Fuel cell field test demonstration of economic and environmental viability for portable generators, backup and UPS power system applications

Informations projet

FITUP

N° de convention de subvention: 256766

Projet clôturé

Date de début 1 Novembre 2010

Date de fin 30 Avril 2014

Financé au titre de

• Specific Programme "Cooperation": Joint Technology Initiatives

Coût total € 5 289 900,72

Contribution de l’UE € 2 475 825,00

Coordonné par

ELECTRO POWER SYSTEMS MANUFACTURINGSRL
Italy

Final Report Summary - FITUP (Fuel cell field test demonstration of economic and environmental viability for portable generators, backup and UPS power system applications)

Executive Summary:
19 market-ready fuel cell systems from two suppliers (Electro Power Systems and Future-E) have been produced and installed as UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) backup power sources in selected sites across Europe (Italy, Switzerland, and Turkey). Real-world customers from the telecommunications industry (Swisscom, Polycom, Wind and Turkcell) used thirteen fuel cell-based systems, with power levels in the 3-12 kW range, in their sites. On the other hand benchmark tests of six fuel cell UPS systems have been implemented at the research centres (JRC, Environment Park, LUASA, IBU) to validate the lifetime of the systems.
Grid failures are imposed in these sites according to the test protocol developed for each application. Test protocol provides a tool to check whether the systems satisfy end-user backup power requirements at different levels of grid quality. Three distinct goals of the project has been focused in the test results and compared:
• Reliability greater than 95%
• Response time less than 5 ms
• 1500 hours and 1000 cycles of system lifetime in benchmark tests and no considerable performance deterioration for the on-field systems.
Combining all the tests in the project, a total of 10,397 cycles have been tested. Systems responded to 10,332 of these cycles successfully to provide 6,573 hours of backup power without interruption. The average reliability of all systems tested in the project reaches 99.4% which is well above the project goals. Individual system reliability has differed from 97% to 100%, which assures each of tested systems has surpassed the projected goals individually. The total energy production during the tests has surpassed 18.7 MWh with an average power output of 2.85 kW for the 17 systems tested. Long term durability tests prove that expected lifetime has been reached both in terms of cycles and operating hours. Finally all the systems are proven to provide the same rated power at the end of the tests, which hints that there is not a considerable deterioration in the system performance.
Thus technical viability and reliability of back-up fuel cell systems have been proven on the field.
A lifecycle analysis using data from the project has been carried out by UNITOV to determine economic and environmental value proposition over incumbent technologies such as batteries and/or diesel generators, including a TCO analysis as comparison criteria. The comparison of competing technologies in three different scenarios confirms that the FC backup system is an environmental friendly solution.
Using the expert advice of TÜV Süd the project also studied a proposal for a uniform certification procedure for Fuel Cell Systems as backup and UPS power systems.

The dissemination of project progress has been geared mostly towards getting the word out to final users through presentations at specialised conferences, thus improving the visibility of market-ready fuel cells and pave the way for market penetration.

Non-technical barriers, i.e. all those barriers to deployment that are not specific to the technical performance of the products demonstrated, for the exploitation of fuel cell systems for back-up power / UPS applications and recommendations regarding the removal or reduction of these non-technical barriers to deployment have been identified.
Project website: http://fitup.engr.bilgi.edu.tr/
Project coordinator: Ilaria Rosso, Electro Power Systems S.p.A. [e-mail].

Project Context and Objectives:
Fuel cells are electrochemical devices that convert chemical energy in fuels into electrical energy directly, with high efficiency and low environmental impact. There is a wide range of potential applications for fuel cells including transportation, on-site residential power generation, auxiliary power systems and material handling. Figure 1 show the total number of units installed worldwide for different application areas.
Fuel cells are very promising technology for automotive applications when concerned with high range and fast refuelling requirements of the alternative technology replacing internal combustion engines. On the other hand, the commercialization of fuel cell vehicles can take up some more time due to lack of fuelling infrastructure and high costs associated with the very small scale of manufacturing. However, even with the current state of the technology, fuel cells have become commercially viable solutions for some applications such as material handling and backup power. This is mainly due to the attenuated operating costs of fuel cell systems when compared to competing battery and fossil-fuel technologies.
Backup power technologies currently include batteries and generators operating on diesel, propane, or gasoline where the former has advantages of zero emissions operation standing out for indoor applications. Fuel cells also being emissions free become another alternative when environmental impacts are concerned. Moreover, compared to batteries, fuel cells offer longer continuous runtime and greater durability in harsh outdoor environments under a wide range of temperature conditions. With fewer moving parts, they require less maintenance than both generators and batteries.
Also lifetime of the fuel cell systems is higher than battery systems, significantly reducing the maintenance costs associated with replacement batteries.
Several studies have pointed out the economic benefits of fuel cells over these other , . In a study for the U.S. Department of Energy, Battelle Memorial Institute analysed lifecycle costs of emergency response radio towers, comparing fuel cells with a 2 kW battery-only backup (8 hours autonomy) and a 5 kW battery-diesel generator backup (52 hours, 72 hours, and 176 hours backup duration). PEM fuel cells can provide service at substantially lower total cost than current technologies (the higher cost for the fuel cell system for the 176-hour backup results from the cost of hydrogen storage tank rental).
Sales and installations of backup power systems in the US have been increased recently with the federal grants and tax incentives. Latest reports show that there have been 5023 fuel cell backup power units deployed in the US . 907 of these systems are government funded which presumably led to 4116 industry funded installations. Industry installations itself jumped from 3593 to 4116, about 15% in the last one year. Total amount of government funding for these systems are reported to be $18.5 million. These funding are utilized in the sites of US telecom operators such as AT&T, Sprint, utilities company PG&E and military sites of Warner Robins Air Force Base and Fort Irwin. These kind of incentives definitely has helped fuel cell industry in the US with companies like ReliOn Inc reporting more than 3.9 MW of installed capacity in more than 1350 customer sites, Altergy Systems reaching more than 5 million hours of operation in the telecommunications applications and stack manufacturer Plug Power deploying more than 4500 stacks for various applications accumulating over 20 million hours of runtime .
Developing countries also increasingly used fuel cells for back-up and remote power. Wireless TT Info Services in India purchasing 200 Plug Power systems. IdaTech continued its focus on Indonesia, receiving an order for 154 ElectraGen™ H2 fuel cell systems, adding to the more than 100 IdaTech fuel cell systems already installed across Indonesia for telecommunications backup power . In 2012, Idea Celullar of India ordered 30 systems from Ballard following the regulations of the Indian government which required 50% of the rural base stations and 33% of the urban ones using hybrid power sources including fuel cells . Indonesian company Cascadiant ordered 102 Ballard systems to be used in their networks reaching 500 units cumulative. Moreover, Ballard reported shipment of 300 units to Inala Technologies in S. Africa, 350 units to NSN in Japan and 170 units to Azure Hydrogen in China .
In the EU, the manufacturers have made inroads into the marketplace, but could still greatly benefit from a project such as FITUP. So far, the level of sales in EU countries by EU suppliers appears to have been somewhat limited, although they have been increasing. The fuel cell suppliers participating in the FITUP project are ramping up production of their units. At the same time, widespread knowledge of this technology is still an objective to be achieved in order for potential users from a number of industries to consider using fuel cells, alongside batteries or diesel generators.

Because the number of demonstrations of fuel cell-based backup power applications has been limited, there is a lack of data for users to access. Without references, many potential users are understandably reticent to try a new technology that provides reliability for their networks, e.g. in the case of the telecommunications industry. Furthermore, the set of criteria for commercialization that are included in the call regarding reliability, durability, cost, cyclability and response times, have not, as a whole, been proven with a representative set of units.

FITUP project’s aim is to overcome these problems, carrying on an extensive test campaign that will supply data about the systems and spread technology knowledge.

In the FITUP project a total of 19 market-ready fuel cell systems from two suppliers, Electro Power Systems and Future-E, have been installed as backup power sources in selected sites across Europe. Customers from the telecommunications industry and public safety departments in Italy, Switzerland and Turkey tested these fuel cell-based systems in real life conditions, with power levels in the 3-12 kW range.
The goal of the project is to demonstrate a level of technical performance (start-up time, reliability, durability, number of cycles) that qualifies them for market entry, thereby accelerating the commercialization of this technology in Europe and elsewhere.

