Final Report Summary - ENE.FIELD (European-wide field trials for residential fuel cell micro-CHP)
Executive Summary:
Ene.field is the largest European demonstration of the latest home energy solution for private homes, fuel cell micro-CHP. The project ran from 2012 to 2017 and during these five years it installed 1,046 Fuel Cell micro-CHP systems across 10 key European countries and demonstrated more than 5.5 million hours of operation and 4.5 GWh of power produced. Outputs of the project include: detailed performance data, lifecycle cost and environmental assessments, market analysis, commercialisation strategy.
The project has demonstrated that fuel cells can efficiently produce electricity and heat from natural gas. Large-scale roll-out of FC microchip units can help the EU fulfil energy policy aims and climate commitments. An environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of FC micro-CHP unit has been carried out as part of the project. This LCA concluded that in general the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a FC micro-CHP are lower than those of a gas condensing boiler or a heat pump in all the investigated scenarios. Furthermore, the FC micro-CHP generally leads to lower air pollutant emissions compared with the alternative systems.
From a technical point of view, the FC micro-CHP is ready for a large market penetration. In the best 6-month period of the field trial, the availability of the units to the end-user has been above 99%.
End-users participating in the ene.field project were very positive about the FC micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all aspects of their micro-CHP systems, especially the environmental profile of the technology. Based on the end-users’ perception, the following two areas with some room for improvement have been identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology.
With today’s capital and maintenance costs, FC micro-CHPs are more expensive than traditional heating technologies. However, as serial production begins, economies of scale will cause the costs to drop substantially. The conducted life cycle cost analysis (LCC) showed that the FC microchip can become economically competitive with volume manufacture. Increased sales encouraged by for example subsidies could therefore improve the near-term economics of micro-CHP units, and may be crucial for the technology to reach the mass market and hence for the EU to harvest the environmental and system benefits.
Comprehensive analysis carried out by the ene.field project shows that FC micro-CHP can deliver important system wide efficiency and decarbonisation benefits across Europe between 2020-2050, as it is expected to mainly displace more inefficient and carbon intensive generation up to 2050. This can be achieved at a lower cost for the energy system and the consumer compared to a scenario with no uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP 2. With the right policy framework in place, FC micro-CHP can deliver 32 million tonnes of CO2 emission reductions in 2030, while reducing infrastructure and operational cost for the energy system by more than € 6,000 (gross) for each kilowatt-electric of installed capacity until 2050.
The project has developed and implemented an effective communications strategy to inform and engage the different target groups who have a role to play in the wider market development and uptake of the product. These efforts culminated in six ene.field national workshops and three dissemination sessions origanized throughout 2016 and 2017 in the countries participating in the field trial, with the objective to raise awareness on the market readiness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology and its benefits, and on the project’s achievements. The final dissemination event entitled “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration: Generating Sustainable Heat and Power for your Home” was a day-long event and it took place on October 11th, 2017, at Autoworld museum in the heart of Brussels.
Project Context and Objectives:
The ene.field project is a major step to overcoming the challenges of commercialising fuel cell technology used in Combined Heat and Power (micro-CHP) mode in residential buildings. The project allowed ten of Europe’s leading micro-CHP developers to embark on a large field validation of the technology under a common analysis framework.
Fuel cell micro-CHP has long been promised as a major component in the push to decarbonise the housing sector, however, the technology has taken a long time to reach the market. This has been partly due to technological challenges and partly due to the inevitable difficulty of overcoming the initial barriers to commercialising any new technology which requires volume production, and significant levels of deployment to overcome market inertia.
A number of European manufacturers had reached the point where the technical challenges of residential fuel cell micro-CHP (micro FC-CHP) are resolved in small field trials and the scale up towards mass manufacture can begin. All suppliers will be demonstrating units which have been approved for customer release according to their own internal procedures for new product design and form the first production models of manufacturing scale up.
Ene.field aims at deploying and monitoring c.1,000 new installations of residential fuel cell CHP across 11 key Member States. It represents a step change in the volume of fuel cell deployment for this sector in each country. By learning the practical implications of installing, operating and supporting a fleet of fuel cells with real world customers, ene.field will demonstrate the environmental and economic imperative of micro FC-CHP, and lay the foundations for market exploitation. The primary outcomes from ene.field will be:
• Real world learning - demonstration of market potential, segmentation, cost and environmental benefits of micro FC-CHP
• Developed market focused-product specifications and harmonised codes and standards
• A more mature supply chain, readied for deployment of micro FC-CHP in 11 Member States.
• An evidence base on cost and environmental performance that can be used to accelerate policy support from governments and adoption by channels to market.
A large scale deployment enables suppliers to overcome the point of greatest risk in new product commercialisation where volumes remain low and a significant cost reduction is required to move the technology to a commercial proposition.
Ene.field addresses the diversity of end users with monitored installations in three of Europe’s climatic regions, a range of dwelling types and occupancy levels and as a result evaluate the techno-economic and environmental performance of the options available in the different residential heating markets across Europe. Such a suite of trials will ensure that a clearer picture is available for ‘best fit’ between technologies and markets, and that the range of FC-CHP technologies can together address all relevant market segments post-trial.
The ene.field framework also brings together partners who provide the route to market required for fuel cell micro-CHP commercialisation. An unprecedented number of utilities, housing providers and municipalities are brought together by the project to deliver the products to market and learn about their operation.
Ene.field involves Member States with significant experience in fuel cell micro-CHP (such as Germany) as well as those deploying residential FC micro-CHP for the first time. This will establish new markets for micro-CHP across Europe by developing field support networks and supply chain arrangements in these regions. The differences in codes, standards and regulations between Member States will also be investigated and where possible aligned.
Finally, to inform clear national strategies and policies on micro-CHP within Member States, ene.field will establish the future economics and CO2 savings of the technologies in their target markets and make recommendations on the most appropriate policy and financial incentives to support the commercialisation of domestic micro-CHP in Europe.
Background - The need for residential fuel cell CHP
Environmental need for residential fuel cell CHP: In the EU, the building sector is responsible for 40% of Europe’s energy consumption and 25% of its CO2 emissions, with nearly 20% of CO2 emissions from dwellings alone. Evidence is emerging that there is a very large “hard to treat” group of the existing housing stock (primarily urban and old homes), where significant decarbonisation is either technically challenging or prohibitively expensive.
Significant decarbonisation will require a broad suite of technologies and measures to be deployed, ranging from simple insulation to grid decarbonisation. Addressing the retrofit market is crucial if meaningful savings are to be realised; 80% of the homes we will live in in 2050 have already been built. Cost effective solutions are urgently required.
In an appropriate setting, micro FC-CHP can achieve carbon savings of up to 30%. Furthermore, the technology is well suited to the retrofit market, including the substantial “hard to treat” segment and is also compatible with new build properties. Micro FC-CHP systems can therefore be a vital component in decarbonising the residential sector.
Market opportunity for residential fuel cell CHP: By working with the existing boiler market channel, the potential exists for FC-CHP to deploy units quickly once the initial barriers to market entry have been overcome. With favourable policy support, the technology could potentially replace 30% of the 91 million gas boilers and water heaters in the EU by 2025, making a huge impact on emissions from the residential sector and representing at least 30GW of new clean generating capacity.
Other territories (such as Japan and South Korea) have already recognised the latent potential of micro FC-CHP. The need to bring efficient European micro FC-CHP technologies to market is therefore robust and immediate.
The challenge: As the technology moves towards commercialisation, a number of challenges are presented. The business and environmental case needs to be proved in practice, reflecting system operation in a diverse end user market. The supply chain needs to be matured to accept the new technology and the regulatory environment needs to be updated to ensure the technology has fair access to markets. More specifically there is a need to:
Confirm the business and environmental case by:
• Confirming volume / cost reduction potential
• Collecting operational data to identify market size and target segmentation
• Validating environmental benefits in various climatic zones in Europe
Ensure the product specification fully meets market requirements by:
• Confirming the way in which units are controlled to maximise energy & cost savings and environmental benefits
• Modifications of the basic micro FC-CHP systems to suit markets across the EU
• Achieving harmonised codes and standards.
Mature the supply chain through:
• Demonstrating routes to market and business models
• Engaging key stakeholders and end users
• Developing installation and maintenance skill sets
• Expanding the European supply chain for components and services
A large scale deployment addresses these barriers and is the focus of the ene.field proposal.
Objectives
The main aim of this demonstration project is to remove barriers to the roll-out of technically mature fuel cell micro-CHP systems through a large scale deployment. This will trigger important first steps in: the establishment of genuine product support networks, well-developed supply chains and the growth of new skills to support commercial micro-CHP rollout.
The deployment of large numbers of micro-CHP devices will also help to drive costs down, increase consumer awareness and establish new routes to markets, in preparation for commercial rollout.
Ene.field will be the most ambitious European micro FC-CHP deployment and will bring the European Union to the forefront of the global micro FC-CHP industry, helping to ‘catch up’ with initiatives in Japan and South Korea for example.
The detailed objectives of ene.field are to:
• deploy up to around 1000 fuel cell CHP units with consumers in residential properties across Europe, in order to demonstrate their techno-economic performance for a representative range of building types, sizes, occupancy types and lifestyles – all of which impact the operational characteristics of the FC-CHP and ultimately define the target market.
• implement all of the main FC-CHP technology variants including High Temp SOFC, Intermediate Temp SOFC, High temp PEM and Low Temp PEM, to characterise their strengths and limits.
