There are no files associated with this item.
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.citation.startPage | 142468 | - |
dc.citation.title | JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION | - |
dc.citation.volume | 458 | - |
dc.contributor.author | Syauqi, Ahmad | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, Hyunjun | - |
dc.contributor.author | Nagulapati, Vijay Mohan | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lim, Hankwon | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-08-01T11:05:08Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-08-01T11:05:08Z | - |
dc.date.created | 2024-07-03 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024-06 | - |
dc.description.abstract | This study conducts technical, economic, and safety analysis of a green hydrogen production system consisting of a 1000 kWp photovoltaic cell, 3 options of energy storage namely lead carbon (PbC), lithium -ion (Li -ion), and repurposed lithium -ion (2nd Life Li -ion) battery, and an electrolyzer. Firstly, the system is optimized to maximum hydrogen production by adjusting equipment capacity and capacity factors, informed by a 1-h resolution solar energy generation profile. This optimization yields insights into the system's yearly operational dynamics. Techno-economic analysis was conducted to estimate the levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH) from 2020 to 2050, additionally, uncertainty analysis using Monte -Carlo simulation to estimate the range of uncertainty in LCOH projection from 2020 to 2050 was performed. Furthermore, a quantitative risk analysis, utilizing the process route index metric, evaluates the risk of battery explosions. Finally, this study employs multi -criteria decision-making to choose the best energy storage technology to produce green hydrogen from economic and safety factors. The result indicates that in 2020, the PbC battery emerged as the most cost-effective option. However, over time, both lithium batteries became the cheapest option with almost similar trends. In terms of explosion hazard, the analysis shows that the PbC battery is a safer option for stationary energy storage. When both aspects are considered, the preferred battery option is almost certainly PbC over the years, but in extreme cases where the decision-maker places significant emphasis on economic factors both Li -ion options may become preferable. | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, v.458, pp.142468 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142468 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0959-6526 | - |
dc.identifier.scopusid | 2-s2.0-85192823988 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://scholarworks.unist.ac.kr/handle/201301/83347 | - |
dc.identifier.wosid | 001242122200001 | - |
dc.language | 영어 | - |
dc.publisher | ELSEVIER SCI LTD | - |
dc.title | Optimal energy storage system selection for future cost-effective green hydrogen production: Integrating techno-economic, risk-based decision making, and cost projections | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.isOpenAccess | FALSE | - |
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategory | Green & Sustainable Science & Technology; Engineering, Environmental; Environmental Sciences | - |
dc.relation.journalResearchArea | Science & Technology - Other Topics; Engineering; Environmental Sciences & Ecology | - |
dc.type.docType | Article | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | scie | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | scopus | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Green hydrogen | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Energy storage | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Techno-economic analysis | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Cost projections | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Risk analysis | - |
dc.subject.keywordPlus | ALKALINE WATER ELECTROLYSIS | - |
dc.subject.keywordPlus | BATTERY | - |
Items in Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
Tel : 052-217-1404 / Email : scholarworks@unist.ac.kr
Copyright (c) 2023 by UNIST LIBRARY. All rights reserved.
ScholarWorks@UNIST was established as an OAK Project for the National Library of Korea.