FITUP project has involved testing systems from both fuel cell suppliers at real life-conditions and laboratory benchmarking tests according to a test protocol developed in the scope of the project. The performance and availability data have been logged and analysed to draw conclusions regarding commercial viability and degree to which they meet customer requirements, as well as suggesting areas for improvement.

Also, a lifecycle analysis using data from the project have been carried out to determine economic and environmental value proposition over incumbent technologies such as batteries or diesel generators.

The system producers used the results of the tests to obtain valuable first hand feedback from customers and optimized their systems as needed in the course of the project. On the other hand, final users participated in the project have had the chance for first-hand experience of the use of fuel cells to be used in their applications.

Another goal of the project is to develop a certification procedure, under the supervision of TÜV Süd, valid in the countries of the project where either the fuel cells systems are produced or tested. Moreover, the dissemination of project is aimed towards improving the industry awareness of the fuel cell systems and pave the way for market penetration.

Identification of non-technical barriers, i.e. all those barriers to deployment that are not specific to the technical performance of the products demonstrated, for the exploitation of fuel cell systems for back-up power / UPS applications represents a further objective of the project.

The consortium consists of large and small entities, which are fuel cell suppliers, end users and R&D centres (for data acquisition and analysis). The list of partners is given in Table 1. The partners are located throughout Europe covering a range of environmental conditions, such as those found in Italy, Switzerland and Turkey.
Table 1: List of partners

Partner Name Country Role in the project Contact name

Electro Power Systems Italy Fuel cell manufacturer Ilaria Rosso
[e-mail]
FutureE Fuel Cell Solutions Germany Fuel cell manufacturer Mark-Uwe Osswald
[e-mail]
Environment Park Italy R&D centre Alessandro Graizzaro
[e-mail]
Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts Switzerland R&D centre Ulrike Trachte
[e-mail]
UNIDO-ICHET (Terminated on 31st December 2012) Turkey R&D centre n.a.
Joint Research Centre Netherlands R&D centre Thomas Molkow
[e-mail]
TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Germany Certification body Tim Faber
[e-mail]
Swisscom (Schweiz) AG Switzerland End user Willy Kolher
[e-mail]
Wind Italy End user Reale Aniello
[e-mail]
Betriebskommission Polycom Nidwalden (BKPNW) Switzerland End user Hans Buchel
[e-mail]
Università di Roma Tor Vergata Italy R&D centre Stefano Cordiner
[e-mail]
Istanbul Bilgi University Turkey R&D centre Fazil Mustafa Serican
[e-mail]



Project Results:
The strategy of the work plan of the FITUP project is laid out in three separate major steps. First, the systems were produced and installed prior to testing the systems, second, testing of all systems took place at sites selected by final users, third, the data from the field tests have been gathered and evaluated; conclusions on lessons learned, suggestions for improvement and a full lifecycle analysis have been carried out enabling assessment of environmental, technical and economic feasibility of the use of this technology. The list of the work packages is given in Table 1.

During the first phase, before the systems are tested, a number of steps were taken. These include:
• Produce and install fuel cell systems
• Install hydrogen infrastructure that meet applicable legislation and customer requirements
• Determine and install testing equipment and monitoring protocol to be implemented
• Develop test architecture and protocol
Following the development of the test protocol and installations of the systems, the testing phase started and continued throughout the rest of the project. This phase comprises benchmarking procedures as well as field demonstrations. The benchmarking activities provide a reference against which the results from field trials can be compared.
Testing activities have been accompanied and supported with the data analysis in WP5. Testing algorithms are indeed modified in order to efficiently deal with the collected data. In this work package the collected data will be interpreted to assess the fuel cell systems within the scope of project outcomes.
There are three other tasks that are ancillary, yet vitally important to the success of the project. WP’s 1, 6 and 7 complement the work outlined. WP1 deals with management and coordination. In WP6 a certification procedure suitable for these systems across the EU will be proposed. In WP7 dissemination activities will be carried out, including website management and organisation and attendance at seminars or workshops and identification of non-technical barriers.
Main S&T results and foregrounds are therefore related to WP2, WP3, WP4 and WP5.
1. WP2 – Production of the Fuel Cell Systems
For this work package, the two manufacturers, ElectroPS and FutureE, lead their own work. ICHET acted as WP leader, given its status as independent party and oversee the work being undertaken by both suppliers.
Within this WP two tasks have been identified and executed:
Task 2.1: Production of fuel cell systems for benchmark by research centres and for installation in the field at end user sites
Starting from month 1 of project activities the fuel cell systems have been produced by the two manufacturers and shipped to the research centres and final users.
Each supplier will produce 3 fuel cell systems for benchmarking, while the rest will go towards field demonstrations. The systems from both suppliers will be mounted in a cabinet and can be remotely monitored. This remote monitoring capability will be integrated with the data acquisition and analysis equipment provided by the R&D centres in charge of monitoring. Their respective products are deemed ready for commercialisation and therefore are suitable for demonstration under the scope of this project.
Depending on the detailed site specific requirements and the installation procedures of the selected operators, the power level, the power type (DC/AC) and the configuration (indoor/outdoor) can vary. By using portable 19” rack mounts, the fuel cell systems are designed to allow for custom specific variations while maintaining a high level of standardized components. For the FITUP project this meant that the manufacturers were able to change the hardware from site to site at least in some details but that the overall fuel cell power system remained a standard module. Regardless of the customization it was possible to apply standard manufacturing and test procedures and it will be possible to generate statistically relevant test data that can be compared with each other due to the similarity of the core of the systems.
Fuel cell systems produced for benchmark tests are listed in the table 2 with related date of shipment:

Some changes in the final user sites definition, power outputs and technical specification requests with respect to what had been foreseen at the time of the proposal presentation occurred and brought about some delay in the completion of production and delivery of the systems for final users.
1. Following the decision of the consortium partner Lucerne Cantonal Police to leave the consortium due to the impossibility of having sites ready for installation of systems in line with their own project schedule, Swisscom and BKPNW offered to take the installation of the two systems originally proposed for LucPol.
2. Initial on-field test sites in Turkey were at Four Seasons Hotel in Istanbul. However, due to the diminishing interest of the business management, the consortium decided to look for another partner. Turkcell, the largest GSM telecommunication company in Turkey, accepted to offer two sites to be utilized in FITUP project for a duration of one year each, without becoming member of the consortium.
3. In Turkey initially manufacturers prepared themselves for providing systems with compressed hydrogen cylinders to the hotel installation. However, due to the high cost of hydrogen logistics in Turkey, Turkcell did not see economic viability in that option and asked for a system with electrolyzer which at the end might offer a business case. The manufacturers accepted to change their original planning for the favour of producing the exact configuration demanded by Turkcell.
Lot 1 of fuel cell systems, consisting of 11 of 13 systems to be produced, were manufactured in due time according to data listed in Table 3:

The two missing fuel cell systems with electrolysers for Turkcell were manufactured and delivered with some months of delay also because of some complications arisen at the customs due to unprecedented nature of the shipment.

The complete list of produced systems is reported in Table 5.

Task 2.2: System optimisation
This task refers to the optimization of the fuel cell systems once installed at user’s site.
This work has been done by the manufacturers on systems installed at research centre facilities and for systems installed at final users’ sites.
Within this task both manufacturers performed the system optimization at research centres and final users‘ sites once the systems has been installed.
It is important to underline that while the basic products are standard production routine, there were some aspects of RTD work that also play a role in this Work package. The power level and the necessary integration of an electrolyser in the application for WIND is new and required some RTD work prior to shipping them to the client site. The added site in Turkey created a similar situation for Future E, as the client there also requested on-site hydrogen generation via electrolyser due to the difficult topographic accessibility of the site. Furthermore, from the point of view of a manufacturer the use of their products by RTD Centers in benchmarking exercises also constitutes an RTD task.

Deliverables
Three deliverables were foreseen in this workpackage and fully achieved:
• D 2.1 Fuel cell systems for benchmark tests; 6 total systems.
• D 2.2 Fuel cell systems for field testing, lot 1; 11 total systems.
• D 2.3 Fuel cell systems for field testing, lot 2; 2 total systems for the sites in Turkey.