• unite 10 of Europe’s leading fuel cell CHP manufactures under a common trial project, to build the critical mass required to maintain European leadership in a competitive international environment to rival similar efforts internationally (notably the ENEFARM initiative in Japan)
• explore options for standardisation between manufacturers, including common parts, branding and political messaging, to reduce barriers
• demonstrate the complete route to market for FC-CHP, including an approach to installation, support in the field and mechanisms for interacting with building owners (the ultimate customers for the products)
• establish well-developed supply chains and support networks and develop a relevant skills base, to prepare the main initial EU territories for micro-CHP for the commercial deployment of the technology
• develop a detailed dataset of the energy requirements of over 1,000 different homes; hence provide an authoritative analytic basis to optimise micro-CHP deployments across Europe and defend the environmental and economic case
• perform a socio-economic assessment exploring barriers to micro-CHP adoption in European Member States, based on feedback from end users, installers, utilities and other actors in the micro-CHP value chain.
• carry out a comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) to determine the true environmental impact of the technology, and compare against the incumbent and other low-carbon heating technologies
• develop clear recommendations on common regulations, codes and standards for micro FC-CHP, helping to drive down costs and remove barriers to market entry.
• establish a Utility Working Group to facilitate discussions on active control and future integration with low voltage network infrastructure
• determine a future commercialisation strategy for the technology by reviewing cost and volume projections with the manufacturers and by exploring different routes to market assess the requirements for future policy or financial incentives
• understand the future environmental case for micro-CHP by studying the effects on emissions of widespread deployment of micro-CHP under rather variable conditions (in the different Member States, different dwellings). And in particular the impact on their electrical grid systems in combination with higher percentage of fluctuating renewable energy.
• provide clear position papers and advice for policy makers on where and how to encourage the take up of fuel cell micro-CHP
Project Results:
Demonstration of 1000 fuel cell based micro-CHP units
The ene.field project (European-wide field trials for residential fuel cell micro-CHP) has been Europe’s (to date) largest demonstration project for FC micro-CHP (fuel cell based micro combined heat and power) systems. The project has demonstrated more than 1000 small stationary fuel cell systems for residential and commercial applications in 10 countries.
Fuel cells can efficiently produce electricity and heat from natural gas. Large-scale roll-out of FC microchip units can help the EU fulfil energy policy aims and climate commitments. An environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of FC micro-CHP unit has been carried out as part of the project. This LCA concluded that in general the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a FC micro-CHP are lower than those of a gas condensing boiler or a heat pump in all the investigated scenarios. Furthermore, the FC micro-CHP generally leads to lower air pollutant emissions compared with the alternative systems.
From a technical point of view, the FC micro-CHP is ready for a large market penetration. In the best 6-month period of the field trial, the availability of the units to the end-user has been above 99%. Of the total failures observed, only 1-2% were due to the fuel cell stack itself.
End-users participating in the ene.field project were very positive to the FC micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all aspects of their micro-CHP systems, especially the environmental profile of the technology. Based on the end-users’ perception, the following two areas with some room for improvement have been identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology.
At today’s capital and maintenance costs, FC micro-CHPs are significantly more expensive than traditional heating technologies. However, as serial production begins, economies of scale will cause the costs to drop substantially. The conducted life cycle cost analysis (LCC) showed that the FC microchip can become economically competitive with volume manufacture. Increased sales encouraged by for example subsidies could therefore improve the near-term economics of micro-CHP units, and may be crucial for the technology to reach the mass market and hence for the EU to harvest the environmental and system benefits.
A number of aspects of the field trial turned out to be more challenging than originally anticipated. These aspects were routes to market, site selection, good business case for all involved partners, supply of components for the manufacturing, installation process and administrative procedures. These caused a delay in the deployment of units compared to the original plan. However, by the end of the project a total number of 1046 units have been installed which exceeds the target of 1000 units. The expected main route to market via utilities proved to be very difficult as less funding was available for demonstration projects than previously (e.g. for the German demonstration project Callux). The most successful approach for selling micro-CHP systems has been via installers through the heating market channels. A key element for a generally successful field trial is to establish good communication channels with end-users and installers beyond the basic technical discussion. The training of installers to ensure a smooth and faultless installation process is also key to successful deployment. During the project approximately 600 installers have been trained.
Germany has been the most successful market for ene.field in terms of deployment numbers. More than 750 of the 1000 units have been installed in Germany. Funding from the national support schemes helps decrease the investment costs, and therefore favoursthe ramping up of the installation numbers. Moreover, high electricity prices make the technology more attractive in Germany than in other European countries.
The installers of FC micro-CHP units find the systems easy to install. However, the time required for completing the installation is longer than desirable. The installation times are likely to decrease significantly as installers become more experienced with the technology. In addition, further standardisation of components and training of installers are also expected to reduce the installation time.
Lack of a common framework for European standards is seen as a large hindrance to further market uptake. Countries use international and European standards, but supplement these with national versions. This mix of standards leads to problems for manufacturers who want to commercialise products throughout Europe. Furthermore, the forms for approval of installation lack standardisation and are partly complex and lengthy. A systematic and simple approach is required for the registration of new technologies.
The FC micro-CHP technology is well suited for integration into smart grids. A smart grid is a power grid where information and communication technology is used to manage generation, consumption and distribution of electricity, typically to compensate fluctuations in power generation from renewable energy sources (grid-balancing and peak-shaving). The micro-CHP units can be remotely controlled and can adjust to external heat and power demands at seconds’ notice when at operating temperature. In order for micro-CHP units to contribute to grid stability, an estimated minimum of 1000 units need to be aggregated into a virtual power plant (1 MW).
The German support programme KFW433 will facilitate the commercialisation of the FC micro-CHP technology in the coming years. As a follow-up on the ene.field project, field demonstration of FC micro-CHP systems in Europe continues with the EU funded project PACE.
Introduction to FC micro-CHP technology
Fuel cells efficiently produce both electricity and heat from natural gas. This can be utilized in a combined heat and power (CHP) unit. Units with an electric capacity below 50 kW are usually referred to as micro-CHPs. Typical systems with capacity up to 5 kW are suitable for both residential use and small commercial buildings, see Figure 1.
(Placeholder for Figure 1)
FC micro-combined heat and power (FC micro-CHP) is a new technology that may replace the conventional gas boiler and provide homes with electricity as well as heat. FC micro-CHP units allow for significant increases in the efficiency of heat and power production compared with traditional heating appliances and grid distributed electricity and, hence, they may bring a reduction in the overall primary energy consumption of the households. FC micro-CHP units allow for very efficient heat and power production compared to traditional heating appliances and grid electricity. The efficiency of energy conversion is above 90%, which is comparable with the energy conversion for the most efficient big scale CHP power plants. The FC on-site energy production ensures it is used without loss of energy in transmission, a loss that might be 5-10% for electricity and heat transport from big scale CHP plants. As the systems are installed at the end-use premises they can furthermore reduce the load on the electricity infrastructure and even provide a local peak capacity and assist in balancing the electricity grid.
Various types of fuel cells exist. For micro-CHP applications, two main types are used:
• Solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC), which operate at high temperatures (600-850°C) and are made from ceramic materials (“solid oxide”)
• Polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cells which operate at lower temperatures (60- 160°C) and are based on polymer materials
Micro-CHP units are available in various sizes (electric capacity from 300 W – 5 kW) and have been optimised for various applications. They can operate in different modes: The systems may be designed 10 ene.field project to be heat-led which means that the operation is controlled by the heat demand of the building, or it may be electricity-led which usually means that it aims at a constant high electricity production.
FC micro-CHP units are complex systems including many components (see Figures 2 and 3). The systems can be designed in many ways for various purposes and can be more or less integrated. A typical FC micro-CHP system may include:
• Fuel cell module (see Figure 2), including:
- Fuel processor (with reformer separated or integrated with the fuel cell stack)
- Fuel cell stack (power section)
- Inverter (power conditioner)
• Balance of plant components (may include heat exchanger, system control, gas recirculation system, valves, pumps, etc. in connection with the fuel cell module)
• Back-up boiler (gas condensing boiler for peak heat demand) and hot water storage tank
• Periphery (may include heating circuits incl. controls, heating circuits pumps, domestic hot water station, energy management system, domestic hot water circulation pumps, etc.)
(Placeholder for Figures 2 and 3)
The ene.field project
The ene.field project has been Europe’s (to date) largest demonstration project for fuel cell based micro-CHP (micro combined heat and power) systems for private homes. The field trial brings real world learning of benefits and challenges of the technology. The project has deployed more than 1000 micro-CHP units in 10 EU member states, see Figure 4. This is a step change in the volume of FC micro-CHP deployment in Europe and an important step to move the technology towards commercialization, see Figure 5.
(Placeholder for Figures 4 and 5)
The five-year project started in 2012. The main aim was to remove barriers to the roll-out of FC microCHP systems through large-scale deployment. Apart from deployment, the project focused on analyses of:
• Performance and barriers
• Environmental impact assessment
• Cost and market projections
• Policies and political challenges
• Requirements for standardisations
Most of the units have been equipped with meters to monitor the technical performance. Three surveys have been made involving end-users and installers. A number of complex analyses based on various data input and modelling have helped to evaluate the status and potential of the technology. The project has involved 27 partners. Besides the manufacturers of fuel cell systems, several research institutes as well as utility companies have been involved as partners in the project. An overview of the project consortium is shown in Figure 6.
(Placeholder for Figure 6)
In the field trial, units have been demonstrated for 1-3 years. The first units were installed in 2013, but the majority of the units were installed in 2015 and 2016, see Figure 7.
(Placeholder for Figure 7)
Units with very different characteristics have been deployed, see Figure 8 and Table 1. In total,
• 603 SOFC units and
• 443 PEM units
have been demonstrated with more than 5.5 million hours of operation in total and more than 4.5 million kWh electricity produced. The 1046 units installed have a total capacity of approximately 1155 kW of distributed power generation.
(Placeholder for Figure 8 and Table 1)
Main findings of the field trial
A number of aspects of the field trial turned out to be more challenging than originally anticipated. These aspects were routes to market, site selection, good business case for all involved partners, supply of components for the manufacturing, installation process and administrative procedures. These caused a delay in the deployment of units compared to the original plan. However, by the end of the project a total number of 1046 units have been installed which exceeds the target of 1000 units.
