and demand.
The PV system and the battery size for different scenarios in
Table 6 are calculated using equations (2.1) to (2).5 described in the
materials and methods section. Alkaline electrolyzers have an
advanced technology maturity level and their energy consumption
Fig. 6. System sketch for grid connected PV þ alkaline electrolyzer [88].
per Nm3 of hydrogen produced is less as compared to PEM elec-
trolyzer. So the PV size required to power an alkaline electrolyzer is
smaller than that for PEM. As a result of using different quality
factor for off grid and grid connected system, the PV system
required to power the electrolyzer in an off grid mode is higher
than that required for the grid connected system. A PV system with
a capacity of 2.6 MW will be required to power the alkaline elec-
trolyzer in an off grid mode. But due to the intermittent nature of
solar energy, the designed system will unable to meet the energy
requirements completely. Therefore a battery with an energy
storage capacity of 7250 kWh will be required to complement the
PV system in supplying green electricity to the alkaline electrolyzer
to generate green hydrogen. The PV system and the battery size
required in the limited operations scenario is much smaller as the
Fig. 7. System sketch for grid connected PV þ PEM electrolyzer [88]. electrolyzers is not operated during the night. The type of elec-
trolyzer, its hours of operation, system configuration (off grid or
grid connected) have a corresponding effect on the PV and the
battery size. The effect of different system parameters can be seen
in the system sizing results of Table 6.
Table 7 Summarizes important system performance parameters.
The selected alkaline electrolyzer has a power rating of 49 kW.
Under continuous operation, this leads to a daily and annual elec-
tricity demand of 1176 kWh and 429240 kWh respectively.
For the case of “off grid PV þ alkaline”, the PV system size is
calculated to be at 2.6 MW. Taking the daily radiation values (from
Fig. 8. System sketch for off grid PV þ alkaline electrolyzer limited operation [88]. meteonorm software, version 8.0), the total annual energy gener-
ated by a 2.6 MW system is about 1532973 kWh. The PV system
produces surplus energy for majority days of the year and there is

Fig. 9. System sketch for off grid PV þ PEM electrolyzer limited operation [88].

4. Results

The results of the calculations described above are presented in

this section. Demand curve is a flat line in case of 24 h electrolyzer Fig. 10. Daily radiation for Cologne.

924
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

demand by the electrolyzer, that the system is unable to cover 100%

of the demand entirely without battery storage/grid electricity. So
in order to calculate the “useful energy” generated by the PV system
in a year, the utilization rate is calculated. Utilization rate means the
percentage of the total electricity generated by the PV system that
is actually “useful” for the intended end application. For the case of
“off grid PV þ alkaline” scenario, 12.5% of the total energy generated
per year by the PV system is available directly to the alkaline
electrolyzer in real time. Taking into consideration PV and battery
(total supply to the electrolyzer demand in a year), the PV utiliza-
tion rate is calculated as 28%. The remaining part of the surplus goes
unused. The results for further off grid scenarios shown in the same
Fig. 11. Ppeak calculated using daily values for the case of off grid PV and alkaline Table 7 can be interpreted in a similar manner. The power rating of
electrolyzer. the selected PEM electrolyzer is 62 kW, as a result of which the
presented values for this case are slightly different than in alkaline
case.
For the “off grid PV þ alkaline limited operation” scenario, the
operating hours of the electrolyzer are selected in such a way that
they match with the actual time of solar generation. As a result of
which the PV system is able to supply 85.49% of the electrolyzer
electricity demand directly at the actual time of use. This per-
centage is significantly higher than off grid PV with 24 h electro-
lyzer operation. The other impact of selecting the limited hour
operation is that it also improves the direct PV utilization rate
(27.52%) and the utilization rate with battery (32.19%). Similar trend
can be observed with “off grid PV þ PEM limited operation”
scenario.
For the “grid connected PV þ alkaline” case, 41.38% of the total
Fig. 12. Ppeak calculated using weekly values for the case of off grid PV and alkaline energy required by the alkaline electrolyzer is supplied by PV at the
electrolyzer. actual time of use and the remaining 58.62% is supplied from the
grid electricity. The PV system designed for this scenarios is capable
to that much energy needs of the electrolyzer in real time in a year
an energy deficit on the remaining days. On the hours when the and the deficit is covered with grid electricity. The real time PV
system produces the surplus, it can cover the instantaneous elec- utilization rate for this scenario is 22.15%.
tricity demand of the electrolyzer and on other hours only a part or The LCOH for different scenario is shown in Fig. 15. Hydrogen
none of the electrolyzer demand is supplied by the PV system. produced using “off grid PV þ PEM” is the most expensive. LCOH for
Taking this into account, the total annual energy supplied to the off grid systems is higher than grid connected system in all cases
electrolyzer directly from the PV system is calculated as due to the fact that battery backup is used in off grid application to
191697 kWh. The deficit energy of the year is covered by the storage ensure continuous power supply. Even though only a small share of
battery and it is calculated as 237543 kWh. It is interesting to electricity comes from battery in all off grid scenarios, battery costs
further check, what percentage of the total annual electrolyzer have a significant effect on the LCOH. In the off grid limited oper-
electricity demand is covered by the PV. Calculated results show ations scenario, the system size is reduced, but the LCOH is still
that 44.66% of the electrolyzer electricity demand is covered high. The best case scenario, considering the LCOH is “grid con-
directly by the PV electricity (direct supply at the time of genera- nected PV þ alkaline” because of the maturity of the technology.
tion) and the remaining 55.34% with electricity from the battery. The LCOH results for grid connected systems are comparable to the
The designed PV systems generates more energy in a year than existing market price of hydrogen in Cologne (at a vehicle refueling
that is actually required by the electrolyzer. It is due to the time station). The results clearly show the fact that the idea to run the
difference in electricity generation by PV and actual electricity electrolyzers 24 h a day and round the year in off grid mode is not
economically feasible as the hydrogen produced is very expensive.
Instead, grid connected PV based electrolytic hydrogen production
options shall be preferred in the practical project implementation.
It is notable to see the effect of different system components on
the LCOH. Fig. 16 shows the LCOH cost distribution for different off
grid systems considered in this study. Battery has the highest share
in the LCOH for the systems (both alkaline and PEM) that run
completely off grid at full load throughout the year. Electrolyzer
capex and water costs are almost negligible for all the scenarios.
The cost of the PV system for the scenarios considering PEM elec-
trolyzer is higher than that of scenario considering alkaline elec-
trolyzer due to difference in required PV sizes.
Table 8 summarizes the values of different system components
for different scenarios of the off-grid systems considered in this
study.
Fig. 13. Demand and generation curve for off grid þ alkaline scenario (PV Fig. 17 shows the LCOH cost distribution of the grid connected
system ¼ 2.6 MW). systems considered in the study. Solar PV has the maximum share
925
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

