go to top scroll for more

Impact Analysis - Hydrogen - Final Report

Citation Romero, P. and Cooke, H. Impact Analysis - Hydrogen - Final Report, ETI, 2016. https://doi.org/10.5286/UKERC.EDC.000657.
Cite this using DataCite
Author(s) Romero, P. and Cooke, H.
Project partner(s) Buro Happold Ltd
Publisher ETI
DOI https://doi.org/10.5286/UKERC.EDC.000657
Download ESD_EN2015_1.pdf document type
Abstract This project assessed the potential impact of selected, identified innovations on specific types of network (relating to heat, gas, electricity and hydrogen). Generic modelled networks will be developed utilising the 2050 Energy Infrastructure Cost Calculator model developed by a separate ETI project to understand the expected costs of certain types of network. The modelled networks will provide ‘business as usual data’ and a useful basis for further understanding of the impact of identified innovations in terms of overall cost and network performance.

This report considers  hydrogen.. The work undertaken here made use of the first version of the ICC and as such also acted as a testing phase. Some issues arose in relation to the output of the tool particularly in respect of the treatment of operational and lifecycle costs. These findings are being fed into aparallel project to develop a second version.

Key Findings:
  • Representative hydrogen transmission model: transmission pipeline of different lengths required to transport hydrogen from production facilities to power generation sites and vehicle refuelling sites
    • Pipe lengths (NTS 32”) modelled for connection to production sites were 5km and 10km without the need for a compression station; pipe lengths (LTS 16”) for connection to refuelling sites were modelled at longer distances up to 200km, with a compression station required for anything over 100km
    • NPV/km for connecting to power stations was £5.4m for installation in 2025
    • NPV/km for connections to refuelling sites was in the range £3.0m to £3.5m depending on network length with the higher cost relating to the need to add in a compression station
    • The additionalcost of the power station scenario was due to the need to use larger diameter and hence more expensive pipe
  • Representative hydrogen distribution model: distribution pipelines (LP/MP) required to connect production facilities to vehicle refuelling stations at different capacities and contexts
    • Context is a strong influencer of costs, with first costs per km increasing from rural through to urban and London. This is due to the higher costs of installing pipework in more congested areas.
    • Pipe costs dominate the overall network cost, particularly for the longer network lengths.
    • There is a small increase in cost per km for the higher capacity scenarios
  • Hydrogen transmission and the impact of including storage:
    • Connecting a single large storage site into the network is considerably less expensive than connecting multiple storage sites of the same capacity
    • As the pipe lengths modelled were relatively short (5-10km) the storage costs dominated the overall project cost
    • Costs per mcm are considerably higher for the multi-storage option
    • The main benefit of the storage options is the storage itself and not the first cost savings associated with it.
  • Hydrogen transmission network and the impact of pipeline material change: comparison of stainless steel 316L pipe with conventional steel using same pipe diameter (32” NTS)
    • First costs per km are higher for the stainless steel innovation
    • There is a slight reduction in cost/km for the longer stainless steel pipe lengths
Associated Project(s) ETI-EN2015: Impact Analysis
Associated Dataset(s) No associated datasets
Associated Publication(s)

An ETI Perspective - The challenges of energy storage and its place in UK energy system planning

Impact Analysis - Electricity - Final Report

Impact Analysis - Gas - Final Report

Impact Analysis - Heat - Final Report