2. WP3 – Installation
Workpackage 3, led by LUASA, deals with the installation of the 19 FC-UPS systems, the hydrogen supply infrastructure and the data acquisition. 13 systems have been installed as backup power sources for telecommunications companies and radio security network at selected end-user sites in Italy, Switzerland and Turkey. The other 6 systems have been installed at the research centres ICHET in Istanbul and JRC in the Netherlands for benchmark-testing according to a defined test protocol.
Table 6 shows how the systems are distributed geographically and the partners in charge of the main tasks. All FC-UPS systems are provided by the two producers ElectroPS and FutureE. The supply of the hydrogen equipment for final users is in charge of the producers as well. The research centres are already equipped with a hydrogen supply infrastructure. The test and data acquisition equipment is provided and installed by the relative research centre which is in charge for conducting and monitoring the tests.

In the project firstly the nominal and maximum loads and power types of the individual end-user sites were identified and a suited FC-UPS system was agreed. Corresponding to the systems for end-user sites the technical specifications for the systems for benchmark testing were defined. Table 4 shows the basic technical data of the FC-UPS system at the different sites.
Within this WP four tasks have been identified and executed:
Task 3.1 Site preparation
For the preparation process at end-user sites several steps had to be considered. The approach in the project was the following:
• Identification of site requirements (site inspection, accessibility)
• Engineering of structural works and electrical integration (preparation of layout, 
electrical scheme, alarm and communication concept)
• Structural works (wall openings, concrete plates for placement of the cabinet)
• Submission of authority approval if required.
In a first step the requirements of the individual sites were identified. A site- inspection was arranged at each site for the FC-UPS providers and the relative research centres which are in charge of testing. Technical requests were checked as well as the available space for the placement of the FC-UPS systems, the cooling system and the hydrogen supply equipment. Special attention had to be given to the accessibility of the sites for the delivery of the pressure cylinders. The decision on indoor or outdoor solution and hydrogen pressure cylinders or electrolysers was made according to the different local conditions. Furthermore it has to be clarified if an already existing backup system will remain on site. According to these requirements the site specification list was completed for each site. 
According to the decision of the FC-UPS type the engineering of structural works and electrical integration had to be done. An installation layout was made for each site to design the placement of the FC-UPS unit, the hydrogen supply system and the piping. Also an electrical scheme was prepared for the electrical integration of the components into the existing installation as well as an alarm and communication concept. The alarm concept includes hydrogen alarms and FC-UPS alarms which are to be added to the available structure of the corresponding end-user control system.
The end-users arranged the achievement of the structural works for the assembly of the FC-UPS enclosure, the appropriate cooling system and the placement of the hydrogen cabinet. These works consists mainly of the preparation of concrete plates for cabinet placement, of the preparation of wall openings for the air cooling system and for piping.
Installations with hydrogen have to follow specific standards and rules. For the field installations in Switzerland the approval of a local authority was requested. The systems with electrolyser technology for the sites in Italy and in Turkey don’t need an approval by a local authority because the hydrogen storage volume is below a defined limit by local rules.

Task 3.2 Installation of hydrogen infrastructure that complies with local regulations
For hydrogen supply two different systems are provided: hydrogen stored in pressure cylinders and hydrogen produced on site by electrolyser systems. Within the project the hydrogen supply equipment and the piping is supplied by the FC-UPS producers. This decision was made in order to offer a complete and for the end-user most comfortable solution.
The hydrogen supply equipment without electrolyser technology consists of the following components:
• hydrogen cabinet
• pressure reducing and measuring devices
• safety vents

• solenoid valve

• hydrogen sensor for indoor-installations (supplied by one manufacturer)

Hydrogen is provided in 50 Litre cylinders with 200 bar. One cylinder has a weight of around 63 kg and contains 8.9 Nm3 of hydrogen or 26.7 kWh of stored energy (lower heating value). In combination with FC technology one cylinder contains around 12 kWhel of stored electrical energy. The capacity of the hydrogen storage was designed according to the end-users requirements. Therefore the chosen cabinets may store 4 to 6 cylinders. For normal operation 3 respective 4 cylinders are connected in parallel. The others are kept in reserve in order to deliver hydrogen in case of the first cylinders have to be changed. This concept assures a replacement of the cylinders during the operation of the FC system.
For the replacement of the cylinders the accessibility to the sites is an important variable. Within the project there is a diversity of different kind of accesses by road, rural road, rack railway or elevator and stairs in a building. At 2 Polycom sites a 72 hours test will be carried out. The process of the cylinder replacement for this test scenario was checked in advance with the hydrogen provider. Due to steep and narrow roads the accessibility is restricted especially during winter time. The specifications of the hydrogen installations with pressure cylinders, the autonomy time and the accessibility of the different sites are summarized in table 7.

The 3 installed systems with electrolyser technology in Italy integrate an additional electrolyser module in the outdoor cabinet. At 2 sites the storage comprises 6 hydrogen cylinders with a volume of 50 Litre and at one site 10 cylinders. As hydrogen will be produced on-site the cylinders don’t need to be changed. The specifications of the hydrogen installations with electrolyser technology and the expected autonomy times are summarized in table 8.
In Turkey the hydrogen storage is included in the complete system. No cylinders need to be changed as hydrogen will be produced on-site. The EPS system provides a cabinet with six 50 Litre hydrogen cylinders. FutureE stores hydrogen in two 1000 Litre tanks.

The hydrogen installation and piping has to comply with general standards and local rules.
The following European standards are to be considered:
• SN EN 62282-3-1 FC technologies. Part 3-1: Stat. FC power system - Safety, 2007
• SN EN 62282-2 FC technologies. Part 2: FC modules, 2007
• SN EN 62282-3-3 FC technologies. Part 3-3, Stat. FC power system - Installation, 2008
• EC machinery directive 

Additionally national standards and local terms of reference must be adopted or respected.
All installations were inspected by our project partner TÜV SÜD. Furthermore all Telecom sites needed an approval by a national inspection authority.

Task 3.3 Installation of fuel cell systems
A total number of 6 FC-UPS systems have been installed at the R&D centres ICHET and JRC for benchmark testing. Both suppliers provide 3 FC-UPS systems. ICHET will test 2 systems, one from each manufacturer, whereas JRC will test 4 systems, 2 from each manufacturer. All but one system are indoor systems and delivered to the R&D centres.
All systems are rated 6 kW with nominal voltage of -48 VDC as shown in table 4. Both suppliers inspected the test facilities at the research centres in advance. An existing hydrogen supply infrastructure is available. Hydrogen is provided externally from a centralized hydrogen line which is connected to hydrogen gas cylinder bundles located outdoors. Additional structural works or the submission of an authority approval is not required. The testing equipment is supplied and installed by each R&D centre and comprises common agreed components as described in deliverable D4.1. The measurement data will be uploaded directly from the measurement PC.
Pictures of the installations in the testing facilities are shown in figures 1 and 2.

Out of a total number of 13 FC-UPS field installations there are 7 systems for telecommunications, 3 systems for radio security network and 3 systems are applied as backup for the cooling system of a Telecom provider in Italy. 5 of all systems are equipped with electrolyser technology.
The diversity of locations makes it possible to prove the functionality of the FC systems under different environmental conditions. The following locations may be pointed out:
• One indoor-installation is at an altitude of 2215 m above sea level
• Two outdoor-installations are at an altitude of around 800 m above sea level
• One outdoor-installation is close to the entrance of a tunnel - increased emissions are expected in environmental air
• One outdoor-installation is close to the sea
The FC-UPS systems including the cooling systems and hydrogen cabinets were sent in advance to the end-users. After the completion of structural works and site preparations the end-users organised the placement of the enclosures. At two sites the placement with a crane was necessary.
Both FC-UPS suppliers installed the systems at each site in collaboration with the users and the relative R&D centre. The installation comprises the assembly of the cooling equipment, the electrical connection and the alarm configuration to the existing infrastructure.
The figures 3 and 4 show end-user sites in the field with outdoor systems, figure 4 additionally with electrolyser module.

The figures 5 and 6 show end-user sites in the field with indoor systems.

Each installed unit undergoes a start-up procedure to ensure proper performance. The start-up procedure involves the control of the start-up time and the set-up of the voltage level at which the FC unit starts. During one start-up procedure it was realised that the nominal load is too low for a proper performance of the FC unit. During the testing period an additional load will be needed.
The commissioning of the systems involves the start-up procedure, the testing of the alarms and the training of the users.