Table 5
Costs of different system components used for calculating LCOH.

Cost type Cost per unit Notes Source

PV system capex 800 V/kWp for system > 1 MW The total system cost including balance of system (BOS) [91e94]
1000 V/kWp for system <1 MW Lifetime ¼ 20 years
PV opex 1% of the PV system capex/year e [92]
Battery capex 560V/kWh This cost is for lithium ion battery [91,95]
Lifetime ¼ 10 years
Battery opex 0.027 V/kWh Calculated based on 0.27 V/kWh [95]
Battery replacement cost 200 V/kWh Estimated price in 10 years from now [91]
Alkaline electrolyzer capex 800 V/kW 2020 value (estimated value) includes stack and BOS [69,96]
Lifetime ¼ 20 years
Alkaline electrolyzer opex 2% of initial capex per year e [22]
Stack replacement cost 340 V/kW Stack life time ¼ 80000 h/10 Years @ full load for alkaline electrolyzer [22,97]
PEM electrolyzer capex 1000 V/kW Includes stack and BOS [69,96]
Lifetime ¼ 20 Years
PEM electrolyzer opex 2% of initial capex per year e [22]
Stack replacement cost 420 V/kW Stack life time ¼ 40000 h/5 Years @ full load for PEM electrolyzer [22,97]
Water cost 3 V/m3 Value assumed for the city of Cologne [98]
Grid electricity price (industrial) 0.1855 V/kWh A flat rate price is assumed for the system lifetime [99]

in the LCOH in both scenarios. The cost of grid electricity is less but PEM þ CSP (PPA) at 4.97 US$/kg (2018). Assuming an average ex-
significant. The difference in the cost of PEM and alkaline electro- change rate 1 US $ ¼ 0.8475 V for 2018, this corresponds to 1.86
lyzer is seen in the LCOH, with the grid connected þ PEM scenario V/kg and 4.21 V/kg respectively [102]. The price difference can be
having electrolyzer cost higher than the grid connected þ alkaline attributed to the fact that stack replacement cost has not been
scenario. taken into consideration. The argument given for that is the solar
PV capacity factor, which at 41% amounts to 3650 h in a year. The
5. Discussion sum of the operating hours would be less than 80000 h for a system
lifetime of 20 years. Hence they neglected the stack replacement
While comparing the results of current study with that of the costs. In Ref. [103] Gunawan et al. do the techno-economic
existing literature, effect of different assumptions and system modelling of the hydrogen fuel supply chain (HSFC) which
boundaries was seen on LCOH. Viktorsson et al. calculated the LCOH included production, transportation and dispensing for Fuel cell
of 13.9 V/kg for a hydrogen refueling station (HRS) using alkaline electric buses in Ireland. The hydrogen is produced using a wind
electrolyzer powered by the electricity from grid assuming a sys- photovoltaic battery electrolyzer system (WPBES). The electrolyzer
tem lifetime of 20 years [98]. This value is on the higher side but on employed was PEM. They find that adding battery and/or PV to the
the similar lines as compared to the current study as the cost of wind powered electrolyzer brings down the LCOH as it improves
compression and storage were considered there. Minutillo et al. the electrolyzer capacity factor. They find the LCOH of the entire
performed the techno-economic analysis of the on-site hydrogen hydrogen supply chain ranges between 5 and 10 V/kg. Rose and
production for a HRS in Italy [100]. The proposed system consisted Neumann merged the results of transportation infrastructure
of a grid connected PV coupled to an electrolyzer. The LCOH for a model into electricity system model [104]. The objective of the
production capacity of 200 kg/day and 50% grid electricity was 9.29 research was to evaluate the economic and technical implications
V/kg and for a production capacity of 50 kg/day and 100% grid of a potential heavy duty vehicle (HDV) hydrogen refueling station
electricity was 12.48 V/kg. Gallardo et al. undertook a techno- (HRS). The value of LCOH as reported by their study was found to
economic analysis of solar based hydrogen production in Chile vary between 4.83 V/kg and 5.36V/kg. Weidner et al. undertake a
and examined the case of exporting it to Japan [101]. The analysis feasibility study of implementing large scale hydrogen solutions for
was undertaken in different scenarios involving alkaline and PEM applications like Power to Industry, Power to Mobility and Power to
as the selected electrolyzers and solar PV and CSP as the energy Power using LCOH. They conclude that upscaling of hydrogen based
sources. They found that the LCOH of hydrogen at the outlet of the applications is the key to lower the costs. The cost of hydrogen
electrolyzer was the cheapest for alkaline þ solar PV (Power pur- production is dropping in recent years with the cost of hydrogen
chase Agreement PPA) at 2.20 US$/kg (2018) and the costliest for being 5.96 V/kg in Germany [105].
Micena et al. designed a HRS using alkaline electrolyzer pow-
ered by the grid connected PV to supply the taxi fleet under
different scenarios. The cost of hydrogen was between 8.06 V/kg
and 12.19 V/kg for system including hydrogen generation,
compression and storage [106]. Hinkley et al. performed the cost
analysis for hydrogen production using PEM electrolyzer and off
grid solar PV under two scenarios. In the first case the solar panels
were connected directly to the electrolyzer without battery and the
LCOH was 12.83 V/kg. In the second scenario, a lithium-ion battery
was introduced in the system to run the electrolyzer continuously
and the LCOH was 19.54 V/kg. These results show the fact that
battery increases the LCOH considerably, as also observed in this
study. However, the difference in the LCOH values can be attributed
to the differences in the stack lifetime of the electrolyzer and
related replacement costs [107]. Nicita et al. made the techno
Fig. 14. Demand and generation curve for off grid þ alkaline limited operation (PV
economic evaluation of green hydrogen production system for
system ¼ 680 kW).