The experience gathered during the ene.field project has highlighted the need for early discussions with all stakeholders involved and the need to determining – before the installation occurs – the specific requirements of the site proposed for the system. This in turn allows for more rapid and smoother installation on site.
A key element for a generally successful field trial is to establish good communication channels with end-users and installers beyond the basic technical discussion. The training of installers to ensure a smooth and faultless installation process is also key to successful deployment. Until the technology is broadly understood by this group of stakeholders, it is still recommended that the manufacturers remain involved in the commissioning process.
A large amount of time and effort is required for the preparation of the information needed for the administrative preparation of each site (e.g. paperwork for grid operators, approvals, etc.). Forms have not been standardised, and in some cases a vast amount of documents have to be completed. The lead time for completing the paper works varies significantly between countries. In some countries, approvals may typically take 2-3 months. The administrative preparation for the site can be problematic for installers and end-users as these groups have no experience with dealing with this process.
A more harmonized approach to permissions and approvals is required for the market to progress. A standardised simple registration of new technologies producing decentralised electricity would be a good first step and, until this becomes a reality, it is still recommended that the manufacturers remain involved in the administrative preparation process.
Routes to market
The two main routes to market strategies of the manufacturers were:
• Contact with end-users established via installers, sales staffs, architects, etc. These stakeholders were mainly motivated by the prospect of increasing their product portfolio.
• Contact with end-users established via utilities or energy service companies (ESCOs). These stakeholders were mainly motivated by the prospect of potential business cases.
The most successful approach to selling the micro-CHP systems was via installers through the heating market channels. Sales under ene.field have been conducted via installers for as much as 80% of the total number of contracts signed by one manufacturer.
At the beginning of the project, it was anticipated that sales through utility companies would be the dominant route to the market (or route to the field trial installations), see Figure 9. However, the route to market via utilities has proved to be very difficult as less funding was available for demonstration projects than was the case for earlier projects (e.g. the German Callux project). During the ene.field project, utility companies have mainly been interested in demonstrating only a small number of units and have only contributed with limited co-financing of the units.
Technical capabilities
The technical performance of all FC micro-CHP units in the field trial has been monitored. Performance data have been collected for 70% of the installed units in the ene.field project. Most of the units were subject to “standard monitoring”. Here, monthly data regarding gas consumption, calculated heat production, electricity production, operation hours and on/off cycles has been collected. 7% of the installed units were further equipped with sensors for “detailed monitoring”. In this case, data regarding e.g. electricity and heat production and consumption, electricity import and export, indoor and outdoor temperatures was collected every 15 minutes. Furthermore, all “issues encountered” (failures) were reported by manufacturers for all units in operation.
Efficiency
For the detailed monitoring, the fuel cell module (i.e. not including the backup gas condensing boiler) is equipped with a gas meter, power meter, heat meter and other sensors. All products have been tested in laboratories under controlled conditions. Efficiencies measured in the laboratory and in the field trial are shown in Table 2.
There are a range of uncertainties related to the field trial data. One example is the actual energy content (the lower heating value, LHV) of the natural gas used, as this varies across European locations. Nominal values have been collected for most sites.
To anonymise data for reasons of individual company confidentiality, the data from laboratory tests has been reported as average numbers for all the tested units. Unfortunately, this anonymization process limits the information which can be taken from the data, as an average number may cover data from both a 1 kW unit designed for optimal heat demand coverage and a 2.5 kW unit designed for constant operation and maximum electric efficiency. The averaged performance data from units does therefore not represent the performance of any of the individual tested units. This was the approach agreed by the ene.field consortium and used in the analysis of the performance data.
The efficiencies given in Table 2 are average numbers of all the systems tested even though the products are rather different in size, performance and optimal conditions. The laboratory testing includes 6 different SOFC products and 5 different PEM products. It should be noted that for the laboratory tests, the thermal and the electric efficiencies in the table cannot be added to calculate a total system efficiency as the two efficiencies may not have been realised under the same test conditions. Conclusions based on these data should be drawn with big reservation as each number represents a number of very different units as explained above.
The real-life data from the field trial has been taken from a period towards the end of the project where there was the highest number of units in operation. This gives the most robust data. The field trial includes very different types of units, ranging from early prototypes to commercially available products optimised for different applications. No conclusion can therefore be made regarding performance of individual unit types based on the average numbers presented here.
(Placeholder for Table 2)
Availability of installed units
Part of the monitoring of the FC micro-CHP units deployed in the ene.field project was an investigation of their availability to the end-users. The average availability has been calculated based on units in operation in 6-month periods. For the period with the highest availability, both PEM units and SOFC units have availability of more than 99%.
These results show that the technology is well on its way to very high robustness. In previous projects, such as Callux and SOFT-PACT, availability between 90% and 96% has been reported. For the upcoming field trial in the PACE project, a goal of 99% availability has been set. The results from ene.field clearly show that this is feasible.
As part of the end-user perception survey (reported in section 6), a more detailed analysis of availability has been made of 67 units, see Table 3. Of these systems, 45% experienced no failures in the first year of operation and an availability of 100%. Hence, 55% had 1 or more failures. However, the vast majority of these failures were only for short periods of time; 90% of the FC micro-CHP systems were available for at least 95% of the time.
(Placeholder for Table 3)
Smart grid capability
From a technical point of view, FC micro-CHP systems are well equipped for smart grid integration. Systems can typically be remotely operated and controlled. Furthermore, micro-CHP systems can adjust to external heat and power demands at seconds’ notice when at operating temperature. Fast response times and aggregation capabilities make micro-CHPs well suited for smart grid controlled distributed generation which can limit transmission losses in the grid.
For micro-CHPs to positively contribute to grid stability in the context of the emerging smart grid model, the viability of aggregation of multiple units into a virtual power plant needs to be considered. At a capacity of 1 kW per system, an estimated minimum of 1000 units in a virtual power plant is required (1 MW). The rewards for the aggregator and installation owners will need to outweigh the Learning points from demonstration of 1000 FC based micro-CHP units 21 administrative and coordination costs required for such a complex operation if the virtual power plant model is to gain ground.
The analysis of the smart grid capability is based on a survey among manufacturers and utility companies. See the full report at the project website http://enefield.eu/category/news/reports/ for further information.
Installation process
An installer survey polled the installers about the perceived ease or difficulty of various aspects of the FC micro-CHP installation and the time taken to carry out the installation.
The installers reported that the systems were generally easy to install. Regarding the installation time, all installations took at least 2 days, with most installations taking 4-6 days.
As an installation requires multiple visits to the installation site by a handful of professionals before, during and after installation, these numbers are more reasonable than they may appear at first glance, especially when compared with a standard gas boiler that requires 2 days of installation. As a natural consequence of demonstrating new technology, many of the installations represent a first or an early installation for the installers. Therefore, the installation times are likely to decrease significantly as installers become more experienced with the FC micro-CHP installation process. Given that the shortest installation times in the project were 2 days it is reasonable to assume that this is a reasonable a target for normal installation by an experienced installer in the future.
For the future, further integration and standardisation of components and further training of installers may be ways of reducing the required installation time.
Grid connection
Early in the ene.field project, an overview was made of requirements, guidelines and issues in relation to connection of FC micro-CHPsto the gas grid and the power grid. The report covers several European countries.
The installation procedure is similar in most countries, but with national supplements such as requirement for an additional electric breaker and for outdoor installation of the breaker so that the network operator has constant access.
The most frequently observed issue relates to the inverter which is sensitive to disturbances on the grid as well as to power outages. This often leads to a sudden stop of the micro-CHP as the inverter will trigger the safety system and thereby shut down the whole system.
Environmental life cycle assessment
As part of the project, Fuel Cell – micro CHP (FC-µCHP) units are assessed in terms of their environmental performance in different settings. The settings vary notably in terms of a home’s space heating demand. This, in turn, is a function of the dwelling type (i.e. Single Family Home (SFH) and Multi-Family Home (MFH)), its level of insulation (i.e. new/renovated and old buildings) and climate zone (i.e. northern, central and southern) that vary in terms of outside temperatures that are also a function of solar irradiance. The FCµCHP systems considered are complemented with a gas condensing boiler (GCB) and a heat store. As a second aim of this study, the systems are compared with other low-carbon, incumbent techniques, notably a stand-alone GCB and for single family homes an air-water heat pump (HP). All homes equipped with these devices are connected to the electricity grid.
Four technologies are assessed, i.e. SOFC-µCHP, PEM FC-µCHP, GCB and HP. They are generic, meaning that they do not correspond to a specific existing system. All systems compared provide the same function, i.e. their ability to satisfy the heat and electricity demand of a given home in a specific, but generic European setting with an associated energy demand. The amount of heat and electricity produced varies between FC-µCHPs. Except for the end-of-life (decommissioning and waste treatment or recycling), the whole life cycle is assessed quantitatively.
Following the requirements regarding how to carry out an LCA of FCs as laid out in the HyGuide guidance document, a critical review of the study has been carried out by an external panel consisting of three experts.
The environmental performance of FC-µCHP is substantially influenced by the amount and kind of electricity production replaced. Two key assumptions were therefore varied, i.e. the power production mix replaced by the FC-µCHP’s electricity produced (so-called replacement mix) and the annual amount of Full Load Hours of FC-µCHP systems.
The following environmental impact categories were primarily assessed: greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (termed “climate change”), metal, fossil fuel and other resource uses (“resources depletion”), water use (“water depletion”), human exposure to airborne particulate matter (“respiratory effects”), and acidification of soils and water bodies (“acidification potential”).
Note that this LCA covered many more impact categories.
MAIN FINDINGS
In the following, first the results for the setting in which most of the FC-µCHP units have been installed in ene.field’s field trial, i.e. existing buildings in central climate, are compared with the results of a recent study by Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015). Afterwards, main findings are presented for contrasting cases of the investigated scenarios, covering different European climate zones, levels of insulation, single and multi-family homes, and fuel cell types.