Task 3.4 Installation of testing data and data acquisition equipment
The testing equipment is supplied and installed by the relative R&D centre which is in charge of testing. The procedure of grid failure simulations and the monitoring will be done remotely in collaboration with the control centres of the end-users. The remote control capability minimizes the necessity for onsite visits.
The components of the testing equipment are common agreed for benchmarking and field testing to compare the results. Main parts are the measurement PC, the signal conditioning board and devices for current and temperature measurement.
The integration of the components in the existing infrastructure, the placement of the parts and the work-sharing was agreed carefully with the end-users. For the installations in Switzerland Lucerne UASA is the R&D centre in charge. For the installations in Italy and Turkey the R&D centres EP and ICHET implement the testing equipment.
For the placement the existing space and the aspect of an easy removal after the project was important. At the Polycom sites the complete measurement equipment is placed in a separate rack, at the Telecom sites the equipment is installed on panels for the placement in existing racks. For the systems with electrolyser technology the measurement equipment is integrated in the FC rack.
Preassembly and cabling was done at the R&D centres, together with the preparation of electrical schemes for cabling. All panels were tested before the installation on site.
Measurement data will be acquired from the installed measurement devices and from the FC unit itself. For communication and data transfer a communication concept and the appropriate components had to be defined. The data will be transferred to the server of the R&D centre respective the Telecom end-user will store the measurement data on its own server due to security reasons. During the start-up procedure trial runs were conducted to ensure that the equipment works properly.

Deliverables
Two deliverables were foreseen in this workpackage and fully achieved:
• D 3.1 Installation and Commissioning report.
• D 3.2 Instllation Completion report for fuel cell systems – Lot 2

Milestones
MS3 System Start-up completed
The installation of the systems is one of the first defined milestones in the FITUP project. The works proceeded in an excellent collaboration of end-users, producers, research centres, certification body and project management. The systems at the research centres, all 8 systems with hydrogen supply by pressure cylinders in the field and 5 systems with electrolyser technology are installed successfully.
During the installation process of the hydrogen infrastructure and the preparation of the security measures an uncertainty existed how to adopt the general security standards and local requirements for fuel cell applications. The involvement of the project partner TÜV Süd and of a local inspection authority was important to gain confidence.
The following points have been identified:
• The process of getting an approval by local authorities was less complicated in case a local provider was involved in the hydrogen installation.
• The level of standardization may be checked to meet the needs for an effective production process on the one hand and to stay flexible for customer requirements on the other hand.
All fuel cell systems have been installed at both research centre and final user sites to be tested for two year with exception of systems in Turkey, where Turkcell, the largest GSM telecommunication company in Turkey, accepted to offer two sites to be utilized in FITUP project for a duration of one year each, without becoming member of the consortium.

3. WP4 – Testing
Workpackage 4, led by EP and involving all partners: R&D centres, FC systems manufactures and final users, with the only exception of UNITOV, deals with the testing activities at both lab and final user sites.
It is important to mention that following the shutdown of UNIDO-ICHET in December 2012 and rearrangement of the consortium and workplan accordingly, two systems that had been tested at ICHET for benchmarking were sent to FutureE and Environment Park. The results of the tests for the system at Future-E is however analyzed by LUASA.
Within this WP five tasks have been identified and executed:

Task 4.1 Definition of test architecture
A common test architecture has been defined for both benchmarking and test on-field. Nevertheless some differences come out in different locations, due to system characteristics and installation issues.
In the benchmarking tests the controlled test variables (test inputs) have been defined as follows:
• external grid power availability (controlled through a controlled power switch)
• load applied to the UPS systems
• environment temperature (only during climatic chamber tests)
The resulting measured variables (test outputs) are:
• voltage and current at fuel cell system terminals
• voltage and current at start-up batteries (or ultracapacitors) terminals
• voltage and current at electronic load terminals.
Thus benchmark test system is composed by the following parts:
• an industrial pc used to control the tests and collect the data through an acquisition board, equipped with necessary signal conditioning devices
• a temperature sensor used to monitor the environment temperature
• three couples of cables that carry the voltage signals to the acquisition board
• three shunts used to measure the currents
• an electronic load that absorb the power produced by the UPS
• an ac/dc converter used to power the load using AC power, before the grid failure simulations
• a controlled switch that breaks the connection between the AC/DC converter and the grid
• an optional hydrogen sensor, used to detect gas leakage in the test environment.
according to the setup shown in figure 7.

In the on-field tests the main target is to confirm the functionality, reliability and good performance of the system, therefore grid failure simulations are performed in all the on-field installations of the project.
The controlled test variables (test inputs) during on-field tests of systems equipped with compressed hydrogen cylinders are:
• external grid power availability (controlled through a controlled power switch).
The resulting measured variables (test outputs) are:
• voltage and current at fuel cell system terminals
• voltage and current at start-up batteries (or ultracapacitors) terminals
• voltage and current at electronic load terminals.
The test system is composed by the same components of benchmark test system with exception of the load that of course is present on-site.
The setup of test systems for sites with fuel cell systems equipped with H2 cylinders is shown in figure 8.

The precise installation procedure of the test equipment will vary from site to site, depending on the characteristics of the place, but some basic rules have been defined in order to ensure the correct working of the system.
The hydrogen sensor must be placed in the higher point of the system room in case of indoor installations (outdoor installations don’t need this device).
The ambient temperature sensor should be placed as close to the fuel cell as possible, in order to have a correct information about the temperature close to the UPS.
The shunts, used to measure the current at fuel cell and batteries terminals, should be installed as close as possible to these devices. The shunt that measures the current going to the load should be instead placed immediately after the insertion of the backup systems on the DC bus, i.e. as far as possible from the load, in such a way that the ohmic losses on the bus are taken into account as loads. It is also necessary to place the shunts in a way that the heat produced by the shunts (around 10 W) can be dissipated.
The voltage measurement points should be placed before shunts connections, excluding in this way the voltage drop on the shunts from the measurement.
The measurement cables should be shielded and as short as possible, in order to reduce electrical noise.
The fuel cell system and start-up batteries (or ultracapacitors) must be installed and connected to the required supplies (air, hydrogen, …) according to manufacturer indications.

Regarding tests to be performed on systems equipped with electrolyser, power absorbed by the electrolyser has been defined as additional variable to be measured. Accordingly a power meter that measures the power consumption of the electrolyser is added to be installed as close as possible to the electrolyser according to the setup shown in figure 9.

Task 4.2 Development of test protocol
A test protocol has been defined to be followed in both laboratory benchmark experiments and on-field tests, in locations defined by final users.
The main purpose of the tests is to demonstrate that the fuel cell UPS systems satisfy the following objectives, stated in the project:
• reliability higher than 95%
• durability higher than 1500 hours and 1000 cycles (real-time or extrapolated)
• response time smaller than 5ms
The reliability will be statistically verified at the end of the whole test campaign. Final users also specified that their usual reliability requirements are higher than 99%, and they expect that the tested systems will meet them.
Response time will be controlled at each system start-up.
The requirements in terms of durability will be instead completely checked only for 4 systems, two for each manufacturer involved in the project. These systems will be operated for more than 1500 hours, and will carry on more than 1000 on-off cycles. The data collected from these tests will be used to predict the aging of the other systems. The long-time tests will be operated in laboratory, due to the logistic complexity of the hydrogen tanks replacement in real-world applications.
In addition to the mere verification of project objectives, during the tests additional data will be collected in order to investigate system performances and obtain useful information for manufacturers and final users.
The described protocol could also be used as a standard performance test for fuel cell UPSs, both in laboratory and in real world applications.
As a starting point for the test protocol development activities, in order to understand how to test the UPS units in a realistic way, the characteristics of the electrical grid failures, especially in terms of duration and frequency have been studied. Existent reports coming from previous research projects and industrial tests concerning test procedures of this kind of systems were taken into account as well.
Grid stability is improving in Europe, however there are still some outages. Major weather problems and unexpected consequences of repair and maintenance works can affect even generally stable and highly developed grids.
Apart from very short failures (on which complete data are not available), it is possible to classify the outages in the following way:
• short term (less than 1 hour)
40-60% of cases on L2 and L3 networks, happen also on L1 grid. Average duration of 15’-20’
• medium term (1 hour)
20-30% of cases on all grid levels
• long term (2 hours)
20-30% of cases on all networks, less frequent than medium term ones
• catastrophic (more than 24 hours)
possible once a year in all grids at least regionally.
The obtained results have been used as a basis for the development of a mix of grid failure simulations that represent the reality.
The grid failure simulations have been divided in three main groups, each one characterized by a different duration and representing a statistical class of failures that actually happen in electrical grids:
• short term grid failures (A type), duration of 15’
• medium and long term grid failures (B type), duration of 240’ (4 hours)
• catastrophic grid failures (C type), duration of 4320’ (72 hours).
B and C type simulations have a larger duration compared to the actual grid failures of the same class. The duration of B failures has been fixed in order to create test procedures respecting the given number of on-off cycles and hours of operation. C simulations satisfy instead a particular demand coming from some end users, that would like to check if the systems can match TETRA applications requirements.
However, since the above said durations are larger than real world ones, the resulting tests are more stressing for the systems than usual functioning. As a consequence, if the systems will be able to withstand the programmed tests, they will prove to be capable of working in harder conditions than normal operation in Europe.
During laboratory tests, each kind of grid failure simulation will be performed at different power levels (50%, 75% and 100% of total system power). This will not be done in on-field tests: in fact, in real-world applications it is not possible to choose the load applied to the systems.