926
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

Table 6
Results of system sizing and H2 production for different scenarios.

Scenario Description PV size (MW) Battery size (kWh) H2 yield per year (kg)

Off grid PV þ alkaline 2.6 7250 7796

Off grid PV þ PEM 3.3 9125 7796
Grid connected PV þ alkaline 0.85 N/A 7796
Grid connected PV þ PEM 1 N/A 7796
Off grid PV þ alkaline limited operation 0.68 1500 2930
Off grid PV þ PEM limited operation 0.95 2000 2930

selling it as feedstock under two scenarios from the perspective of

an entrepreneur [108]. Under the first scenario they assumed that
an alkaline eletrolyzer is connected to an existing off grid PV plant
and the LCOH was calculated as 30.3 V/kg. In the next scenario, they
assumed that the off grid PV plant also had to be procured for the
hypothetical hydrogen plant and the LCOH was calculated as 40.7
V/kg. The value for the case of off grid PV and alkaline electrolyzer
for the present study is 45.4 V/kg because the battery is also a part
of the system.
As a further analysis, it is interesting to compare the results of
the present study with that of the literature. The LCOH results of the
review done for hydrogen production using PEM and alkaline
electrolyzers are shown in Fig. 18 [71e82]. Altogether, 18 and 12
different cases were reviewed for hydrogen production using PEM
and alkaline electrolyzers, respectively. The case studies were car-
ried out for different locations across the world. For all the cases
Fig. 15. LCOH for different scenarios.
considered for PEM, there was no grid connection and battery was
not a part of the system used to generate hydrogen.
As seen in the boxplot in Fig. 18, about 50% of the data points for
Yates et al. conclude that system size, the cost of the system
PEM lie between 4.89 V/kg and 7.02 V/kg. The maximum value of
components and the efficiency of the electrolyzer are the most
LCOH for PEM is 7.56 V/kg. The median LCOH was 5.14 V/kg. The
important drivers of the LCOH [75]. This is also true for the present
results of the present study for hydrogen production using PEM are
study as the system size required to power the alkaline electrolyzer
completely different as compared to the results of the review
is smaller than that of the PEM electrolyzer. Because of the techno-
because of different assumptions as compared to the other authors.
logical advancement of alkaline electrolyzer, the results of the pre-
For all the cases considered for alkaline in the review, there was no
sent study show that LCOH for all the alkaline systems is lower than
grid connection and battery was also not a part of the system. As €kçek et al. concluded that the LCOH for a
that of the PEM systems. Go
shown in Fig. 18, about 50% of the data points for alkaline lie be-
wind-solar-battery hybrid system was lower than that of wind-
tween 2.91 V/kg and 4.43 V/kg. The maximum value of LCOH for
battery system. They also concluded that when going for a single
alkaline is 8.81 V/kg. This point is an outlier for the given range of
renewable source, the system size needs to be increased in order to
data. So the maximum is adjusted by adding 1.5*IQR (IQR ¼
ensure reliability [84]. As seen in the results, the system size for the
Interquartile range) to the Q3 of the dataset and the new maximum
fully off grid systems are much higher than grid connected system,
is 6.71 V/kg. The median LCOH is 3.33 V/kg. Only the LCOH of grid
which have a direct impact on the LCOH of the system.
connected PV þ alkaline scenario (6.23 V/kg) of the present study
When looking at the LCOH distribution of present study for both
falls within the range.
off grid and grid connected systems, the cost to provide electricity

Table 7
Summary of system performance parameters for different scenarios.

Parameter Off grid Off grid Grid connected Grid connected Off grid PV Off grid PV
(2.6 MW)þ (3.3 MW) þ PEM (0.85 MW)þ (1 MW) þ PEM (0.68 MW) þ alkaline (0.95 MW) þ PEM
alkaline alkaline limited operation limited operation

(a) PV system electricity generation per year 1532973 1945697 801863 943368 501164 560125
(kWh)
(b) Electrolyzer electricity demand per year 429240 543120 429240 543120 161308 204104
(kWh)
(c) PV electricity supplied directly to 191697 242625 177632 222505 137900 177166
electrolyzer at real time of generation per
year (kWh)
(d) Battery/grid electricity supplied to 237543 300495 251608 320615 23408 26938
electrolyzer per year (kWh)
(e) Share of real time PV electricity supply to 44.66 44.67 41.38 40.97 85.49 86.80
electrolyzer demand per year ((c/b)*100) (%)
(f) Share of battery/grid electricity supply to 55.34 55.33 58.62 59.03 14.51 13.20
electrolyzer demand per year ((d/b)*100) (%)
(g) Direct PV utilization rate ((c/a)*100) (%) 12.50 12.47 22.15 23.59 27.52 31.63
(h) Total PV utilization rate with battery/grid 28.00 27.91 53.53 57.57 32.19 36.44
((b/a)*100) (%)