The current study generally confirms the main environment related conclusions drawn by Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) concerning residential applications of FCµCHP: the main two drivers for emission savings by heat-led FC-µCHPs relative to a gas condensing boiler installed in single-family homes are a low heat demand of a given dwelling and a high carbon intensity of the electricity production replacement mix. Reversely, the lower the carbon intensity of the replacement mix is (or becomes) the lower the CO2 emission savings by FC-µCHP systems. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) limited their analysis to the life cycle stages “domestic heat (and power) production” in single-family homes and “electricity production in the grid”. Compared to a gas condensing boiler in a partially renovated semidetached single family home located in Germany, they found CO2 emission savings by a generic FC-µCHP system of 33%. For a similar setting and considering the same life cycle stages but taking further GHG emissions into account, the current study finds that FC-µCHP systems may achieve CO2–equivalent emission savings of between 45% and 50%, depending on the FC type, when the electricity production mix replaced is as carbon intensive as a hard coal fired power plant and the heat-led FC-µCHP systems run up to 5333 full load hours per year (data not shown in this summary). When extending the assessment of this setting to the whole life cycle (i.e. including processes other than those in the life cycle stages “domestic heat (and power) production” in single-family homes and “electricity production in the grid”), the CO2–equivalent emission savings are in the range of what Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) found (32% to 36%, cf. Figure 1). When increasing the full load hours to numbers that have been demonstrated in the field trials of the ene.field project, equal to about 6000 h/a, the emission savings further increase to more than 40%. Figure 1 additionally shows the annual life cycle CO2-Eq savings achievable by FC-µCHPs when further increasing the full load hours and taking replacement mixes corresponding to the German average electricity mix (in green) or to the ENTSO-E mix (in blue). The current study also confirms the Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) study regarding the substantially lower air pollutant emissions of FCµCHPs compared to the alternative systems analysed.
(Placeholder for Figure 9)
The environmental assessment being wider in scope than the Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) study, the main findings of ene.field’s LCA can be summarised as follows:
• In general, the FC-µCHPs have a better environmental performance and in no case worse than the HP and the stand-alone GCB in all settings concerning the prioritised impact categories (only “climate change” results are partially depicted graphically in the summary, cf. the next point). According to the HyGuide guidance document, the default case is to assume that all electricity produced or replaced in the grid corresponds to the average European electricity production mix (i.e. the ENTSO-E mix). For this replacement mix, the FC-µCHPs are compared to the stand-alone GCB in all settings over the entire life cycle by assuming default full load hours of 4750 h/a for the PEM FC-µCHPs and of 5333 h/a for the SOFC-µCHPs. Under these conditions, FC-µCHPs lead to 6-26% lower GHG emissions, 7-49% lower resource uses, 21-65% lower particulate matter induced impacts, 25-73% lower acidification impacts and 54-118% lower water uses. The upper values usually correspond to new buildings located in southern Europe (low heat demand), while the lower values usually correspond to existing buildings located in northern Europe (high heat demand). Moreover, the environmental gain of FC-µCHPs, compared to GCBs, is more evident in multi-family homes than in single family homes because of more electricity production replaced in the grid (resulting from more full load hours at a higher rated capacity).
• Life cycle GHG emissions of the FC-µCHPs are generally lower and in no case worse than for the GCB and the HP analysed in all of the investigated settings also when changing the replacement mixes or when increasing the amount of full load hours (data not shown in the summary). Compared to the stand-alone GCB in single family homes4 with differing insulation levels across Europe over the entire life cycle, heat-led FC-µCHPs, running between 4750 and 5333 full load hours per year, lead to 6-15% lower GHG emissions when replacing an electricity generation mix that is as carbon-intensive as the ENTSO-E mix and to 28-67% lower GHG emissions when replacing an electricity generation mix that is as carbon-intensive as a hard coal fired power plant. When additionally increasing the full load hours to 6000h, the corresponding numbers amount to 8-18% and 36-76%, respectively.
• The FC-µCHP efficiencies and the full load hours of operation throughout the year are the main FC-µCHP systems’ characteristics influencing the final LCA results. The full load hours vary depending on the size of the FC-µCHP total output relative to the home’s demand and whether the FC-µCHP is heat-led or electricity-led. While generally important, the replacement mix is not FC-µCHP system-specific.
• Different elements of the systems’ life cycle contribute substantially to their environmental performance. The operation of the FC-µCHP, GCB and HP have the most influence on the GHG emissions of the systems. The process of manufacturing these systems is most important for impacts related to resource uses. The electricity supply from / to the grid, and the natural gas supply for the FC-µCHP and GCB operation are important for all environmental impact categories.
• Measured data obtained from ene.field’s field trial was used for plausibility checks against the values assumed in the LCA. The data also motivated a sensitivity analysis to increase the assumed full load hours. The main obstacle in using field trial data in the LCA itself is the diversity of the real world: the measured units have technical specifications and are installed in dwellings that differ from those analysed in the LCA. This is because there is variability notably in terms of degrees of insulation and size of the dwellings, user behaviour and occupancy, differing rated capacities and modes of operations (e.g. recovery times, night setback) and actual weather conditions (changing especially the heating demand). Resources allocated to the LCA were not sufficient to take account of all of these aspects.
• Comparison with the literature: Ene.field’s LCA undertook to analyse different systems in different settings across Europe which none of the studies found in the literature did. The studies found are not immediately comparable with this study because of differing scopes, assumptions and the applicable replacement mix. Nevertheless, this study confirms the general finding that FC-µCHP systems with backup lead to smaller GHG emissions compared to gas condensing boilers.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND OUTLOOK
Drawing on the insights gained by the LCA, the following can be concluded:
• Diversity of systems: FC-µCHP systems and their modes of operation are diverse. Analysing generic systems for assumed generalized operation modes has given results which are indicative in general terms of the FC-µCHP environmental performance tendency. It is recommended that further work analysing individual existing systems with measured data will provide insights to the manufacturers into which parts of a given FC deserve improvements. For instance, evidence from the ene.field field trials has shown that the full load hours assumed in the LCA may well be exceeded leading to stronger environmental advantages.
• Flexible modulating systems allow FC-µCHP powered by natural gas to operate in times when carbon intensity tends to be high in the electricity grid. In addition, FCµCHP are independent from insolation and winds. As a result, already the currently available FC-µCHPs can supply heat and electricity also in times when heat demand is high and heat and electricity from renewable sources are less abundant or missing such as in winter. Further techno-economic study of different modes of flexible operation, including an improved grid-oriented operation strategy, could be useful.
• Hydrogen and other low carbon renewable fuels: As an innovative technology, FCµCHP can operate either on natural gas or on hydrogen. Comparative analysis using hydrogen or other low carbon renewable fuels (e.g. biogas and methane from power to gas) would be helpful in understanding the possible future roles of the technology.
• FC-µCHPs’ role on the political agenda: Energy efficiency is high on the political agenda, especially after the publication of the Winter Package by the European Commission in November 2016. The main priority of this package is energy efficiency, followed by renewable energies and energy access. Thanks to their high efficiency (cogeneration of heat and electricity) and fuel flexibility (e.g. biogas and power-to-gas hydrogen), FC-µCHPs have the potential to play a key role in the ongoing energy transition.
• Extending the technological comparison: The comparison of the FC-µCHPs was limited to an air-water heat pump for single family homes and a stand-alone gas condensing boiler for both single family homes and multi-family homes. In all cases, the systems were complemented with electricity from the grid. The resources foreseen in the ene.field project did not allow further low-carbon systems, notably biomass based heating systems, Stirling, Otto or diesel engine-based µCHP, solar thermal or photovoltaic combined with other heating systems, or district heating, to be evaluated. Further comparisons with other systems would be of value to the sector in understanding its positioning among innovative solutions.
This study exclusively dealt with residential, stationary FC applications. It therefore does not allow conclusions on other FC applications, including in the commercial, industrial and transport sectors.
Economy
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Fuel cell micro-combined heat and power (FC mCHP) is an innovative, emerging technology which promises significant increases in the efficiency of heat and power production compared to traditional heating appliances and grid electricity. This can lead to several benefits for the European energy system including CO2 emissions reductions, reduced peak loads on electricity networks and reduction of electricity transmission losses. However, the near term economic proposition is challenging.
At today’s capital and maintenance costs FC mCHP are significantly costlier than traditional heating technologies. However, as serial production begins, economies of scale can be unlocked, and previous studies suggest these costs are expected to drop significantly. Over the last two years, deployment of FC mCHP in Europe has gone from 10s of units to thousands, and several European manufactures have made considerable steps towards commercialisation. In turn, this has led to updated estimates of cost and technical improvements that can be made as production scales increase.
This study examines the Life Cycle Cost of fuel cell mCHP, compared to incumbent technologies based on an aggregated, updated set of manufacturer cost and performance projections. These suggest increased electrical efficiency, reduced costs and longer stack lifetimes than have been previously estimated. Life-cycle costs for fuel cell mCHP technologies have been compared for a number of key European markets, based on typical household heat demands and gas and electricity price data.
The analysis suggests that in the most attractive markets, fuel cell CHP can become competitive with all incumbents (including gas condensing boiler) on a Life Cycle Cost basis when manufactured at scales of 5,000 – 10,000 units per manufacture (cumulative) for the smallest (0.7kWe) systems, and larger systems (2-5kWe) can become competitive when produced at scales of 1,000 units per manufacturer (cumulative). This is shown below for the case of 0.7kWe systems in single family homes in Germany.
Overall, the analysis suggested the following key conclusions:
Economies of scale are crucial for improving the value proposition of FC mCHP
Future improvements to the economics of FC mCHP are likely dominated by the reduction in capital cost which are driven by production volume. Therefore, scaling up production is of paramount importance to the economics of the stationary fuel cell.
FC mCHP has the best economic performance in buildings with high heat loads
Fuel cells are likely to perform well in settings where there is high heat demand, they can be operated for long run hours, and where the spark spread is high.
