A comparative cost and qualitative analysis for the transportation of green energy carriers†

IF 5 3区 材料科学 Q2 CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL
Tom Kroon, Amir Fattahi, Francesco Dalla Longa, J. Chris Slootweg and Bob van der Zwaan
{"title":"A comparative cost and qualitative analysis for the transportation of green energy carriers†","authors":"Tom Kroon, Amir Fattahi, Francesco Dalla Longa, J. Chris Slootweg and Bob van der Zwaan","doi":"10.1039/D4SE00959B","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Green energy carriers play a pivotal role in the transition towards the pervasive use of variable renewable electricity, as they allow for efficient storage, transportation, and utilization of excess electricity generated in specific regions and/or over different time frames. In this paper, we analyze the cost-optimality of transporting eight liquid or gaseous green energy carriers, including H<small><sub>2</sub></small>, <em>via</em> pipelines and shipping, over distances from 250 to 3000 km. To provide a more comprehensive deployability evaluation beyond purely cost-based criteria, we introduce several novel concepts that allow comparing green energy carriers on the basis of safety, applicability, and end-use characteristics. Our study reveals that H<small><sub>2</sub></small> exhibits significantly higher costs compared to other energy carriers across both transportation modes. For a pipeline and shipping distance of 250 km, we calculate H<small><sub>2</sub></small> transportation costs of 1.4 and 8.1 m€ per PJ, respectively, while for alternative carriers costs range from 0.1 to 0.7 and 0.2 to 3.1 m€ per PJ. For a distance of 3000 km, H<small><sub>2</sub></small> transportation costs through pipeline and shipping are estimated at 18.6 and 10.3 m€ per PJ, respectively, whereas for alternative carriers the cost ranges from 1.2 to 7.6 and 0.3 to 4.0 m€ per PJ. An integration of additional selection criteria, however, implies that the practical deployability differs significantly across different green energy carriers, and that no one-to-one relationship exists between deployability and transportation costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":104,"journal":{"name":"Sustainable Energy & Fuels","volume":" 7","pages":" 1773-1785"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlepdf/2025/se/d4se00959b?page=search","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainable Energy & Fuels","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/se/d4se00959b","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Green energy carriers play a pivotal role in the transition towards the pervasive use of variable renewable electricity, as they allow for efficient storage, transportation, and utilization of excess electricity generated in specific regions and/or over different time frames. In this paper, we analyze the cost-optimality of transporting eight liquid or gaseous green energy carriers, including H2, via pipelines and shipping, over distances from 250 to 3000 km. To provide a more comprehensive deployability evaluation beyond purely cost-based criteria, we introduce several novel concepts that allow comparing green energy carriers on the basis of safety, applicability, and end-use characteristics. Our study reveals that H2 exhibits significantly higher costs compared to other energy carriers across both transportation modes. For a pipeline and shipping distance of 250 km, we calculate H2 transportation costs of 1.4 and 8.1 m€ per PJ, respectively, while for alternative carriers costs range from 0.1 to 0.7 and 0.2 to 3.1 m€ per PJ. For a distance of 3000 km, H2 transportation costs through pipeline and shipping are estimated at 18.6 and 10.3 m€ per PJ, respectively, whereas for alternative carriers the cost ranges from 1.2 to 7.6 and 0.3 to 4.0 m€ per PJ. An integration of additional selection criteria, however, implies that the practical deployability differs significantly across different green energy carriers, and that no one-to-one relationship exists between deployability and transportation costs.

Abstract Image

绿色能源载体运输的成本比较与定性分析
绿色能源载体在向广泛使用可变可再生电力的过渡中发挥着关键作用,因为它们允许在特定地区和/或不同时间框架内有效储存、运输和利用多余的电力。在本文中,我们分析了通过管道和航运运输包括H2在内的8种液体或气体绿色能源载体的成本最优性,运输距离为250至3000公里。为了提供超越纯粹基于成本的标准的更全面的可部署性评估,我们引入了几个新颖的概念,允许在安全性、适用性和最终用途特征的基础上比较绿色能源载体。我们的研究表明,在两种运输方式中,氢气的成本都明显高于其他能源载体。对于250公里的管道和运输距离,我们计算的氢气运输成本分别为每PJ 140万欧元和810万欧元,而对于替代承运人,成本分别为每PJ 0.1至0.7万欧元和0.2至310万欧元。对于3000公里的距离,通过管道和航运的氢气运输成本估计分别为每PJ 18.6和1030万欧元,而对于替代承运人,成本分别为每PJ 1.2至7.6和0.3至4.0万欧元。然而,综合其他选择标准意味着,不同绿色能源载体的实际可部署性存在显著差异,可部署性与运输成本之间不存在一对一的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sustainable Energy & Fuels
Sustainable Energy & Fuels Energy-Energy Engineering and Power Technology
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
394
期刊介绍: Sustainable Energy & Fuels will publish research that contributes to the development of sustainable energy technologies with a particular emphasis on new and next-generation technologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信