927
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

Fig. 16. LCOH cost distribution for off grid systems. Fig. 17. LCOH cost distribution for grid connected system.

is the major cost component in the LCOH. In Ref. [79], Zhao et al. buses for public transport in the region [44]. Apart from this, the
reported that electricity consumption accounts for 71% of the hydrogen generated could also be injected into the natural gas grid
hydrogen production cost. Mallapragada et al. mentioned that grid in future.
connected electrolytic hydrogen production is cheaper than that by
renewable sources as it does not require direct investment costs
and it increases the electrolyzer capacity factor [78]. Batteries have 6. Conclusions
the maximum share in the LCOH for the off grid system even if they
provide only a little electricity to the electrolyzer. So this leads to It can be concluded that the cost of hydrogen produced using
the question e does it make sense to have battery in the system grid connected PV is already market competitive with fossil fuels
configuration at all? It makes more sense to couple the electrolyzer based hydrogen in Cologne, Germany. It has further potential for
directly with the PV plant. Although the hydrogen production will price reduction due to economies of scale and the learning effect on
depend on the capacity factor and the energy production of the PV both electrolyzers and solar PV systems.
plant, there is significant potential to reduce cost when looking at Alkaline electrolyzer is a promising technology and the LCOH of
the results of the off grid systems of the present study. hydrogen produced is less than that of the PEM technology. But
So far the results of the present study were compared with that because of its inflexibility to adjust to the variability of the re-
of the existing literature. The results for LCOH using either PEM or newables, it cannot be coupled directly to renewable source of
alkaline match for some cases and there is a significant difference in energy. However on the other end, PEM is relatively new technol-
values in other cases. All these differences can be attributed to the ogy and has tremendous potential for competing with conventional
different set of underlying assumptions, system configurations and hydrogen production technologies because of its flexibility, pro-
geographical locations used to carry out the study. This shows that vided there are significant cost reductions for PEM electrolyzers in
there are still many uncertainties involved for the cost and opera- the future.
tion of electrolyzers for hydrogen production. Hydrogen production in an off grid mode with battery backup is
Hydrogen production using water electrolysis and solar PV can not economically feasible today. Hence energy storage using bat-
be used for a number of applications. There are many chemical teries should be avoided. Focus should be now to couple the elec-
industries with own onsite hydrogen production facility using SMR trolyzer directly with the renewable source of energy and store it as
technique [96]. Such industries could install such power-to- hydrogen without battery backup for decentralized production.
hydrogen plants for onsite hydrogen production using grid con- This shall be analyzed further to see the LCOH values before the
nected solar PV and alkaline electrolyzer. Apart from hydrogen, exact comparison can be made. As there is an urgent need of large
oxygen could also be sold to the market. In Ref. [11], Squadrito et al. scale and seasonal storage systems to meet the future energy needs
calculated the cost effectiveness of hydrogen/oxygen co-production with renewable energy resources, the hydrogen as energy carrier
using different market prices for oxygen in Italy. They concluded does not have many alternatives. Although the calculated economic
that the investment into hydrogen/oxygen co-production using parameters as of today are not yet very attractive, they can be ex-
solar PV and alkaline electrolyzer is feasible when the market price pected to be competitive in a near future following the cost
of oxygen is at least 3 V/kg. reduction path of solar PV systems over the past years driven by
In this study, the daily hydrogen production from any system learning curve effects. Furthermore, policies like CO2 tax can in-
configuration is capable to supply the needs of a hydrogen refueling crease the cost of hydrogen production using conventional
station (though limited demand as of today). If more numbers of methods like SMR.
electrolyzers are deployed, the electricity can be properly managed This study is a theoretical assessment of the hydrogen produc-
and the hydrogen produced can also be used to supply the hybrid tion value chain from solar PV. The methodology used in this study
provides a simple model to do the system sizing and to calculate the

Table 8
LCOH cost distribution for off grid systems.

Scenario PV Battery Electrolyzer Water Total (V/kg)

Off grid PV þ alkaline 14.43 30.57 0.37 0.04 45.41

Off grid PV þ PEM 18.32 38.47 0.80 0.02 57.61
Off grid PV þ alkaline limited operation 12.55 16.83 0.99 0.04 30.41
Off grid PV þ PEM limited operation 14.03 22.44 2.12 0.02 38.60

928
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

[10] D. Azhgaliyeva (Ed.), Energy Storage and Renewable Energy Deployment:

Emperical Evidence from OECD Countries, Energy Procedia, 2018.
[11] G. Squadrito, A. Nicita, G. Maggio, A size-dependent financial evaluation of
green hydrogen-oxygen co-production, Renew. Energy 163 (2021)
2165e2177, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.10.115.
[12] M.M. Rahman, A.O. Oni, E. Gemechu, A. Kumar, Assessment of energy storage
technologies: a review, Energy Convers. Manag. 223 (2020), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113295.
[13] S. Koohi-Fayegh, M.A. Rosen, A review of energy storage types, applications
and recent developments, Journal of Energy Storage 27 (2020) 101047,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2019.101047.
[14] A.K. Rohit, K.P. Devi, S. Rangnekar, An overview of energy storage and its
importance in Indian renewable energy sector: Part I e technologies and
comparison, Journal of Energy Storage 13 (2017) 10e23, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.est.2017.06.005.
[15] M.S. Javed, D. Zhong, T. Ma, A. Song, S. Ahmed, Hybrid pumped hydro and
battery storage for renewable energy based power supply system, Appl.
Energy 257 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114026.
[16] World Energy Council, Future Energy Leaders, Energy Storage Monitor:
Latest Trends in Energy Storage, 2019.
[17] H.C. Hesse, M. Schimpe, D. Kucevic, A. Jossen, Lithium-ion battery storage for
the gridda review of stationary battery storage system design tailored for
Fig. 18. LCOH results from selected literature using PEM and alkaline electrolyzers. applications in modern power grids, energies 10 (2017), https://doi.org/
10.3390/en10122107.
[18] J. Boyle, T. Littler, A. Foley, Battery energy storage system state-of-charge
management to ensure availability of frequency regulating services from
LCOH anywhere in the world by changing the relevant input pa- wind farms, Renew. Energy 160 (2020) 1119e1135, https://doi.org/10.1016/
rameters. The model used here can be applied to get the required j.renene.2020.06.025.
system size and the economic indicators to further the idea of [19] World Energy Council, California Independent System Operator, Five Steps to
Energy Storage: Innovations Insights Brief, United Kingdom, 2020.
“power-to-gas” and create business models for hydrogen produc- [20] H.M. Marczinkowski, P.A. Østergaard, Evaluation of electricity storage versus
tion using renewable energy. thermal storage as part of two different energy planning approaches for the
islands Samsø and Orkney, Energy 175 (2019) 505e514, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.103.
Declaration of competing interest
[21] G. Kraja cic, R. Martins, A. Busuttil, N. Duic, M.d.G.-a. Carvalho, Hydrogen as
an energy vector in the islands' energy supply, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 33
The authors declare that they have no known competing (2008) 1091e1103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.12.025.
[22] Irena, Hydrogen from Renewable Power: Technology Outlook for the Energy
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
Transition, Abu Dhabi, 2018.
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. [23] World Energy Council, New Hydrogen Economy - Hope or Hype?: Innovation
Insights Brief, United Kingdom, 2019.
Acknowledgement [24] I. Martín-García, E. Rosales-Asensio, A. Gonza lez-Martínez, S. Bracco,
F. Delfino, M. Simo  n-Martín, Hydrogen as an energy vector to optimize the
energy exploitation of a self-consumption solar photovoltaic facility in a
Authors would like to acknowledge the financial support from dwelling house, Energy Rep. 6 (2020) 155e166, https://doi.org/10.1016/
Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Germany through its j.egyr.2019.10.034.
[25] V. Oldenbroek, S. Wijtzes, K. Blok, Ad J. M. van Wijk, Fuel cell electric vehicles
Project Management Agency DLR under the framework of WESA- and hydrogen balancing 100 percent renewable and integrated national
ITT project. The results reported in this paper were presented in transportation and energy systems, Energy Convers. Manag. X 9 (2021)
the 15th SDEWES Conference, September 01e05, 2020, Cologne, 100077, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2021.100077.
[26] O. Ehret, K. Bonhoff, Hydrogen as a fuel and energy storage: success factors
Germany. Authors are thankful to attendees for their valuable for the German energiewende, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 40 (2015)
feedback as well as they express their high appreciation and thanks 5526e5533, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.01.176.
to anonymous reviewer of this paper's original version. [27] International Energy Agency, The Future of Hydrogen: Seizing Today's Op-
portunities, 2019. Report prepared by the IEA for the G20, Japan.
[28] Iea Hydrogen Technology Collaboration Program, IEA Hydrogen: Global
References Trends and Outlook for Hydrogen, 2017.
[30] Agora Energiewende, Report on the German Power System: Country Profile,
[1] P.A. Østergaard, N. Duic, Y. Noorollahi, H. Mikulcic, S. Kalogirou (Eds.), Sus- first.second, Berlin, 2015.
tainable Development Using Renewable Energy Technology, Renewable [31] C. Morris, M. Pehnt, Energy Transition: the German Energiewende, Berlin,
Energy, 2020. 2017.
[2] International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2019, Executive sum- [32] BMWi, Energy Concept for an Environementally Sound, Reliable and
mary, Paris, 2019. Affordable Energy Supply, Berlin, 2010.
[3] J. Chi, Y. Hongmei, Water electrolysis based on renewable energy for [33] B.N. Stram, Key challenges to expanding renewable energy, Energy Pol. 96
hydrogen production, Chin. J. Catal. 39 (2018) 390e394, https://doi.org/ (2016) 728e734, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.05.034.
10.1016/S1872-2067(17)62949-8. [34] M. Esteban, Q. Zhang, A. Utama, Estimation of the energy storage require-
[4] Siemens Gas and Power, Power-To-X: the Crucial Business on the Way to a ment of a future 100% renewable energy system in Japan, Energy Pol. 47
Carbon Free World, 2019. (2012) 22e31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.03.078.
[5] World Energy Council, O. Wyman, World Energy Trilemma Index 2019, [35] T. Klaus, C. Vollmer, K. Werner, H. Lehmann, K. Müschen, Energy Target
United Kingdom, 2019. 2050: 100% Renewable Electricity Supply, Dessau-Roßlau, 2010.
[6] C. Cheng, A. Blakers, M. Stocks, B. Lu, Pumped hydro energy storage and 100 [36] M. Sterner, I. Stadler, Energiespeicher - Bedarf, Technologien, Integration,
% renewable electricity for East Asia, Global Energy Interconnection 2 (2019) secondnd ed., Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2017.
386e392, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloei.2019.11.013. [37] M.A. Pellow, C.J.M. Emmott, C.J. Barnhart, S.M. Benson, Hydrogen or batteries
[7] A. Pfeifer, G. Kraja
ci
c, D. Ljubas, N. Dui
c, Increasing the integration of solar for grid storage? A net energy analysis, Energy & Environmental Science
photovoltaics in energy mix on the road to low emissions energy system e (2015), https://doi.org/10.1039/C4EE04041D, 1938e1952.
economic and environmental implications, Renew. Energy 143 (2019) [38] A.M. Elberry, J. Thakur, A. Santasalo-Aarnio, M. Larmi, Large-scale com-
1310e1317, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.05.080. pressed hydrogen storage as part of renewable electricity storage systems,
[8] M.S. Ziegler, J.M. Mueller, G.D. Pereira, J. Song, M. Ferrara, Y.-M. Chiang, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/
Trancik, E. Jessika, Storage requirements and costs of shaping renewable j.ijhydene.2021.02.080.
energy toward grid decarbonization, Joule 3 (2019) 2134e2153, https:// [39] A.M. Abdallaa, S. Hossaina, O.B. Nisfindya, A.T. Azadd, M. Dawoodb, A.K. Azad,
doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2019.06.012. Hydrogen production, storage, transportation and key challenges with ap-
[9] Y. Zhang, W. Wei, Decentralized coordination control of PV generators, plications: a review, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 165 (2018) 602e627, https://
storage battery, hydrogen production unit and fuel cell in islanded DC doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.03.088.
microgrid, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 8243e8256, https://doi.org/ [40] S. Niaz, T. Manzoor, A.H. Pandith, Hydrogen storage: materials, methods and
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.01.058. perspectives, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 50 (2015) 457e469, https://