Moreover, two different start-up conditions will be employed:
• warm start up (1 type), duration of the off time before the cycle 1’
• cold start up (2 type), duration of the off time before the cycle 60’ (minimum)
The characteristics of the simulations and their frequency are indicated in the following table.

Five test procedures were defined, taking care of different test objectives, locations and system characteristics:

1. LONG-TIME DURABILITY BENCHMARK test (BENCH-LTD)
2. ADDITIONAL BENCHMARK tests (BENCH-ADD)
3. ON-FIELD test for systems with COMPRESSED H2 CYLINDERS (OF-CH2)
4. ON-FIELD test for TETRA systems with COMPRESSED H2 CYLINDERS (OF-TET)
5. ON-FIELD test for systems equipped with ELECTROLYSER (OF-ELS)

Every procedure has been constructed combining the cycles listed in table 10. The precise description can be found in deliverable 4.1.

The assignment of the test procedure to each installed system is showed.

During the testing period, because of some technical drawbacks occurred during benchmarking tests at JRC, some revisions were introduced in tests protocol. According to the Amendment to the DOW of the 19th of March 2013 Deliverable 4.2 Revised test protocol (M29) was therefore introduced.

Task 4.3 Benchmarking
A total of 6 fuel cell UPS systems have been manufactured for benchmark tests in R&D centres.
Benchmark tests were carried out at JRC and ICHET in the first part of the project. Following the shutdown of ICHET and rearrangement of the consortium and workplan accordingly, two systems that had been tested at ICHET were sent to FutureE and Environment Park.
Identical systems have been manufactured and sent to the R&D centres in order to provide the reference functional operating information in a controlled environment. All the system used for Benchmarking test are fed with compressed hydrogen, and not by electrolysers.
JRC have also completed specific tests in the climate chamber for both cold start and tropical conditions as defined in the testing protocols.
A target number of start-up shut-down cycles and hours of operation was defined at the beginning of the project as requested by the call:
• 1000 Start-up / Shut-down cycles
• 1500 hours of operation
At the end of the testing period more than 4600 hours of test were completed, with over 4000 cycles and a production of 16 MWh of electric energy.
The table 11 summarises the progress of the test done according to the protocols defined in the task 4.2 and in the Deliverable D4.2:
Detailed description of benchmarking activities is reported in deliverable D4.3.
Detailed test history of each fuel cell system is reported and test results are described with regards to the following parameters:
• Reliability (target >95% as requested by the call).
Reliability has been investigated considering the main causes of the failures:
- Fuel cell system malfunction, due to the degradation of the fuel cell (voltage degradation) or to the BOP components malfunction;
- H2 equipment, due to the lack of H2 feeding;
- Measurement equipment, due to the malfunction of internal or external equipment;
- Maintenance, due to an improper maintenance of the machine;
- Installation, due to an improper installation of external equipment.
• Hydrogen consumption (performed in each research centre) that provides information on system efficiency.
• Fuel cell performance degradation in order to estimate lifetime and replacement time of the stack
• Start-up time (response time <5ms as requested by the call).
Main conclusions can be summarized as follows:
All the systems reported 23 failures over 4045 power interruptions for a reliability value of 99.4%. Laboratory environment has a very high reliability in term of hydrogen infrastructure, and this has allowed performing so many hours of test without interruption.
Data-logging hardware has worked properly in laboratory environment, with a reliability of 99.9% with 3 failures over more than 4000 test. No interferences or failures arose from the artificial blackout provoked by the system.
Efficiency was calculated with the electrical energy produced by the system and the amount of hydrogen energy used. The efficiencies of the fuel cell without the power of the batteries are between 30% and 50%.
Hydrogen consumption tests have identified an important information for the end users who is basically interested in:
• Available energy (in kWh)
• Residual backup time
As a summary result from all consumption tests done 100 grams per kWh is the worst case of all the systems at maximum power rate, this value can be safely used by the telecom operator in order to define the storage capacity to be installed in the site.
Degradation effects are not clearly comparable between systems coming from the two suppliers, as the two hardware architectures are radically different. The average voltage drop during 1,000 h of runtime is around 4%. At the end of the testing period the fuel cell system delivered still the maximum power of 6 kW.
The start-up time, the time it takes for the system to recover the 50% and the 75% of the load, that is considered a more interesting parameter with respect to response time, results to be in a time ranging from 20-30 seconds (> 98%).

Task 4.4: Data acquisition
All sites were equipped with the same data-logging hardware and software. Every experiment generates multiple files at different sampling rate in order to understand what happens during the interruption event (1,000 Hz) and during the rest of the test at lower speed (default 1 Hz). Grid restore is logged at high frequency (1,000 Hz default) in order to capture transients.
Each test is recorded with the following files:
• START files are logged at high speed (default 1,000 Hz)
• REG files are logged at a nominal 1 Hz frequency
• STOP files are logged at high speed (default 1,000 Hz)
• EPS or Fut-E files are logged at the same speed of the REG files
Start and Stop files are useful to understand if the response and start-up time of the system is correct according to the specifications. A specific software for a quick visualization was created to check these information during the test or during the final data analysis.
In order to quickly analyse the resulting data a visualization tool was implemented. Using this tool in few clicks it is possible to check what happened to the system.
In order to reduce the data a specific pre-processing tool was implemented using labview. The pre-processor is designed to analyse every file of each test to create a single summary record in which all the most interesting information are stored. Every summary line store the following information, extracted by the START, STOP and REG file:

1. Machine ID
2. Date
3. Time of the interruption
4. Cause of the interruption (S for software G for grid falure, which means a real blackout)
5. Fail Type (A1, A2, B1…)
6. Average Current during the interruption from the shunts (I_BAT, I_FC, I_LOAD)
7. Average Voltages during the interruption
8. Minimun and maximum voltage during the interruption
9. Average power (calculated by a point by point integral on the data files)
10. Integral of the energy procuded by the system
11. Average temperature during the test
12. Start-up time to reach 50% and 75% of the load
13. Hours and Cycles counter
14. Last value of current and voltage before the end of the test (blackout end)
The result of the pre-processor is an ASCII table (CSV file) that can be read directly from excel to draw summary charts.
Full description of data acquisition methodology is reported in both deliverable D4.3 Report on results of benchmarking and deliverable D5.1 Report on field test results.

Task 4.5: Field testing at end-user sites
13 market ready systems have been installed at real world sites of telecommunications base stations and police communications stations across Europe. Status of the testing activities at the end of the project can be seen in Table 12 in comparison to the expected numbers found in the project’s Description of Work. Test cycles have been implemented in each site according to a specific test procedure developed for different type of applications as resumed in Table 10.
Each test procedure is made of a number of different types of cycles, as elaborated in deliverable 4.1 Development of Test Protocol and confirmed in deliverable 4.2 Revised Test Protocol.

A total of 6,352 cycles have been tested in these 13 systems corresponding to 1,941 hours of testing.
In Switzerland a total of 8 systems were installed in the field, whereof 5 systems were tested at Swiss telecom operator Swisscom and three systems at POLYCOM sites for the national security network. For all systems hydrogen were supplied in 200 bar pressure cylinders with a volume of 50 liter. At the end of the on-field testing the target was completely fulfilled with a total of 4,082 cycles and 1,054 grid-off hours. About 1.9 MWh of energy were produced during grid failure simulations at real life installations in the field. The tests were performed in accordance with the developed testing procedures. One system for the security network was tested for nearly 72 hours to meet the requirements of the end user.

