1、 l : 2006- 09- 21 “ : S E null 863null / ? Z 9 “ (2003AA501340); Z g S S / 1 “ (05dz12025)T e : y (1954 ), q , p V , 1 Z _ _ ! # $ ! .Enullmail: jxma fcv- sh. comF _ _ _ Z 1 马建新,刘绍军,周! 伟,潘相敏( 6 v _ ? / , Z ! 201804)K 1 : n 5 D C _ Z T , _ Y V 5 a # 5 a ? h # . Y V y F _ _ _ s , T V Z v ? _ 5 2. 3 kg
2、- 1,A _ 0.4 kg- 1,5 6 kg- 1. _ A ? 1 _ ; ; ? ; m s | : TK 91! ! ! ! ! ! D S M : A ! ! ! ! ! ! c I | : 0253- 374X( 2008) 05- 0615- 05Comparisonof HydrogenTransportationMethodsfor HydrogenRefuelingStationMA Jianxin, LIU Shaojun, ZHOU Wei, PAN Xiangmin(Institute of Hydrogen Technology, TongjiUniversity
3、, Shanghai201804, China)Abstract: This paper first presents a review of theexisting hydrogen delivery methods. Then a studyis made of the delivery cost, energy consumption and the safety of hydrogen transportation by tubetrailer, tank and pipe. A hydrogen transportation cost model is established to
4、calculate the largenullscalehydrogen transportation cost in Shanghai. The results show gaseous hydrogen ( GH2) transportationcost by tube trailer is 2.3 RMBkg- 1,liquid hydrogen (LH2) by tank is 0.4 RMBkg- 1,and GH2 bypipe is 6 RMBkg- 1. Regarding to the energy consumption, hydrogen liquefaction con
5、sumes morethan 30% of its low heat value( LHV);about 3 timesof hydrogen compression.Theremay exitst somerisks such as. highnullpressure, LH2 boilnulloff and permeability during the delivery, which can be avoidedcylinder design,regulation and so on.Based on the analysis result,hydrogen delivered by t
6、ube trailer isthebest option for a plan to establish ascale of about a thousand fuel cell vehicles in Shanghai.Key words:hydrogen refueling station; hydrogen transportation; cost; energy consumption; safety! ! ? Z , Z A y ? Z M a _ $ ! (F _ _ ).F _ _ _ V s _ F _ _ _ = _ F _ _ ,7 _ F _ _ , _ 1 B . _
7、Z T “ , O Z T a a P M ,y N 1 1 , L = f Z T , r Z _ $ ! ? Z . 36 5 2008 M 5 6 v (1 S )JOURNAL OF TONGJI UNIVERSITY( NATURAL SCIENCE)Vol. 36 No. 5! May 20081! _ Z T v H _ ) , _ Z T V s : _ (GH2) aA _ (LH2) % _ (SH2) . - | _ F A Y , “ - F _ _ P Z T .% _ Y V _ , % _ Z T , “ % _ / l , Z L Z T V P 1.1.1!