929
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.011. 11563e11578, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.05.047.

[41] N. Hartmann, L. Eltrop, N. Bauer, J. Salzer, S. Schwarz, M. Schmidt, Strom- [68] S. Schiebahn, T. Grube, M. Robinius, V. Tietze, B. Kumar, D. Stolten, Power to
speicherpotenziale für Deutschland, Stuttgart, 2012. gas: Technological overview, systems analysis and economic assessment for
[42] H. Blanco, A. Faaij, A review at the role of storage in energy systems with a a case study in Germany, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 40 (2015)
focus on power to gas and long-term storage, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 81 4285e4294, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.01.123.
(2018) 1049e1086, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.07.062. [69] O. Schmidt, A. Gambhir, I. Staffell, A. Hawkes, J. Nelson, S. Few, Future cost
[43] F. Dawood, M. Anda, G.M. Shafiullah, Hydrogen production for energy: an and performance of water electrolysis: An expert elicitation study, Interna-
overview, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 3847e3869, https://doi.org/ tional Journal of Hydrogen Energy 42 (2017) 30470e30492, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.12.059. 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.10.045.
[44] N.R.W. EnergieAgentur, Hydrogen e the Key to the Energy Transition: Ex- [70] A. Buttler, H. Spliethoff, Current status of water electrolysis for energy
amples from North Rhine-Westphalia from Production to End Use, Dues- storage, grid balancing and sector coupling via power-to-gas and power-to-
seldorf, 2018. liquids: A review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 82 (2018)
[45] P. Nikolaidis, A. Poullikkas, A comparative overview of hydrogen production 2440e2454, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.09.003.
processes, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 67 (2017) 597e611, https://doi.org/ [71] B. Olateju, A. Kumar, Marc Secanell, A techno-economic assessment of large
10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.044. scale wind-hydrogen production with energy storage in western Canada,
[46] I. Dincer, C. Acar, Review and evaluation of hydrogen production methods for International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 41 (2016) 8755e8776, https://
better sustainability, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 40 (2015) 11094e11111, doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.03.177.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.12.035. [72] A. Abuşog €
lu, S. Demir, E. Ozahi, Energy and economic analyses of models
[47] T.S. Veras, T.S. Mozer, Danielleda Costa Rubim Messeder dos Santos, developed for sustainable hydrogen production from biogas-based elec-
A.S. Ce sar, Hydrogen: trends, production and characterization of the main tricity and sewage sludge, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 41
process worldwide, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 42 (2017) 2018e2033, https:// (2016) 13426e13435, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.05.105.
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.08.219. [73] Y. Gu, Q. Chen, J. Xue, Z. Tang, Y. Sun, Q. Wu, Comparative techno-economic
[48] F. Safari, I. Dincer, A review and comparative evaluation of thermochemical study of solar energy integrated hydrogen supply pathways for hydrogen
water splitting cycles for hydrogen production, Energy Convers. Manag. 205 refueling stations in China, Energy Convers. Manag. 223 (2020), https://
(2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.112182. doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113240.
[49] International Renewable Energy Agency, Green Hydrogen: A Guide to Policy [74] J. Armijo, C. Philibert, Flexible production of green hydrogen and ammonia
Making, Abu Dhabi, 2020. from variable solar and wind energy: case study of Chile and Argentina, Int. J.
[50] H. Ishaq, I. Dincer, Comparative assessment of renewable energy-based Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 1541e1558, https://doi.org/10.1016/
hydrogen production methods, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 135 (2021), j.ijhydene.2019.11.028.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110192. [75] J. Yates, R. Daiyan, R. Patterson, R. Egan, R. Amal, A. Ho-Baille, N.L. Chang,
[51] M. Wang, G. Wang, Z. Sun, Y. Zhang, D. Xu, Review of renewable energy- Techno-economic analysis of hydrogen electrolysis from off-grid stand-alone
based hydrogen production processes for sustainable energy innovation, photovoltaics incorporating uncertainty analysis, Cell Reports Physical Sci-
Global Energy Interconnection 2 (2019) 436e443, https://doi.org/10.1016/ ence 1 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrp.2020.100209.
j.gloei.2019.11.019. [76] R.S. El-Emam, I. Khamis, International collaboration in the IAEA nuclear
[52] G. Kakoulaki, I. Kougias, N. Taylor, F. Dolci, J. Moya, A. Ja €ger-Waldau, Green hydrogen production program for benchmarking of HEEP, Int. J. Hydrogen
hydrogen in Europe e a regional assessment: substituting existing produc- Energy 42 (2017) 3566e3571, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.07.256.
tion with electrolysis powered by renewables, Energy Convers. Manag. 228 [77] C. Zhang, J.B. Greenblatt, M. Wei, J. Eichman, S. Saxena, M. Muratori,
(2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113649. O.J. Guerra, Flexible grid-based electrolysis hydrogen production for fuel cell
[53] F. Razi, I. Dincer, A critical evaluation of potential routes of solar hydrogen vehicles reduces costs and greenhouse gas emissions, Appl. Energy 278
production for sustainable development, J. Clean. Prod. 264 (2020), https:// (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115651.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121582. [78] D.S. Mallapragada, E. Gençer, P. Insinger, D.W. Keith, F.M. O'Sullivan, Can
[54] S.K. Ngoh, D. Njomo, An overview of hydrogen gas production from solar industrial-scale solar hydrogen supplied from commodity technologies be