In Italy a total of three systems were installed and tested in the on-field site of telecom operator WIND. The 3 systems installed in Italy are equipped with an electrolyser and a booster for hydrogen compression up to 150 bar. During the on-field test 590 hour of testing was completed for a total of 1,645 cycles consisting three different type of cycles: A1, A2 and B2.
In Turkey two systems were installed at the telecom operator Turkcell’s sites in Bursa. Total of 625 cycles corresponding to 298 hours of tests. Turkcell joined the project after it started as an external partner. Previously tests in Turkey would take place in some residential building. Both systems in Turkey were equipped with electrolyzers one with 150 bar and the other 30 bar of hydrogen storage depending on the manufacturer.
Results coming from analysis of all collected data are described in WP5.

Deliverables
Three deliverables were foreseen in this workpackage and fully achieved:
• D 4.1 Definition of test protocol.
• D 3.2 Revised test protocol
• D 4.3 Report on result of benchmarking

Milestones
MS4 Benchmarking completed
MS5 Field tests completed
4. WP5 – Analysis
Following the shutdown of ICHET and rearrangement of the consortium, the WP was lead by BILGI UNI, involving all R&D centres and the FC system manufacturers.
Activities in this work package can be grouped as analysis of the data of the laboratory tests, analysis of the data of on-field tests, in charge of IBU (task 5.1) and life cycle analysis, in charge of UNITOV (task 5.2). LCA results will be presented in the following paragraph related to the socio-economic impact of the project results.

Task 5.1: Analysis of test data
Data analysis have been implemented with respect to the guidelines developed by the work package partners in order to sustain highest level of harmony possible for analysis of both field test data and benchmarking data. Strict cooperation between WP4 and WP5 activities and partners has been performed.

Starting from the status of the testing activities at the end of the project and main results in terms of reliability and response time summarized in Table 12, the test results have been analysed focusing on the three distinct goal of the project:
• Reliability greater than 95%
• Response time less than 5 ms
• No considerable performance deterioration after the tests.
1. Reliability of the fuel cell systems as given in Table 12 are defined by the failures that caused the systems not respond to a grid failure. When calculating the reliability numbers of failures are divided to the total number of test cycles to give a percentage measure. In this analysis this terminology is used to give a general understanding of all the systems tested in the project. However, there are different meanings for different types of failures. On the other hand, there are some cases that the systems are down due to maintenance but these are not considered as failures because it was taken as granted that the system would not respond to a grid failure in this condition.
Events are divided into 5 categories:
• Fuel Cells System Failure
• Hydrogen Production / Infrastructure
• Maintenance
• Measurement Equipment (FITUP data monitoring hardware)
• Installation issues
Of these categories, only those related with fuel cell system and electrolyzer are considered as failures and count towards reliability calculation in Table 12.
A total of 6,352 cycles have been tested in these 13 systems corresponding to 1,941 hours of testing. The systems responded to 6,310 of these grid failure simulations successfully making the average reliability of 99.3%, which is well above the project goals. Individual system reliability has differed from 97% to 100%, which assures each of tested systems has surpassed the projected goals individually.
When the failures are analysed for each system, it is found that many of the failures are due to minor parts in the system like pressure regulator or valves. These can be avoided easily by using alternative products and optimizing the products. Indeed some parts in some systems have been replaced with new items as part of the manufacturers optimizing their product line in the course of the project with the insights acquired from the test results.
Failures in the Italian and Turkish installations are mainly concentrated around hydrogen generation equipment, which can be avoided again by upgrading the available products with the feedback from the project. It should be also noted that electrolyzer was not included in the original project proposal.
On-field installations in Italy and Turkey with an average reliability of 98.9% have shown that the intensive usage of the electrolyzer to reach the target of interruptions and cycles of the project has created some maintenance problems to the electrolyzers.
Those targets of hours and cycles were defined on the basis of the residual test time: a too optimistic assumption was done in term of the availability of hydrogen produced by the electrolysers. Too much intensive use of the electrolysers has caused more maintenance operations that expected (water tank fillings), corresponding to a lower availability of the overall system.
On-field installations in Switzerland with compressed hydrogen cylinders reached with more than 4,000 cycles and over 1,000 hours of operation time the fully target of testing. Average reliability of the systems tested in Swiss sites has been found to be 99.4%, which is slightly higher than systems in Italy and Turkey that are equipped with electrolyzers.
However, it was understood that there is not a single best solution that applies all. System architecture should be optimized with respect to the demands of the customer. At some sites systems with H2 generation may be preferred while in some cases hydrogen delivery may make more sense.
Although test results agree well with the project goals, there may be stricter goals such that some end users of telecom and security network demand a reliability of more than 99.9%. The project showed that the quality of the peripheral parts is crucial for the reliability of the fuel cell systems and these goals can be reached by the optimization of the products.
With one test period of nearly 72 hours the system was tested according to the end user requirement for the security network. The fuel cell delivered the demanded power without any problems during this time and without maintenance personnel on site. This is a significant benefit of fuel cells in comparison with other backup solutions and shows the viability of the systems.
2. The response time for all systems was 0 ms due to the fact that the start-up batteries were always attached to the bus bar. In case of a grid failure they are able to deliver the demanded power without interruption until the fuel cell starts up. With this system architecture the objective of the project to show a response time less than 5 ms is completely achieved.
3. All the systems are proven to provide the same rated power at the end of the tests which hints that there is not a considerable deterioration in the system performance.
4. In addition hydrogen consumption has been evaluated by measuring and logging the pressure in the hydrogen bottles for the field installations in Switzerland. With the pressure data the overall consumption over the complete testing period per kilowatt-hour was calculated. The results for all installations are shown Figure 10.
The dark blue bars show the hydrogen consumption during the operation time of the fuel cell system. The light blue bars show the complete hydrogen consumption comprising the consumption according to the number of cylinder changes. Due to the remaining gas volume before replacement and due to leakages the latter consumption is higher.
The system POLYCOM03 sticks out of the others with a higher consumption. This is due to the fact that the load was very low and therefore the working point of the fuel cell system was unfavourable. Secondly, there was an undiscovered leakage quite close after a cylinder replacement. A more detailed consumption analysis was done for each individual site and reported in deliverable D5.1.
Based on these pressures measurement data and the overall produced energy during the testing period the efficiency of the systems were calculated . Taking all hydrogen deliveries per site into account the efficiencies are between 20% and 30%. The efficiencies calculated with the hydrogen consumption of the real operating time differ between 33% and almost 50%. The lowest value is due to the fact that the fuel cell system was in an unfavourable operation mode with low load. The average efficiency over all sites is 41%. The results are shown in Figure 11.

With the consumed amount of hydrogen and the overall produced energy during the testing period costs in Euro per kWh are calculated. The mean costs per kWh for the FC real operating time over all sites were 5 Euro/kWh. Including the costs for the complete volume of the delivered gas the mean costs are around 6 Euro/kWh. In consideration of the complete hydrogen infrastructure with transport and rental fees the costs differ from 11 to 15 Euro/kWh (without POLYCOM03). A summary of the costs is shown in figure 12.

The mean efficiency of 41% shows that the technology is closing in market demands.
Also all results show that technical viability of fuel cell technology is proven.
However, as better described in the following paragraph, the investment costs are still high in comparison with batteries and diesel generators and there is still a feeling of uncertainty towards fuel cell and hydrogen technology on the part of the end users. A wide spread of the technology in Europe will help to reduce these constraints. Further funding will be necessary to reach this goal.

Deliverables
Two deliverables were foreseen in this workpackage (task 5.1)and fully achieved:
• D 5.1 Report on test results.
• D 5.2 Public Report on test results


Potential Impact:
As above stated, one of the main objectives of the FITUP project is to demonstrate the economic and environmental maturity of back-up and UPS power systems based on fuel cell technology.
Accordingly, several activities have been performed within WP5, WP6 and WP7 related to life cycle analysis, certification issues, dissemination and non-technical barrier to market deployment, respectively. All related deliverables are public.