At scale, FC mCHP can become economically competitive
The analysis has shown that FC mCHP units are likely to become competitive with competitor systems when produced at volumes of 5,000 to 10,000s of units per manufacturer. In countries with lower spark spreads e.g. the UK, the economics are more challenging, but can be improved significantly by increasing self-consumption of electricity. Thus, in less competitive countries, the long-term business case for FC mCHP may not only rely on achieving economies of scale, but could also require manufacturers to explore options to support customers to maximise on-site consumption of the electricity produced. Due to their lower capital costs per kWe installed, 2 – 5 kWe units could become competitive with other low carbon heating systems and with gas condensing boilers at around 1,000 - 5,000 UPM. However, a series of non-economic barriers concerning installation of CHP in multi-family homes may need to be resolved to unlock such deployment volumes.
Subsidies can improve the near-term economics of FC mCHP, but can have the same effect for competitor technologies Subsidies for low carbon heating technologies will increase the competitiveness of fuel cells with condensing boilers, and conventional mCHP. However, depending on the subsidy regime, other low carbon generation and heating technologies (e.g. PV – condensing boiler hybrid systems and air source heat pumps) may be even more competitive when subsidised. Therefore, the fuel cell cannot rely exclusively on subsidies, and should be subsidised only to allow production volumes to increase to drive down capital costs.
Supply chain
An analysis of the EU FC micro-CHP supply chain has been carried out. From a supply chain point of view, the main challenges for the FC micro-CHP technology are:
• Significant increase of production volume and reduction of systems costs, for example by outsourcing to suppliers
• Simplification of maintenance and part replacement procedures
• Development of maintenance networks of trained installers in more markets
• Reduction of system complexity and costs of components
• Development of collaborative strategies between key players
The study provides an evaluation of maturity, competition and standardisation levels of the microCHP industry in Europe as well as an analysis of the barriers and opportunities for the development of the supply chain. The full European Supply Chain Analysis Report can be found on the project website.
Cost and market projections
An analysis of the future cost and market for FC micro-CHP systems has been made and is summarized below.
A model has been created to simulate the potential for CHP uptake in Europe from 2015 to 2050. In order to guarantee a dependable model, the input data (i.e. the housing stock, the heating technology parameters, the cost down trajectory for product cost and the future energy landscapes) has been taken either from reliable sources (e.g. the Roland Berger report or from the manufacturing companies), or it has been attempted to make realistic assumptions where no data was available. The analysis considers three scenarios that differ in how widespread distributed generation solutions, where electricity is generated directly at the consumer, are. The characteristics of the three scenarios are shown in Table 4.
(Placeholder for Table 4)
The analysis of the three scenarios shows the following:
• In the Untapped Potential scenario there is little commitment to distributed generation, and fossil fuels make up most of the energy mix. Distributed generation by FC CHP is expected to have a market share of only a few percent in 2050. Applying incentives (such as subsidies) can cause an early uptake, but this is not expected to make FC CHP a viable technology in the long run.
• The Patchy Progress scenario, in which the share of renewables has increased, describes a landscape for which, without incentives, FC CHP will only become competitive towards 2050. However, with capital cost support for FC or a high feed-in tariff, the uptake is dramatically enhanced, making FC CHP the dominant heating technology (of the options included in this assessment) from 2030 onwards.
• For the Distributed Systems scenario, no incentives are required to make FC CHP the dominant technology. However, the uptake is still enhanced by all incentive schemes. FC micro-CHP will become dominant as early as 2027 when incentivised by FC capital support or a high feed-in tariff.
Macro-economic and macro-environmental impact
The use of micro-CHP systems is appealing due to two fundamental reasons: (i) the efficiency of energy conversion is above 90%, much higher than the efficiency of Combined-Cycle Gas Turbine (i.e. around 60%), (ii) the systems are installed at the end-use premises reducing the need for energy transport infrastructure and losses. The micro-CHP can also provide a local peaking capacity (back-up), and it can become an alternative to the conventional boiler in a smart home environment where the electricity and heat demand can be managed more efficiency. The study involves analyses on the impact of micro-CHP on the capacity and operation of the electricity systems across Europe and the impact on CO2, gas consumption across different uptake scenarios and system backgrounds.
In order to evaluate the system benefits of micro-CHP, a range of simulation studies has been carried out to examine the impact of micro-CHP on the European electricity systems (generation, main transmission, and distribution systems) for different future scenarios. The analysis considers today’s grid mix and the impact of likely changes in the future, based on national energy plans and their central projections for the change in the generation mix through time. The benefits of micro-CHP are quantified by finding the performance differences between two systems: (i) a system without micro-CHP, called the Reference scenario, where the electricity was supplied by a portfolio of generation with no micro-CHP and the heat demand was met using electricity-heat pump, (ii) a system with micro-CHP, called the micro-CHP scenario, where the electricity demand was supplied by a portfolio of generation including micro-CHP which also supplied the heat demand. The performance differences between the two systems, i.e. with and without micro-CHP determine the whole-system costs or benefits of micro-CHP on the system.
In order to capture the range of whole-system implication of integrating micro-CHP in Europe, two uptake scenarios, i.e. low (minimum) and high (maximum) scenarios, developed by Element Energy considering different support policies are used in the studies. The average hourly profiles of heat generated by micro-CHP in the ene.field trial are applied in the study to reflect the actual average load factor of the micro-CHP.
The values of micro-CHP in reducing the infrastructure cost (generation [G CAPEX], transmission networks [T CAPEX], distribution networks [D CAPEX], and Heat Pumps [HP CAPEX]) and operating cost [OPEX] are presented in Figure 10, expressed in €/kW electrical capacity of micro-CHP. These values reflect the cost-saving of the system with micro-CHP in comparison to the cost of a system without micro-CHP, i.e. heat demand is supplied by HP. It is important to note that the CAPEX of micro-CHP is not included in the results; the OPEX of micro-CHP has been included.
(Placeholder for Figure 10)
The total (gross) benefits are around €6000 - €7300/kW, with the 2040 cases as an exception. While the magnitude of the benefits is relatively similar, the savings may come from different sources. In the short and medium term, the savings are dominated by the savings in displacing the capacity of HP, power generation, and distribution network capacity. In the long run, the OPEX savings become higher. The OPEX savings can also become higher when the firm generating capacity in the system is scarce, as illustrated in the cases for 2040.
The results show that micro-CHP can:
• Displace capacity of central generators. The capacity value of micro-CHP is comparable to traditional gas-fired plant providing it can be dispatched as back-up,
• Displace the capacity of alternative heat sources,
• Reduce operating costs. Net energy consumption is reduced indicating higher energy efficiency,
• Release network capacity / postpone reinforcement at distribution and transmission networks.
Some of the benefits can only be realised if the micro-CHP can provide grid services; this has implications for the design and control of the micro-CHP, for example: enabling remote operation capabilities for the system operator to access and use micro-CHP to support the grid. While the remote control technologies exist and they can be integrated into the micro-CHP easily, it also requires stronger control coordination between transmission and distribution system operators if they are operated by separate entities. It is observed that the benefits (per kW) are not too sensitive to the penetration levels of micro-CHP projected which indicate that there is no significant barrier for the micro-CHP at the levels being studied.
In the short term, based on the to-date level of renewables and efficiency of the micro-CHP, it is sufficient if micro-CHP operates in heat-led mode. Combined electrical and heat-led is required when micro-CHP can be a least-cost alternative source to displace high marginal cost generators such as peaking plant (e.g. when the efficiency of micro-CHP is high, or when the generation mixes are not optimal). The studies also find that micro-CHP is competitive against HP in the short and medium term; however, when the renewable penetration in the system is sufficiently high (>70%), a combination of micro-CHP and HP may form an optimal portfolio.
Wide deployment of micro-CHP is not only improving the efficiency of the overall system but also reducing carbon emissions. The magnitude of the carbon saving per kW installed micro-CHP in Europe is estimated between 370 – 1100 kg CO2 per year. In the short and medium term, at least when the use of conventional coal/gas/oil-fired plant is still dominant, the impact of micro-CHP in reducing carbon emissions is expected to be relatively significant. The results are shown in Figure 11.
(Placeholder for Figure 11)
In the long term, when the supply of electricity is mainly from low-carbon generation sources, the use of natural-gas fuel cell micro-CHP becomes less attractive, in the context of carbon reduction. Alternative fuel for micro-CHP, especially from sustainable and low-carbon sources will be needed.
End-user’s perception
Two surveys have been conducted to collect information about end-user expectations and experience with the FC micro-CHP systems. The end-users participating in the ene.field project were very positive to the micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all the aspects of their microCHP systems. It is especially worth noting that their perception of the environmental profile of the technology was entirely positive. However, two areas with room for improvement were identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology.
End-users were asked how satisfied they were with their micro-CHP systems with respect to a number of criteria. The questions included satisfaction with:
• Comfort and warmth
• Heating and hot water production
• Electricity generation
• Overall satisfaction
The survey responses showed that the overall satisfaction was very good (an average score of 3.9 out of 5). Satisfaction with comfort and warmth, space heating, hot water production, and environmental performance scored higher than the average (4.3 out of 5), while the satisfaction with running costs and ease of use/controllability scored slightly lower than average (3.5 and 3.6 respectively).
The lowest scoring aspects of the systems are the most likely to be potential barriers to wider adoption of micro-CHP systems. Although running costs depend on wider political and economic factors and are not completely within the control of the manufacturers, improving the ease of use/controllability of the systems is something that is within the control of manufacturers. This could be down to improved system design, system documentation or after-sales support.
Based on the survey responses, 75% of the properties in which the units were installed were residential properties – and generally quite modern (post 1970s), large detached or semi-detached houses with gas heating systems.
The end-users had relatively high household incomes. The remaining 25% were non-residential properties, including schools and office buildings. The end-user surveys have been analysed and reported in more details in the Non-economic barriers report [3] to be found at the ene.field project website.