energy, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 6782e6792, https://doi.org/ cost competitive by 2030? Cell Reports Physical Science 1 (2020) https://
10.1016/j.rser.2012.07.027. doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrp.2020.100174.
[55] G. Badea, G.S. Naghiu, I. Giurca, I. Aşchilean, E. Megyesi, Hydrogen production [79] G. Zhao, E.R. Nielsen, E. Troncoso, K. Hyde, J.S. Romeo, M. Diderich, Life cycle
using solar energy - technical analysis, Energy Procedia 112 (2017) 418e425, cost analysis: a case study of hydrogen energy application on the Orkney
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1097. Islands, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 44 (2019) 9517e9528, https://doi.org/
[56] M. Temiz, I. Dincer, Concentrated solar driven thermochemical hydrogen 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.08.015.
production plant with thermal energy storage and geothermal systems, [80] T.R. Ayodele, J.L. Munda, Potential and economic viability of green hydrogen
Energy 219 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119554. production by water electrolysis using wind energy resources in South Af-
[57] J. Sui, Z. Chen, C. Wang, Y. Wang, J. Liu, W. Li, Efficient hydrogen production rica, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 44 (2019) 17669e17687, https://doi.org/
from solar energy and fossil fuel via water-electrolysis and methane-steam- 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.05.077.
reforming hybridization, Appl. Energy 276 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/ [81] S. Touili, A.A. Merrouni, Y.E. Hassouani, A.-i. Amrani, S. Rachidi, Analysis of
j.apenergy.2020.115409. the yield and production cost of large-scale electrolytic hydrogen from
[58] Z. Wang, R.R. Roberts, G.F. Naterer, K.S. Gabriel, Comparison of thermo- different solar technologies and under several Moroccan climate zones, Int. J.
chemical, electrolytic, photoelectrolytic and photochemical solar-to- Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 26785e26799, https://doi.org/10.1016/
hydrogen production technologies, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37 (2012) j.ijhydene.2020.07.118.
16287e16301, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.03.057. [82] G. Di Marcoberardino, S. Foresti, M. Binotti, G. Manzolini, Potentiality of a
[59] M.D. Falco, G. Santoro, M. Capocelli, G. Caputo, A. Giaconia, Hydrogen pro- biogas membrane reformer for decentralized hydrogen production, Chemi-
duction by solar steam methane reforming with molten salts as energy cal Engineering and Processing - Process Intensification 129 (2018)
carriers: experimental and modelling analysis, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 46 131e141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2018.04.023.
(2021) 10682e10696, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.12.172. [83] R. Boudries, Techno-economic study of hydrogen production using CSP
[60] J.O. Abe, A.P.I. Popoola, E. Ajenifuja, O.M. Popoola, Hydrogen energy, econ- technology, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 43 (2018) 3406e3417, https://doi.org/
omy and storage: review and recommendation, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 44 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.05.157.
(2019) 15072e15086, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.04.068. [84] M. Go € kçek, C. Kale, Optimal design of a hydrogen refuelling station (HRFS)
[61] C. Kalamaras, A. Efstathiou (Eds.), Hydrogen Production Technologies: Cur- powered by hybrid power system, Energy Convers. Manag. 161 (2018)
rent State and Future Developments, Hindawi Publishing Coporation, 2012. 215e224, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.02.007.
[62] M. El-Shafie, S. Kambara, Y. Hayakawa, Hydrogen production technologies [85] H2.live, Hydrogen Stations in Germany and Europe, 2020. https://h2.live/en.
overview, J. Power Energy Eng. 7 (2019) 107e154, https://doi.org/10.4236/ (Accessed 4 November 2020).
jpee.2019.71007. [86] Hydrogenics, HYSTAT 10 - Indoor. https://www.hydrogenics.com/hydrogen-
[63] A. Abuşog €
lu, S. Demir, E. Ozahi, Energy and economic analyses of models products-solutions/industrial-hydrogen-generators-by-electrolysis/indoor-
developed for sustainable hydrogen production from biogas-based elec- installation/hystat-trade-10/, 2020. (Accessed 1 November 2020).
tricity and sewage sludge, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 41 (2016) 13426e13435, [87] NEL, Nel Hydrogen Electrolysers, The World's Most Efficient and Reliable
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.05.105. Electrolysers, 2020.
[64] Y.S. Cho, J.H. Kim, Hydrogen production by splitting water on solid acid [88] Draw.io, 2021. https://app.diagrams.net/. (Accessed 2 March 2021).
materials by thermal dissociation, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy [89] Meteotest, Meteonorm, (2020).
36 (2011) 8192e8202, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.04.133. [90] A.M. Khalid, I. Mitra, W. Warmuth, V. Schacht, Performance ratio e crucial
[65] I. Dincer, Green methods for hydrogen production, International Journal of parameter for grid connected PV plants, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 65
Hydrogen Energy 37 (2012) 1954e1971, https://doi.org/10.1016/ (2016) 1139e1158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.066.
j.ijhydene.2011.03.173. [91] C. Kost, S. Shammugam, V. Juelch, H.-T. Nguyen, T. Schlegl, Levelized Cost of
[66] A.A. Ismail, D.W. Bahnemann, Photochemical splitting of water for hydrogen Electricity: Renewable Energy Technologies. March 2018, 2018.
production by photocatalysis: A review, Solar Energy Materials and Solar [92] I.S.E. Fraunhofer, Recent Facts about Photovoltaics in Germany, 2020.
Cells 128 (2014) 85e101, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2014.04.037. [93] I.S.E. Fraunhofer, Current and Future Cost of Photovoltaics: Long-Term Sce-
[67] O. Bicakova, P. Straka, Production of hydrogen from renewable resources and narios for Market Development, System Prices and LCOE of Utility-Scale PV
its effectiveness, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 37 (2012) Systems, 2015.