1. WP5 – task 5.2 Life Cycle Analysis
The main goal of this study is to compare fuel cell backup power systems with standard backup technologies as battery and diesel. This comparison is made with regard to environmental aspects. In order to guarantee conformance to the ISO 14040 and 14044 standards on Life Cycle, the LCA report was carried out following the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook and the HC-FC Guide “Guidance Document for performing LCAs on Fuel Cells and H2 Technologies”. In particular, the study is in line with ILCD Handbook guidelines with respect to the following aspects:
• Data quality: relates to completeness, representativeness (technological, geographical and time-related), precision/uncertainty, methodological appropriateness and consistency;
• Method: relates to the appropriateness of the Life Cycle Inventory modelling and other method provisions, and the consistency of their use;
• Nomenclature: relates to correctness and consistency of nomenclature which has been used (appropriate naming of flows and processes, consistent use of ILCD reference elementary flows, use of units etc.) and terminology (use of technical terms);
• Review: relates to the appropriateness and correctness of the review type, review methods and documentation. This includes ensuring that the methods used to carry out the LCA are consistent with ILCD guidance document, and are scientifically and technically valid;
• Documentation: relates to several topics, that is documentation extent (appropriate coverage of what is reported), form of documentation (selection of the applicable forms of reporting and documentation), documentation format (selection and correct use of the data set format or report template, and review documentation requirements);
A TCO analysis has been included as comparison criteria.
The Life Cycle Analysis performed on Fuel Cell backup systems allow to assess the environmental impact of system assembly and its usage. In particular, results of the analysis show that the manufacturing of both Balance of Plant and Stack are important. Within the Stack assembly, attention should be taken to improve efficiency of production processes and raw material utilization for Electrodes and Bipolar Plates.
For the analysed type of application, that is backup systems used for few hours in a year, system life-cycle is in fact more influenced by FC UPS manufacturing rather than its usage. This effect is emphasized when an ever more sporadic use of the system is taken into account (like in Italy and Switzerland scenarios).
As a consequence, in order to enhance environmental performance, system design and manufacturing process optimization should be pursued by manufacturers. Alternatively, by improving system efficiency, the size of components could be reduced on equal nominal power of the FC, thus obtaining a positive effect.
The comparison of competing technologies (FC, Battery and Diesel UPS) in three different scenarios confirms that the FC backup system is an environmental friendly solution, especially when the required operating hours decrease and, as a consequence, the stack lifetime can be sensibly extended. In fact, considering the majority of the environmental categories analysed, this technology proved to be the best choice for all scenarios when external supply of hydrogen and nominal power of 6kW is concerned. The Abiotic Depletion is the only category in which the FC shows a very high impact if compared to Diesel and Battery UPS. This effect is mainly due to the production of hydrogen. However, by carrying out a normalization analysis on European and Worldwide data, it was possible to state that Abiotic Depletion represents an important category but its normalised environmental load is minor if compared to other categories such as Marine Aquatic Ecotoxicity.
Following objectives of the FITUP project, the effect of different hydrogen supply and nominal power of the system were tested. Alkaline electrolysis was analysed and its negative influence on environmental performance of FC UPS was pointed out. However, even considering an electrical energy mix characterised by a high percentage of fossil fuels for energy production, FC technology remains the most environmental friendly backup systems even using on-site production of hydrogen. Moreover, the negative effect of electrolysis, mainly due to the lower efficiency of the electrolysis process if compared to gas reforming, can be reduced by using photovoltaic energy.
The economic analysis, carried out using the Total Cost of Ownership Criteria, showed that the FC UPS has a lower cost than both Diesel and Battery UPSs on a horizon of 12 years, which is the expected lifetime of the system for the intended application. The break-even point for the selected utilization scenario (90 operating hours) is between the seventh (Diesel) and eighth (Battery with 2 hours of autonomy) year. According to the analysis, in order to improve FC UPS marketability, effort should be made to reduce the purchase cost, stating the low relative importance of OPEX.
Then, increasing manufacturing efficiency by reducing the quantity of precious metals in FC stack, optimising stack design and improving production process performance seem key aspects, to be taken into account by manufacturers developing FC UPS.

Deliverables
One public deliverable was foreseen in this task and fully achieved:
• D 5.3 Report on Life Cycle Analysis


2. WP 6 - Certification

The main objectives of this workpackage, lead by EPS but supported strongly by TUEV Sued who has specific expertise in the field of RCS, are:
− Research and comparison of existing requirements for:
• the gas supply system for above named Fuel Cell Systems;
• the installation and use of above named Fuel Cell Systems and valid in selected EU countries.
− Preparation of a uniform systematic certification and installation procedure for Fuel Cell Systems for portable generators, backup and UPS power systems.

It is important to underline that the starting basis of the work has been the existing EU standards on fuel cell systems already published including other findings from previous and on-going projects, such as Hyperprojects, Harmonhy, and Hysafe.

According to the declared objectives within this WP three tasks have been identified and executed:

Task 6.1: Comparison of existing requirements for the gas supply systems (hydrogen cylinder)
Task 6.2: Comparison of existing requirements for installation and use of Fuel Cell Systems
General existing requirements for manufacturing, installation and operation of Fuel Cell Systems and pressure vessels and cylinders have been pointed out and fully reported in the public deliverable D 6.1.
In general there are mandatory regulations and standards for the design, construction and operation of fuel cell systems, pressure vessels and cylinders.
In Europe these are the EC regulations with the CE-marking for the manufacturing and EC regulations with their national implementations for the operation.
Normally the requirements for the fuel cell systems are laid down mainly in following EC directives for the manufacturing:
o 97/23/EC Pressure Equipment Directive
o 2006/42/EC Machinery Directive
o Directive 94/9/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres (valid until 20/04/2016);
o Directive 2014/34/EU on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres (recast);
o Directive 2006/95/EC on the harmonization of the laws of Member States relating to electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits (valid until 20/04/2016);
o Directive 2014/35/EU on the harmonization of the laws of Member States relating to the making available on the market of electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits (recast);
o Directive 2004/108/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility and repealing Directive 89/336/EEC (valid until 20/04/2016);
o Directive 2014/30/EU on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility (recast);
All components installed in a fuel cell system in Europe shall be marked with their applicable CE-markings to show the compliance with the relevant EC directive.
And in the following EC directives the requirements for the operation are laid down:
o 2009/104/EC Directive for safety requirements for the use of work equipment
o 2003/105/EC Seveso II Directive
o 1999/92/EC Directive on minimum requirements improving the safety and health protection of workers potentially at risk from explosive atmospheres
o 98/24/EC Directive for the protection of health and safety of workers from chemicals.
These EC directives are implement in national regulation and laws in all member states of the EU to fulfill the requirements for safety on work and safe operation.
Complete information for selected EU countries: Italy, France, Germany, Norway, Switzerland Austria and Turkey, with special reference to the completed installations have been collected and fully reported in the public deliverable D6.1.

Task 6.3: Proposal for a uniform systematic certification procedure for Fuel Cell Systems

The certification of fuel cell systems shall be generally be based on following procedure:

The targets of this certification procedure are:
- Acceptance by user and public;
- At least the same safety level as for conventional technology.

The certification process consists in two constituent parts:
1. “Procedural Safety” - concept
2. “Handling” – technical testing
For every Fuel Cell Power System (portable or stationary) and every Fuel Cell Module, the manufacturer has to develop a general safety strategy. Therefore, the first important topic for the whole certification is the development of an adequate safety concept. The strategy to develop the safety concept shall consist in following three steps:
- Evaluation of relevant protection devices
Basis: FMEA, HAZOP, etc.
- Evaluation of qualitative requirements
safety related components, e.g. IEC 61508, IEC 61511 (reliability, SIL)
- Realization of the safety concept
quality verification and documentation
After developing the conceptual design of the fuel cell system, it has to be determined which European Directives are applicable for the system, e.g.:
- 2014/35/EU, 2006/95/EC (until 20/04/2016): Low Voltage
- 2014/34/EU, 94/9/EC (until 20/04/2016): ATEX
- 2014/30/EU, 2004/108/EC (until 20/04/2016): Electromagnetic Compatibility
- 97/23/EC: Pressure Equipment (PED)
- 2010/35/EU: Transportable Pressure Equipment (TPED)
- 2006/42/EC: Machinery
In addition to the European Directives, there are harmonized standards that shall be applied to fulfil the requirements regarding a safe operation of fuel cell systems.

Regarding the installation of the UPS power systems, it his highly recommended to identify the local authorities, which are responsible for the permit of operation, in an early stage of the project. The responsible local authorities will be able to provide information about special national or local requirements regarding the installation of fuel cell systems, electrolyser systems and gas supply systems, as storage tanks, cylinders and bundles of cylinders.

For each UPS power system, the manufacturer has to provide the information necessary for safe installation and operation.
The information must be provided in the form of technical documents such as drawings, diagrams, charts, tables and instructions, and these shall be on suitable data medium and language. In standard EN 62282-3-100:2012, chapter 7.4 following different types of manuals are described.