Policies and political challenges
The project has also prepared policy recommendations to support the widespread deployment of fuel cell micro-cogeneration systems, while providing a review of policy frameworks at the EU and national levels expected to impact the uptake of the technology in the coming decade. It highlights the benefits of fuel cell micro-cogeneration in relation to Europe’s energy and climate objectives, taking into account ene.field findings that provide definite evidence on the macro-economic and microenvironmental impact of the technology.
Comprehensive analysis carried out by the ene.field project shows that FC micro-CHP can deliver important system wide efficiency and decarbonisation benefits across Europe between 2020-2050, as it is expected to mainly displace more inefficient and carbon intensive generation up to 2050. This can be achieved at a lower cost for the energy system and the consumer compared to a scenario with no uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP. With the right policy framework in place, FC micro-CHP can deliver 32 million tonnes of CO2 emission reductions in 2030, while reducing infrastructure and operational cost for the energy system by more than € 6,000 (gross) for each kilowatt-electric of installed capacity until 2050.
Despite these benefits, EU and national policy impacting FC micro-CHP is fragmented and in the most part ill-suited for an energy solution providing both heat and power. The current policy approach of favouring energy efficiency (“energy efficiency first” principle) as a main tool in decarbonising energy should be supportive of micro-CHP deployment, but the individual focus of the legislation fails to consider the whole energy system. The full benefits of FC micro-CHP deployment risk remaining unrecognised, unless the key policy barriers are addressed
• Focus on energy reduction at the end-user level instead of on energy system – i.e. final energy vs. primary energy reduction (e.g. Article 7 in the Energy Efficiency Directive)
• Addressing heat or electricity separately rather than total energy (e.g. Eco-design & energy labelling of space heating appliances)
• Enabling electricity-using technologies over other decarbonisation and energy efficiency solutions, specifically in the heat sector (e.g. promoting an inadequate primary energy factor value for electricity (EU PEF))
• Greater focus on renewable electricity rather than fairly rewarding renewable energy across all energy vectors and networks (e.g. heat and gas)
• Allowing renewable energy to count as energy efficiency (e.g. Energy Savings Obligation in the Energy Efficiency Directive)
• Electricity self-production and self-consumption is often penalised through disproportionately high grid connection and grid tariffs compared to real grid use
• In addition, administrative barriers (e.g. for grid connection or support scheme access) at the national level persist and, thus, hinder the large-scale deployment of micro-CHP systems.
All of the 10 European countries which took part in ene.field face challenges in decarbonising their domestic heat supply. In addition, with an increasing penetration of intermittent renewable electricity and the growing role of electricity in heating and transport, ensuring grid stability is also becoming a priority. So far Germany is leading in Member State approach to supporting FC micro-CHP technology, which represents a benchmark of best practise for support in the sector, as has happened with other innovative renewables technologies. Germany has put in place a dedicated programme (KfW433) to encourage early adopter uptake of FC micro-CHP and promote the further industrialisation of this technology. Other countries, including Belgium, France, UK, are supporting FC micro-CHP through more general mechanisms (i.e. feed-in premiums, feed-in tariffs, white certificates/green certificates).
The choice of accounting methodologies to implement building codes or other policies at the national level, also seems to affect the market entry prospects of the technology. ene.field workshops were held with policymakers and other interested stakeholders in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, UK, and the findings show market interest and requests for tailored support schemes to help the early adopter market to take hold.
The EU and national policy frameworks should create a level playing field for renewable energy, decarbonisation and energy efficiency solutions across the whole energy system (electricity, gas, heat networks). Only such an approach will deliver a comprehensive, balanced and cost-effective energy transition for the European consumer.
A more comprehensive approach to energy policy will also better recognise the system wide benefits of FC micro-CHP, thus untapping the important efficiency, decarbonisation and flexibility potential of this energy solution. To achieve this the ene.field project proposes the following policy recommendations:
• A coherent, steady and predictable policy framework is the key for the European heating sector to invest in new products and develop new business models.
• Consumer and energy system benefits of micro-CHP systems should be fully recognised and rewarded by policy at the EU and national levels
• In particular, accounting methodologies used in key decarbonisation and energy efficiency policy mechanisms, including building codes, energy labelling, Covenant of Mayors, should fully reflect the benefits of FC micro-CHP for consumers and the energy system as a whole. This will be an important driver for the micro-CHP technology to reach the mass market.
• Simplified administrative procedures to access the grid or different support scheme should be introduced for the potential users or FC micro-CHP
• Accounting for the decarbonisation and flexibility potential of gas networks (renewable gas), as part of a comprehensive energy and climate strategy
(Placeholder for Table 5)
Non-economic barriers to large-scale market uptake of fuel cell based micro-CHP technology
The project looked at the current non-economic barriers to mass uptake of the fuel cell (FC) micro combined heat and power (micro-CHP) technology and compiled a report entitled Non-economic barriers to large-scale market uptake of fuel cell based micro-CHP technology (or, in short, the Non-economic barriers). The report considers technical, consumer and political barriers. It is based on data from the ene.field trial programme and draws on the knowledge and expertise of the ene.field project partners.
The large-scale market introduction of fuel cell (FC) based micro combined heat and power (microCHP) systems in residential application faces a broad range of challenges, including non-economic barriers, which require special attention. This report identifies the non-economic barriers in terms of product perception by consumers or installers, supply chain limitations, policy and political environment and the performance of the system in operation, and proposes actions to address them to facilitate the market uptake of FC micro-CHPs. Complementing the right market conditions, awareness among end-users and supply chain, as well industry’s further efforts to speed up the industrialisation of FC micro-CHP production, a coherent, steady and predictable policy framework, is key to recognise and incentivise investments by the European heating sector in advanced products and new business models contributing to a more efficient, reliable and cleaner energy system.
The comprehensive review of the policy and political context, conducted as part of the ene.field project, concluded that the multiple consumer and energy system benefits of FC micro-CHP are not adequately recognised and rewarded by most policy at the EU and national levels.
In addition to high level recognition of fuel cell micro-CHP at both EU and national levels, removing barriers and fully accounting for the consumer and system level benefits in building codes, energy labelling and other secondary policy instruments is key to ensure that the right drivers are in place, once the mass market commercialisation stage has been reached. Promoting innovative business models to accompany the roll out of FC micro-CHP will also help consumers derive further benefits from the technology.
A lack of a common framework of European standards is seen as a great hindrance to market uptake. Manufacturers points to a need for updating, improvements or revisions for a large amount of the current standards. Issues include lack of consistency between different standards dealing with similar topics and standards that refer to too general co-generation systems fitting poorly with the reality of FC micro-CHP technology. The sheer amount of standards that are in some way relevant to FC micro-CHP installation makes it hard for the manufacturers to keep an overview.
From a supply chain point of view the main challenges for the FC micro-CHP technology is significant increase of production volume, simplification of maintenance and part replacement procedures and reduction of system complexity and the cost of components. In the same thread, cost reduction is necessary for market introduction of the technology. Here the main can be grouped into three main areas of work: increase in volume, system simplification and development of collaborative strategies between key players.
From the more technical point of view of field installation, the largest problem identified is the sheer time some installations take. Here component standardisation may be a way of decreasing the required installation time. Additionally, while training of installers has progressed tremendously in active markets such a Germany lack of such training may be a barrier for market entry in smaller dormant markets.
Lastly, while customers participating in the ene.field project were found to be overwhelmingly positivity to the FC micro-CHP technology two main areas where improvements would be desirable was identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology. This latter point was most notable when asked about satisfaction with heating and hot water and therefore it should be noted that issues with the backup boiler or heating circuit might just as well have caused this.
Standardisation
An overview of the current regulations, codes and standards in Europe and at national level has been made in relation to the installation aspects of FC micro-CHP systems and an additional report has been made based on experience from the field trials. The main conclusions were:
• Countries use international and European standards, but supplement with national versions.
• A mix of standards leads to problems for manufacturers who want to commercialise the products throughout Europe.
• Energy labelling of FC micro-CHP systems was found to be unfair compared with other energy systems. The current methodologies used to calculate the seasonal space heating energy efficiency were found to poorly represent the performance of micro-CHP units, and this is what determines the energy label.
The lack of a common framework of European standards is seen as a large hindrance to market uptake. Manufacturers point to a need for updating, improvements or revisions of a large amount of the current standards. The issues include lack of consistency between different standards dealing with similar topics, and standards that refer to too general co-generation systems fitting poorly with the reality of the FC micro-CHP technology. The considerable amount of standards that in some way are relevant to FC micro-CHP installation makes it hard for the manufacturers to keep an overview.
The upcoming review in 2017-2018 at the EU level of the Energy Labelling & Ecodesign Regulations for Space Heaters represents an opportunity to amend the methodology for micro-CHP to fully account for the efficiency benefits of these technologies – which is not the case today.
Sulphur content in natural gas
The presence of sulphur and sulphur based components in natural gas may be harmful to fuel cells. For the design of suitable desulfurizers, it is crucial for the fuel cell manufacturers to have information about the sulphur content of the locally used natural gas, when they want to install FC micro-CHP devices across Europe.
A detailed mapping of natural gas odorisation practices in the European countries has been made, focusing on sulphur and sulphur based components. The mapping provides information on the type and amount of naturally occurring sulphur and sulphur containing odorants in the natural gas.
In general, the most critical aspect is the absence of a maximum concentration for the odorants injected into the natural gas in many countries. However, most of the countries have a total sulphur content limit. In addition, it is possible to obtain a range of most probable sulphur concentration. The full report can be downloaded from the ene.field project website.
Training and field support
Early in the ene.field project, an evaluation of the state of field support arrangements, training and certification was made. Towards the end of the project, the initial work was followed up by a survey among manufacturers and utility companies to review lessons learnt and future needs.
