## DOE to issue funding opportunity for fuel cell hybrid medium-duty trucks

##### 11 May 2013

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Fuel Cell Technologies Office (FCTO), on behalf of the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), announced that it will issue a funding opportunity announcement (FOA) titled “Fuel Cell Hybrid Electric Medium Duty Trucks, Roof-top Backup Power, and Advanced Hydrogen Refueling Components” (DE-FOA-0000922).

DOE suggests that prospective applicants to the FOA should begin developing partnerships, formulating ideas, and gathering data in anticipation of its issuance, estimated sometime this month.

DOE anticipates that the FOA will include the following topics:

Demonstration and Deployment of Fuel Cell Hybrid-Electric Medium-Duty Trucks (up to $3M federal funding per award, 50% minimum cost share required). This topic is intended to accelerate the development and deployment of on-board, fuel cell hybrid-electric powered Class 3-6 medium-duty trucks (MD eTrucks) to increase substantially the zero-emission driving range, thereby reducing petroleum consumption and related emissions and increasing the economic viability of these electric drive vehicles. DOE will seek new applications for projects to demonstrate and deploy fuel cell hybrid MD eTrucks at freight distribution centers, cargo distribution centers, or parcel/package distribution center sites. The specific MD eTruck vehicles of interest are commercial vehicles that deliver cargo, parcels, or packaged freight on daily routes and return to their distribution centers at the end of their daily operations. DOE envisions up to two financial assistance awards in the form of cooperative agreements, with a period of performance of up to five years for each award. Validation of Advanced Hydrogen Refueling Components (up to$1.5M federal funding per award, 50% minimum cost share required). Topic 2 will demonstrate and validate the durability and robustness of hydrogen refueling components in real-world operating environments. Feedback will be provided to the DOE hydrogen and fuel cell R&D projects, industry partners, and end users to help determine what additional R&D is required to move the technology forward.

This topic seeks to validate advanced/innovative hydrogen refueling components in their intended real-world application. Proposed projects should validate advanced hydrogen refueling equipment by placing the equipment in service for an existing or planned refueling site in the US.

Advanced components to be validated under this topic area may include, but are not limited to, compressors, electrolyzers, systems co-producing electricity and hydrogen, hydrogen delivery (such as high pressure tanks for tube trailers), bulk hydrogen storage systems, and dispenser systems or components, such as flow meters, nozzles or communications systems.

DOE envisions multiple financial assistance awards in the form of cooperative agreements, with a period of performance of up to five years for each award.

Demonstration and Case Study for Roof-top Installations of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Backup Power Systems (up to $250k federal funding per award, 50% minimum cost share required). The third topic will develop a case study for roof-top installations of fuel cell powered back-up power systems that refuel from the ground. The process of obtaining access to the building, interacting with code officials, obtaining required permits, design considerations, and operation and maintenance will be documented as a case study for informing future siting of backup power systems. The case study is to address methods for reducing the cost of installation such as: • including the use of components that can be installed without the use of a crane; • the use of light-weight composite tanks to reduce the roof load or provide greater energy capacity of the system; • specific designs used for the use of permanently installed hydrogen piping and appropriate remote-controlled valves and service-point valves that allow for the convenient ground-level refueling of the system from hydrogen delivery vehicles; • the safety considerations made in the installation and operation of the system; • operational and maintenance logs for the system or systems covering several backup power events; and • how the costs of installation and operations compare to appropriate baseline business cases, including both standard ground installations and other rooftop installations with conventional technology (i.e. diesel or batteries). The study may include the deployment and demonstration of one or several fuel cell backup power systems, or rely on existing or modified installations. DOE seeks to maximize the variety of specific measures studied to accommodate the roof-top installation or the variety of site-specific conditions that may impact the installation and operation of roof-top installations. The hydrogen delivery tanks for various truck platforms will not be considered in this topic area, but it is possible that hydrogen delivery approaches/advances could be validated under Topic 2 above. DOE envisions up to two financial assistance awards in the form of cooperative agreements, with a period of performance of up to five years for each award. Hydrogen Meter R&D (up to$300K federal funding per award, 20% minimum cost share required). Topic 4 will support research and development to improve the accuracy of meters used to measure the mass of hydrogen fuel dispensed into a vehicle. Accurate dispenser meters are critical to the economic viability of hydrogen fueling stations by enabling them to meet measurement requirements for the legal sale of hydrogen by mass to the public, while protecting both the customers and vendors.

The R&D will address improvements required for meters to enable commercial dispensing devices to meet the measurement requirements defined in NIST Handbook 441, while performing under fueling conditions defined in SAE J2601 TIR2.

The work will advance the state of hydrogen meter technology toward an accuracy of at least 1.5% relative while performing under fueling conditions, which include measurements taken over a range of fueling flow rates at the nozzle (up to 60 g H2/s, up to 3.6 kg/min) and a range of hydrogen pressures (up to at least 87.5 MPa) and temperatures (-40 °C to 85 °C).

DOE envisions one financial assistance award in the form of a cooperative agreement, with a period of performance of up to two years.

Rooftop installations of hydrogen refuelling is interesting.
That is because of the different characteristics of hydrogen compared to petrol and diesel.

If there is a problem, hydrogen will evaporate or burn upward, and will not seep and pool as petrol does.

This gives good opportunities for enhanced safety.

Fuel cells have historically been a means of funneling $billions in taxes to automakers. A(the?) main obstacle seems to be impurities killing operation and the many perfect stack cells required. Can a CHEAP (few use/easy replace) 'quick & dirty' fuel cell be made as a emergency EV genset/range extender? Could it be integrated cheaper than the BMW I3 detuned$4,000 genset option?

Cars are ~useless with a flat tire, but we don't have tire factories in the trunk.

Love is finish. The plant was to release hydrogen technology years ago but now it's too late and everything is collapsing

There are hundreds of fuel cell vehicles on the road, as well as fleets of fork lift trucks and hosts of stationary generators using exactly the same fuel cell stacks.

The notion that impurities represent any short of show stopper is absurd, and bespeaks a profound ignorance of the subject under discussion.

Ignorance is the Honda \$million FCX cost, the fourth decade of "in a few years" AFFORDABLE fuel cell vehicle lies, and all those fuel cell cars we see daily on the world highways during this 11th year of "THE HYDROGEN[fuel cell] INITIATIVE.

pissing away money

Its a simple limit of total energy needed vs weight allowed.

As you make the truck bigger and haul more and make it go farther the energy needs skyrocket.

@kelly:
It is remarkable how you simply change the subject when you are called on your absurdities.

Banging on about alleged high costs has nothing at all to do with your contention that impurities are going to kill fuel cells, which I have clearly shown to be nonsense, or rather the umpteen vehicles and stationary installations already in operation have shown to be claptrap.

"which I have clearly shown to be nonsense"

Not even one example. I am waiting for the fist appliacation of a FC to actually be somehow better.

I do not have a problem with goverment funding to make alternatives a practical reality. Certainly intercity buses and truck would be prime for HFCV assuming you can get makers of ICE to stop making improvements at a lower cost.

The comments to this entry are closed.