One of the most important lessons learned during the project, is the need of detailed instruction for the change of cylinders. The people who change the cylinders are mostly not familiar with the UPS power systems. Therefore, it is very important to provide detailed information about the steps to follow during a change of cylinders. This information shall be part of the installation manual, the maintenance manual or the operating manual.

Deliverables

One public deliverable was foreseen in this task and fully achieved:

• D 6.1 Proposal for a uniform certification procedure for Fuel Cell Systems


2. WP 7 - Dissemination and Exploitation

One of the primary goals of Early Market project is to achieve success stories and to have as much of the public know about it as possible. This is why the dissemination activities within the FITUP project have been considered crucial.
In addition the identification and the addressing of non-technical barriers to deployment of fuel cell systems as backup power solutions represent another fundamental activity providing clear information on potential impact of the projet.

Thus within this WP two tasks have been identified and executed:

Task 7.1 Dissemination

The FITUP Website www.fitup-project.eu has been established in the first year by UNIDO-ICHET, posting all information on the project, updates on events, meetings and conduction of the project activities. Following the shutdown of ICHET and rearrangement of the consortium, the dissemination task has been taken over by BILGI UNI. New website address had to be changed to www.fitup.engr.bilgi.edu.tr because .eu could not be registered from Turkey which is the host country of Bilgi University. Website has been updated following the activities in the course of the project.

During the project period partners have presented the project results at different level:

- Potentially interested industries: the project results have been presented in international conferences targeting backup power/UPS industry:
• GSMA 2011 in Barcelona : poster presentation by EPS
• GSMA 2012 in Barcelona: poster presentation by EPS
• GSMA 2013 in Barcelona: poster presentation by EPS
• Intelec 2013 in Hamburg: FITUP results have been presented in Intelec 2013, Hamburg 13-17 October 2013, in a dedicated tutorial “Fuel cells fundamentals, their fuels, their testing and advantages and disadvantages and their state of development for backup power solutions” held in a common presentation by FutureE, LUASA and EPS
- A dedicated workshop “A Fuel Cell Backup Power for Telecommunications Workshop” has been held in Istanbul last 24 April 2014, addressed to related industry especially those from telecommunications. Companies based in Turkey have been informed on an invitation basis while the workshop was for all the interested partners from other locations. In the workshop results from FCPoweredRBS project have been presented as well.

The flyer of the event is shown here below.

- Hydrogen community:
• 2011 Hannover Fair: poster presentation by EPS
• 2013 Hannover Fair: presentation of the project within the technical forum by EPS
• 2014 Hannover Fair: presentation of the project within the technical forum by EPS
• 2011 FCH Review Days: presentation of the project by EPS
• 2012 FCH Review Days: presentation of the project by EPS
• 2013 FCH Review Days: presentation of the project by EPS
• 4th European PEMFC and H2 Forum 2013 in Lucerne, Switzerland presentation of the project by LUASA
• European Fuel Cell Forum Conference 2013, 11-13 December 2013, Rome, Italy, presentation of the project by EPS and BILGI UNI.

- General public:
• European Parliament, Brussels, 5 October 2011: project presentation by EPS
• Workshop on Small Scale Fuel Cell Technology for Residential and Industrial Applications in Gebze 5 May 2013 by BILGI UNI;
• Tubitak’s Horizon 2020 workshop in Istanbul in November 2013 by BILGI UNI;
• A site visit at the installation in Lucerne was offered to EFCF attendees, 27 June 2012. About 40 researchers participated in the visit

- Publications:
• FITUP – Fuel Cell Field Test Demonstration of Economic and Environmental Viability for Portable Generators, Backup and UPS Power System Applications, Ulrike Trachte, Peter Sollberger Beat Wellig, Proceedings of 4th European PEFC and H2 Forum, July 2013, Switzerland.

Task 7.2: Non-technical barriers to deployment
The objective of this task is to provide an assessment report of all those barriers to deployment that are not specific to the technical performance of the products demonstrated.
Such barriers were originally conceptualized to be mainly in the framework conditions under which the products compete with both incumbent technologies which in the case of UPS/back-up power systems are primarily lead-acid battery banks and those additionally equipped with a generator set for energy supply lasting longer than the battery bank capacity, and alternative technologies that may come up during the project.
The most critical part was expected to be differences in the way the fuel cell technology was treated in the RCS (regulations, codes & standards) sector as hydrogen safety represents a new subject for the operators and zoning/permitting authorities. Some of the additional effort necessary to achieve a safe operating status was expected to be a perceived source of resistance.
While this part of the work is addressed by WP6, the experience of the project demonstrated that operating permits could be achieved at all sites, although sometimes requiring extra effort, which resulted in delayed system start-ups and higher installation cost.
The FITUP Consortium thus decided to look at the non-technical barriers to deployment in a broader sense. As these barriers could also be seen as the main variables in determining the “proximity-to-commercialization” and a measurement methodology had been suggested in another FCH-JU project and also been implemented in the technology monitoring and assessment tool the FCH-JU program office has started to use, the FITUP consortium decided to utilize the Expert Judgement Mapping routines of the TEMONAS solution with the assistance of one of its architects, Mr. Herbert Wancura.
The methodology used in the EJM is a computer supported Delphi method of Expert Consensus. Generally it is designed as a two round system, where the expert pool is enabled to select their judgments to each of the parameters.
The second round then presents them with the range of answers and judgments in a statistical format of MIN, MAX, AVG. Based on this information the experts are then selecting their new values, which may also be the same as in the first round of judgments.
Extreme values are recorded but require the addition of an explanation comment. The rationale is that in the typical application of the EJM a set of issues arise:
• Small quantity of responses due to relatively small sample size prohibits truncation due to its major effects on the results
• The timing of the EJM is typically one where major uncertainty still persists. Scientific literature [11] recommends the more detailed analysis of “things that don’t fit” as it could contain “weak signals” that could be important.
Under typical circumstances the second round would again be run computer supported and would yield a new and typically, more narrow range. Given the special situation of the FITUP project where anonymity of judgment was not so critical, it was decided to proceed towards an open second round format in a workshop which also enabled discussion and an agreement on a single consensus value. This may deviate from the typical Delphi methodology, but was seen as acceptable as it replicates the method of achieving expert consensus in the ex-ante peer reviews for EC-cofinanced projects.
This workshop session was held as part of the FITUP project meeting in Munich on April 12, 2014. Mr. Wancura, who co-developed the methodology in the TEMONAS project, acted as facilitator and as rapporteur.
Information collected is fully reported in the deliverable D7.2.
Conclusions and recommendations can be summarized as follows.
Overall the experts from the FITUP Consortium have a rather positive outlook regarding their technology vis-à-vis its main competition as can be seen from the following positioning graph.

They expect the main incumbent technologies to see markets of equal attractivity coming down from higher levels – mostly volumes based – due to increasing customer requirements while their offer will continue to develop positive in terms of relative competitive advantage.
However, while this may be correct in the overall sector, the sub-segment of telecom radio base stations (RBS) may see massive overall changing of the value chain, with telecom operators increasingly looking for models enabling them to reduce CAPEX as they are faced with margin pressures due to regulatory and competitive activity. One path seems to be “build and operate” models for RBS from the suppliers of RBS equipment, where the customer would switch from the end user to an intermediary which is likely to pay close attention to their break-even point which in turn strongly depends on initial capital outlays.
In terms of recommendations regarding the removal or reduction of non-technical barriers to deployment the following items should be considered:
1 While the European Union clearly has no competence in taxation matters the significant structural difference to the US is clearly a disadvantage to European industry from the sector. If this cannot be changed alternative forms of demand stimulation need to be developed; some initial phases possibly coming in new structuring of demonstration programs under FCH-JU 2.0.
2 Regulation is still very regionally fragmented and needs harmonization. Ideally this would be in the format of a directive including clear references to international standards. Alternatively, there are various guidelines from FCH-JU and earlier programmes and a proposal from WP6 on a harmonized procedure. It may be a good initiative to create a task force with the Member States Representatives Group to actually build a recommended harmonized procedure which is then legislated as necessary in a similar fashion by each member state.
3 In terms of standardization we recommend a CSA supporting the industry consisting mainly of SME’s in developing application specific standards. This could be coordinated by the JRC.


Deliverables

Two public deliverables were foreseen in this task and fully achieved:
• D 7.1 Project website
• D 7.2 Report on non-technical barriers to deployment

List of Websites:
Project website: http://fitup.engr.bilgi.edu.tr/
Project coordinator: Ilaria Rosso, Electro Power Systems S.p.A. [e-mail].