8、_ _ Y F B , “ a 5 5 .“ 40 L _ F , Y 15 MPa.“ 2 , p l , d X Z T . 5 h F . 5 r F_ _ , h 5 V s , 5 9 V T % _ . “ - 5 B 9 0.5 m, 10 m F , ! 9 T 20 MPa, V _ 3 500 S m3.5 = _ q 1 ,v 75%85%. 5 / ,? S ,y N S F _ _ 5 _ , Z v ? _ 5 ._ 9 V Y V 5 F _ _ . S aF & v# x Td+ ttf (11)T , ttf 5 9 _ 9 H W ,h.* 1 5 V ,N
9、t = Nc (12)T , Nt 5 . 5 1 9 F - 5 P ( A HW ,9 5 Nt = Nc+ttfNud # 24ns- TdNc+ 1 (13)! ! N V 9 5 h ,V 7 ! g # M 1 g , p a ? .2. 2! 9 # s s Y F _ _ 1 a4 a8 16 4 f 9 _ .L ! F _ _ _ ( 50 km, 5 20 MPa.A _ 65 m3, 9 20 m3, 5 9 _ H W 7.5 h,_ = H W 7.5 h, 5617! 5 y , :F _ _ _ Z 1 ! ! ( H 50 kmh- 1. 5 a a5 5 p
10、 s Y 10 M ,10 M ,20 M 40 M .9 H = l m q IRR 10%6, * s = M l g g 1 ,9 “ V / T 9 :CRF = I RR1- (1+ IRR)- N(14)T , CRF “ , IRR = l m q , N s M K .B F v 3 400S m3 “ 5 N v 120 , h N v 40 ,B 15000F ( 68 m3) A _ N v 50 7. N 42 L- 1, n 6 M - 1 - 1.m 1 _ Y V 5 . V A , F _ _ H , V r 4. 7 kg- 1. “ F _ _ 9 F F
11、_ _ ? 9 v , v . F _ _ H , / V C o , 5 r q 1 , F _ _ ? 750 kgd- 1 H , 5 ) T , ? 9 F 900 kgd- 1 H , 19 F 5 , 5 9 8 r . h B t , ? 3 _ c ,y N Y V 4 a , V y _ c 3 B .5! Z F _ _ _ Z 4 2010 M F _ _ ? l . A _ 1.8 kg- 1, 5 2.5 kg- 1, I n _ A g v , _ A h _ 30% , 6 , 1 Z A _ $ ,y N A _ a F _ _ ? Z . “ , _ , !
12、5 g v ,y N 8 1 A , 2010 M -F _ _ 5 _ L = . v 9 ) a E ) , ? _ h 9 v 9 30 t 300 t,F_ _ r V , s _ ? 9 v . 5 , 5 V / 4 ,N H V I n y _ A U S , O A X ? 6 , A _ A . 6 VI n ! 5 _ F _ _ _ , ? l F _ _ V 5 .6! V Z A , Z T A _ K ,5 K . I n _ A , 5 “ - 6 Z . _ A ? r 1 & 30%, ? 3 . A _ h ? l , 5 ? ,y N a .5 Z T i
13、 , “ - n ? 8 . _ $ ) ? ? Z V ,F_ _ Y V ? 5 _ e L a 6 Z T . r ) ? H , _ A X ? r m , A _ X . _ F _ _ _ V 5 . I D : 1 ! . _ ? M. : Y v , 1990.CHEN Danzhi. HydrogenM. Xi% an: Xi% an Jiaotong Universinullty Press, 1990. 2 ! Amos W A. Costs of storing and transportingR. Colorado: NanulltionalRenewable Ene
14、rgy Laboratory, 1998. 3 ! Simbeck D R, Chang E. Hydrogen supply: cost estimate for hynulldrogen pathways: scoping analysisR. Colorado: National Renullnewable Energy Laboratory, 2002. 4 ! Glass R, Zalesky R. Report of the production and delivery subgroupR. California: Lawrence Livermore National Labo
15、ratory, 2004. 5 ! Unnasch S, Kassoy E, Weinert J, et al. California HydrogenFueling Station GuidelinesR. California: TIAX LLC, 2003. 6 ! Short W, Packey DJ,Holt T. A manual for the economic evaluanulltion of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologiesR.Colorado: NationalRenewable Energy Labo
16、ratory, 1995. 7 ! Sherif S A, Barbir F, Veziroglu T N. Towards a hydrogen econonullmy J. The Electricity Journal. 2005, (18): 62. 8 ! Mercuri R, Bauen A,Hart D. Options for refueling hydrogen fuel cellvehicles in Italy J. Journal of Power Source, 2002, (106):353. 9 ! Syed M T, Sherif S A, Veziroblu
17、T N, et al. An economicanalynullsis of threehydrogen liquefaction systems J. InternationalJournullnalof Hydrogen Energy, 1998, 23(7): 565.10 ! Bossel U, Eliasson B. The future of the hydrogen economy:bright or bleak? R/OL. 2003- 03- 26. http: /www. fuenulllandfiber. com/Athena/hydrogennulleconomy. pdf.11 ! Z .1 _ ) J. . 2003, 20(9): 29.WANG Honghai. Discussion about the safety of hydrogen cylinnullder J. Pressure Vessel. 2003, 20(9): 29.619! 5 y , :F _ _ _ Z 1 ! !