930
R. Bhandari and R.R. Shah Renewable Energy 177 (2021) 915e931

[94] P.V. Magazine, Module Price Index, 2020. https://www.pv-magazine.com/ [102] Exchange Rates, orguk, US Dollar to Euro Spot Exchange Rates for, vol. 2021,
features/investors/module-price-index/. (Accessed 1 November 2020). 2018. https://www.exchangerates.org.uk/USD-EUR-spot-exchange-rates-
[95] K. Mongird, V. Viswanathan, P. Balducci, J. Alam, V. Fotedar, V. Koritarov, history-2018.html#:~:text¼Average%20exchange%20rate%20in%202018%3A
B. Hadjerioua, Energy Storage Technology and Cost Characterization Report, %200.8475%20EUR.
2019. [103] T.A. Gunawan, I. Williamson, D. Raine, R.F.D. Monaghan, Decarbonising city
[96] Hinicio Tractebel, Study on early business cases for H2 in energy storage and bus networks in Ireland with renewable hydrogen, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
more broadly power to H2 applications: final Report, 2017. June 2017. (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.11.164.
[97] G. Matute, J.M. Yusta, L.C. Correas, Techno-economic modelling of water [104] P.K. Rose, F. Neumann, Hydrogen refueling station networks for heavy-duty
electrolysers in the range of several MW to provide grid services while vehicles in future power systems, Transport. Res. 83 (2020), https://doi.org/
generating hydrogen for different applications: a case study in Spain applied 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102358.
to mobility with FCEVs, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 44 (2019) 17431e174442, [105] S. Weidner, M. Faltenbacher, I. François, D. Thomas, J.B. Skùlason, C. Maggi,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.05.092. Feasibility study of large scale hydrogen power-to-gas applications and cost
[98] L. Viktorsson, J.T. Heinonen, J.B. Skulason, R. Unnthorsson, A Step towards the of the systems evolving with scaling up in Germany, Belgium and Iceland,
hydrogen economyda Life cycle cost analysis of a hydrogen refueling sta- Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 43 (2018) 15625e15638, https://doi.org/10.1016/
tion, energies 10 (2017) 763e778, https://doi.org/10.3390/en10060763. j.ijhydene.2018.06.167.
[99] Statista, Industry electricity prices in Germany: (in euro cents per kilowatt [106] R.P. Micena, O.R. Llerena-Pizarro, T.M.d. Souza, J.L. Silveira, Solar-powered
hour), https://www.statista.com/, 2020. (Accessed 1 November 2020). hydrogen refueling stations: a techno-economic analysis, Int. J. Hydrogen
[100] M. Minutillo, A. Perna, A. Forcina, S. Di Micco, E. Jannelli, Analyzing the Energy 45 (2020) 2308e2318, https://doi.org/10.1016/
levelized cost of hydrogen in refueling stations with on-site hydrogen j.ijhydene.2019.11.092.
production via water electrolysis in the Italian scenario, Int. J. Hydrogen [107] J. Hinkley, J. Hayward, R. McNaughton, R. Gillespie, A. Matsumoto, M. Watt,
Energy 46 (2021) 13667e13677, https://doi.org/10.1016/ K. Lovegrove, Cost Assessment of Hydrogen Production from PV and Elec-
j.ijhydene.2020.11.110. trolysis, Australia, 2016.
[101] F.I. Gallardo, A.M. Ferrario, M. Lamagna, E. Bocci, D.A. Garcia, T.E. Baeza-Jeria, [108] A. Nicita, G. Maggio, A.P.F. Andaloro, G. Squadrito, Green hydrogen as feed-
A Techno-Economic Analysis of solar hydrogen production by electrolysis in stock: financial analysis of a photovoltaic-powered electrolysis plant, Int. J.
the north of Chile and the case of exportation from Atacama Desert to Japan, Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 11395e11408, https://doi.org/10.1016/
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 46 (2021) 13709e13728, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ijhydene.2020.02.062.
j.ijhydene.2020.07.050.

931