During the ene.field project, the training of installers has progressed tremendously in active markets such as Germany. Approximately 600 installers have been trained in the course of the project. Some of the manufacturing companies have been training well above 100 installers each. However, the absence of organised training may be a barrier for market entry in new markets.
A good training process reduces the installation time and avoids installation related errors. The training should ensure a good understanding of both the fuel cell and the CHP technologies. The content of the courses should have a general common core with additional modules such as safety, regulation and standards, as well as micro-CHP operation and maintenance. Training courses and training done internally by the manufacturers seemed to cover the present needs.
Future activities
The PACE project is the natural next step following the ene.field project. PACE stands for “Pathway to a competitive European fuel cell micro-cogeneration market”. The aim is to install more than 2,500 FC micro-CHP units in 11 countries in the period 2016-2021. The focus areas are:
• Product innovation and cost reduction
• Supply chain development
• Policy collaboration
• Demonstration and verification of primary energy savings
• Testing grid benefits
Like the ene.field project, PACE is supported by the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCHJU). Further information can be found on the PACE project website www.pace-energy.eu Furthermore, in the upcoming years the German programme KFW433 will enable large-scale deployment of FC micro-CHP units by subsidies. Figure 14 shows the development in some major FC micro-CHP projects and support schemes.
Conclusion
The ene.field project has demonstrated more than 1000 fuel cell based micro-CHP units in 10 countries. From a technical point of view, the FC micro-CHP technology is ready for large market penetration. In long periods of time, the availability of the units to the end-user has been above 99%. Of the failures encountered, only 1-2% of them were caused by the fuel cell stack itself.
A number of aspects of the field trial turned out to be more challenging than originally anticipated. These caused a delay in the deployment of units compared to the original plan. However, by the end of the project a total number of 1046 units have been installed which exceeds the target of 1000 units. The expected main route to market via utilities proved to be very difficult. The most successful approach for selling the micro-CHP systems was via installers through the heating market channels.
A key element for a successful field trial is to establish good communication channels with end-users and installers beyond the basic technical discussion. The training of installers to ensure a smooth and faultless installation process is also key to success.
Large-scale market uptake of FC micro-CHP systems may help the EU fulfil energy policy aims and climate commitments. In the investigated scenarios, the life cycle emissions of greenhouse gas (GHG) of a FC micro-CHP are in general lower than those of a gas condensing boiler or a heat pump. Generally, the use of micro-CHP units also leads to lower air pollutant emissions compared with the alternative systems.
At today’s capital and maintenance cost levels, FC micro-CHPs are significantly costlier than traditional heating technologies. As serial production begins, economies of scale will cause the costs to drop significantly. A life cycle cost analysis (LCC) has shown that the FC micro-CHP technology can become economically competitive. Subsidies can improve the near-term economics of micro-CHP systems, and may be crucial for the technology to reach the mass market.
Germany has proved to be the most successful market in Europe in terms of deployment numbers. Funding from the national support schemes helps decrease the investment costs and thereby favours the ramping up of the installation numbers.
A lack of a common framework of European standards is seen as a large hindrance to the market uptake. Countries use international and European standards but supplement with their own versions. Moreover, the forms for approval of installation lack standardisation and the process may be complex and lengthy.
The end-user participating in the ene.field project were very positive to the micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all aspects of their micro-CHP systems, especially the environmental profile of the technology.
The German support programme KFW433 will facilitate the commercialisation of the FC micro-CHP technology in the coming years. As a follow-up on the ene.field project, the field demonstration of FC micro-CHP systems in Europe continues with the EU funded project PACE.
Potential Impact:
Impact of trials
The project has accelerated the commercialisation of FC micro-CHP and paved the way to large scale deployment of the technology. This full scale field demonstration of proven systems in real end user environment has demonstrated fit-for-purpose technical system performance and provide extended operational experience of FC micro-CHP from manufacturers.
Through the deployment of close to 1050 micro-CHP units across 10 European countries, a volume capable supply chain has been initiated both in terms of product manufacture and field support. As a result of the initiation of this project, mCHP manufacturers and their supply chain partners have been able to begin to lay down mass manufacturing facilities and accelerate cost-down initiatives.
Field demonstration and training measures carried out under the trial programs has prepared market partners such as utilities, installers and end customers for the market launch of fuel cell systems for home energy supply.
Macro-economic and macro-environmental impact
The use of micro-CHP systems is appealing due to two fundamental reasons: (i) the efficiency of energy conversion is above 90%, much higher than the efficiency of Combined-Cycle Gas Turbine (i.e. around 60%), (ii) the systems are installed at the end-use premises reducing the need for energy transport infrastructure and losses. The micro-CHP can also provide a local peaking capacity (back-up), and it can become an alternative to the conventional boiler in a smart home environment where the electricity and heat demand can be managed more efficiency. The study involves analyses on the impact of micro-CHP on the capacity and operation of the electricity systems across Europe and the impact on CO2, gas consumption across different uptake scenarios and system backgrounds.
In order to evaluate the system benefits of micro-CHP, a range of simulation studies has been carried out to examine the impact of micro-CHP on the European electricity systems (generation, main transmission, and distribution systems) for different future scenarios. The analysis considers today’s grid mix and the impact of likely changes in the future, based on national energy plans and their central projections for the change in the generation mix through time. The benefits of micro-CHP are quantified by finding the performance differences between two systems: (i) a system without micro-CHP, called the Reference scenario, where the electricity was supplied by a portfolio of generation with no micro-CHP and the heat demand was met using electricity-heat pump, (ii) a system with micro-CHP, called the micro-CHP scenario, where the electricity demand was supplied by a portfolio of generation including micro-CHP which also supplied the heat demand. The performance differences between the two systems, i.e. with and without micro-CHP determine the whole-system costs or benefits of micro-CHP on the system.
In order to capture the range of whole-system implication of integrating micro-CHP in Europe, two uptake scenarios, i.e. low (minimum) and high (maximum) scenarios, developed by Element Energy considering different support policies are used in the studies. The average hourly profiles of heat generated by micro-CHP in the ene.field trial are applied in the study to reflect the actual average load factor of the micro-CHP.
The values of micro-CHP in reducing the infrastructure cost (generation [G CAPEX], transmission networks [T CAPEX], distribution networks [D CAPEX], and Heat Pumps [HP CAPEX]) and operating cost [OPEX] are presented in Figure 10, expressed in €/kW electrical capacity of micro-CHP. These values reflect the cost-saving of the system with micro-CHP in comparison to the cost of a system without micro-CHP, i.e. heat demand is supplied by HP. It is important to note that the CAPEX of micro-CHP is not included in the results; the OPEX of micro-CHP has been included.
(Placeholder for Figure 10)
The total (gross) benefits are around €6000 - €7300/kW, with the 2040 cases as an exception. While the magnitude of the benefits is relatively similar, the savings may come from different sources. In the short and medium term, the savings are dominated by the savings in displacing the capacity of HP, power generation, and distribution network capacity. In the long run, the OPEX savings become higher. The OPEX savings can also become higher when the firm generating capacity in the system is scarce, as illustrated in the cases for 2040.
The results show that micro-CHP can:
• Displace capacity of central generators. The capacity value of micro-CHP is comparable to traditional gas-fired plant providing it can be dispatched as back-up,
• Displace the capacity of alternative heat sources,
• Reduce operating costs. Net energy consumption is reduced indicating higher energy efficiency,
• Release network capacity / postpone reinforcement at distribution and transmission networks.
Some of the benefits can only be realised if the micro-CHP can provide grid services; this has implications for the design and control of the micro-CHP, for example: enabling remote operation capabilities for the system operator to access and use micro-CHP to support the grid. While the remote control technologies exist and they can be integrated into the micro-CHP easily, it also requires stronger control coordination between transmission and distribution system operators if they are operated by separate entities. It is observed that the benefits (per kW) are not too sensitive to the penetration levels of micro-CHP projected which indicate that there is no significant barrier for the micro-CHP at the levels being studied.
In the short term, based on the to-date level of renewables and efficiency of the micro-CHP, it is sufficient if micro-CHP operates in heat-led mode. Combined electrical and heat-led is required when micro-CHP can be a least-cost alternative source to displace high marginal cost generators such as peaking plant (e.g. when the efficiency of micro-CHP is high, or when the generation mixes are not optimal). The studies also find that micro-CHP is competitive against HP in the short and medium term; however, when the renewable penetration in the system is sufficiently high (>70%), a combination of micro-CHP and HP may form an optimal portfolio.
Wide deployment of micro-CHP is not only improving the efficiency of the overall system but also reducing carbon emissions. The magnitude of the carbon saving per kW installed micro-CHP in Europe is estimated between 370 – 1100 kg CO2 per year. In the short and medium term, at least when the use of conventional coal/gas/oil-fired plant is still dominant, the impact of micro-CHP in reducing carbon emissions is expected to be relatively significant. The results are shown in Figure 11.
(Placeholder for Figure 11)
In the long term, when the supply of electricity is mainly from low-carbon generation sources, the use of natural-gas fuel cell micro-CHP becomes less attractive, in the context of carbon reduction. Alternative fuel for micro-CHP, especially from sustainable and low-carbon sources will be needed.
Based on these results and the analysis, it can be concluded that micro-CHP technologies are important for the future European energy system development in both short and long run. The micro-CHP can also complement the operation of other low-carbon technologies such as HP.
As the system benefits of micro-CHP are now clear, it is important that appropriate mechanisms are put in place to encourage wide deployment of this technology in the European system. Without acknowledgement of its system benefits, the micro-CHP may not be able to compete with other low-carbon technologies, and this may lead to a sub-optimal development of this technology.
Impact of dissemination
Customer acceptance and awareness of these new products by the public plays an important role in market preparation. By deploying a large number of units under a consistent brand (ene.field) the project has begun to stimulate confidence in the product group and greater awareness of micro FC-CHP technology in the general public.
The dissemination plan identified four key target groups and the communication activities have been centred around them. The messages to the target groups are
• End-users - "FC mCHP will reduce the customers' energy costs, while maintaining their home comfort."
• Utilities - "FC mCHP allows the utility to continue to serve its customers in a changing energy environment."
• Policy-makers - "FC mCHP is an innovative step towards reaching the 2030 environmental targets."
• Project Community - "ene.field is delivering important contributions to the development of FC mCHP."
General communication tools
The project website ww.enefield.eu launched in Month 3 of the project and has been kept up to date all through the duration of ene.field. It includes, among others:
• Public reports (or public summaries of reports) on the findings of the project
• Interactive European map on the main page to allow the end-users recruitment
• Detailed information about the technology
• Information about “how to get a FC mCHP unit”
• Different posts for the news, press release and newsflashes.
In the course of the project 16 press releases and 7 newsflashes have been published. In addition to the publication on the website, news items are also circulated on the mailing lists of COGEN Europe reaching a high number of various stakeholders directly (approx. 1000 people in COGEN Europe's mailing list).
Ene.field videos
The project has also developed videos for the target audiences that capture the main messages of the project in a spectacular and engaging format. The four videos are on the website of the project:
http://enefield.eu/news/watch-the-ene-field-videos-and-find-out-more-about-fuel-cell-micro-cogeneration-and-how-it-supports-the-eus-energy-transition/
National dissemination events
In order to draw attention to the work of the project and ensure a wider awareness and use of the outcomes, the consortium organized dissemination workshops in the countries where trials were organised. The aim was to inform the workshop participants of the project results and ideas and inputs were be collected from the audience (local policy-makers, academics, industries, DSO, ESCOs, utilities, operators and end-users).
With the objective to draw attention on the project and its outcomes, as well as to ensure a wider awareness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration as smart energy solution for private homes, the ene.field project organised six national dissemination workshops in the countries where field trials were taking place.
The workshops were held between June 2016 and March 2017 in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, and United Kingdom.
The aim of each workshop was to inform participants about the ene.field project findings and the potential of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration solutions for enabling energy transition at European and national level.
The findings from the workshops show market interest and requests for tailored support schemes to help the early adopter market to take hold.
The main take-home message from the series of workshops was that Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration solutions are ready to enter people’s homes, enabling consumers to efficiently produce their own heat and power, and thus reducing their energy bills and environmental footprint. In order to realise the potential of FC mCHP, there is a need for a clear vision on policy and market development at both EU and national levels. This will ensure that innovative European manufacturers can bring product costs down, and reach mass commercialisation by scaling up production.
The series of six workshops had a significant impact, since it gathered in total more than 350 representatives from local policy-makers, academics, industries, DSO, ESCOs, utilities, operators and end-users. In order to strengthen the impact, most of the workshops were organised in conjunction with other events or trade fairs focussing on themes linked to Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration (i.e. ISH Fair, ‘Hydrogen and Fuel Cells into the Mainstream’ Conference, ATEE Journée Cogénération, etc.).
All the workshop followed a standard format, with presentations delivered by the invited speakers, followed by a panel discussion with possibility to ask questions from the audience and by networking opportunities.
Each of the events featured at least:
- A speaker from the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU), the European Union’s Public Private Partnership co-funding the ene.field project, to provide an overview of the FCH JU’s scope and ambitions , as well as to present the EU energy and environment legislative framework
- A speaker from the ene.field consortium, introducing the project and covering its main findings, while offering an EU policy perspective.
- One or more speakers from the national industry, presenting the political and technical challenges for the widespread deployment of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in that given country.
The promotion and the follow-up of the workshops was led by COGEN Europe, with the support of project’s partners, via communication tools such as mass-email campaigns, press releases, realisation of videos and publication of posts on ene.field website.
ene.field dissemination sessions
Informative sessions on ene.field and its findings were also organised in Austria, Hungary, and Luxembourg.
• The session in Austria (October 10th, 2016, Wien) was held as part of a workshop organised by the Austrian Energy Agency and by ÖVGW, the Austrian Association for Gas and Water, with the title “Fuel cells: Why is Austria not taking off?”. It was Stefano Modena (SOLIDpower) to introduce ene.field with a 25 minutes presentation.
• The ene.field session in Hungary took part during COGEN Hungary Annual Conference, on the Balaton Lake on 22nd March 2016, with a presentation in Hungarian delivered by Janos Vajda, Project Manager at COGEN Europe.
• The session in Luxembourg on 22nd June 2017 was a restricted round table between industry and Luxembourgish public authorities, at the presence of the Energy Commissioner of Luxembourg. Fiona Riddoch, as ene.field project coordinator, joined the meeting and presented ene.field on behalf of COGEN Europe.
These three sessions, together with the six national dissemination workshops, contributed to the ene.field objective to raise awareness on the market readiness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology and its benefits, and on the project’s achievements.
Fuel Cell micro-CHP policy overview and recommendations by country
Over the course of 2016-2017, the ene.field project organised policy and stakeholders workshops in more than six European countries participating in the field trial. The conclusions and policy recommendations presented below were derived from the exchange with industry and policymakers held during or as a follow up to the national workshops. They are adapted to the national policy and market conditions in each country at the time of the analysis.
Belgium
The policy framework for FC micro-CHP in Belgium looks positive, even if the level of awareness and of support to the technology varies significantly among the three federal regions – being currently higher in Brussels and Wallonia and lower in the Flanders, where there are no support schemes in place, but green certificates.
Belgian suppliers and installers are committed to deliver fuel cell micro-CHP products to consumers, while cutting down costs and aiming for even higher electrical and total efficiency for their technologies. For a successful FC micro-CHP market entry, however, industry efforts need to be complemented by high level political commitment.
The following recommendations emerged for Belgian market and policy framework in the course of ene.field:
• High-level recognition of the environmental and energy security contribution of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies towards the Belgian energy transition is key for the successful mass commercialisation of these products in Belgium.
• As long as these fuel cell micro-CHP products can deliver system wide benefits in terms of primary energy savings, GHG (including CO2, NOx, SOx) reductions, and RES integration, adequate support schemes should be designed to reward these technologies and facilitate their mass market uptake.
• Addressing non-economic and administrative barriers is also necessary in order to prevent further cost being incurred in early commercialisation. One such example is recognising fuel cells as eligible under the EPB methodology, which is time consuming and very costly for this emerging technology. Further harmonisation of standards and requirements between the three Belgian regions would also be beneficial.
• Partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers are essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in Belgium. In addition to recognising fuel cell micro-CHP as one of the key technologies to deliver the energy transition in Belgium by addressing the barriers and providing sufficient support, public authorities themselves can give a boost to the industry by investing in these innovative technologies.
• Having more engagement by the equipment manufacturers and the whole supply chain will also lead to a more dynamic market in Belgium.
To conclude, with a technical potential for fuel cell micro-CHP technologies in Belgium assessed by COGEN Flanders at 200,000 units by 2030, Belgium should not miss the opportunity of reaping the benefits from the large-scale deployment of these products.
France
Even with an energy mix where nuclear has a strong footprint, in France there is still good ground for further deployment of fuel cell micro-CHP units, especially if fuelled by green gas. Nevertheless, without a fair valorisation of the technology and an adequate recognition of its benefits in the upcoming national building code Réglementation Environnementale, coming into force in 2019 and replacing the current Réglementation Thermique 2012 (RT2012), the large-scale uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies in France is endangered. In this context, the adoption of the following recommendations would be beneficial for the FC micro-CHP market development, even more with regards to the implementation of the new building code:
• Concerning the definition of the perimeter, optimisation is made at a building level rather than at a territory level, and this is a burden for CHPs. Optimisation at territory level would fully and fairly into account energy savings from decentralised power production instead.
• In the existing Réglementation Thermique 2012, ICE and Stirling micro-CHP technologies are relatively well integrated, being considered as an alternative to renewables, as they achieve significant energy savings. On the other hand, for fuel cell micro-CHPs, which have just entered the market, an application will be sent to the authorities under the RT2012, in order for fuel cell units to become eligible as of 2017 under the current building code. Nevertheless, the assumptions around the CO2 intensity of electricity from the grid (based on an average calculation of CO2 content for the different energy uses within the building), as well as the system boundaries to be included in the new building code, could undermine the position of fuel cell micro-CHP and might even lead to their exclusion from the list of eligible technologies. In this context, a marginal or seasonal calculation of CO2 intensity of power would more fairly account for benefits deriving from fuel cell micro-CHP instead and the introduction of a carbon bonus would better reflect CO2 savings.
• In the process of adoption of the new building code, an experimentation phase is ongoing, called Label Energie Carbone, and because of the bad positioning of fuel cell micro-CHP, mainly due to the calculation of CO2 intensity on an average base, FC micro-CHP might be even excluded from the experimentation phase.
• Partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers are essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in France. At this stage, as the new building code proposal might represent a major barrier for kick-starting the French market of FC micro-CHP, the key actors to target in the process of drafting and implementing the Réglementation Environnementale, are the French Government on one hand – and namely the Direction générale de l'Énergie et du Climat (DGEC) and the Direction de l'habitat, de l'urbanisme et des paysages (DHUP) – and the industry on the other hand – i.e. the Club Cogénération of the ATEE, Engie and GRDF, and the nuclear lobby, promoting a lower CO2 intensity.
To conclude, high-level and fair recognition of the environmental and energy security contribution of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies towards the French energy transition is key for the successful mass commercialisation of these products in France. The ultimate aim is to show France that the European Union is supportive of fuel cell micro-CHP technology, and that even with an energy mix where nuclear has a strong footprint, there is still good ground for further deployment of fuel cell units, especially if fuelled by green gas.
Germany
The workshop panel, comprised of Ms. Atanasiu (FCH JU), Mr. Brosziewski (B.KWK) Mr. Dauensteiner (IBZ), Mr. Schumacher (NOW), Mr. Stengel (SenerTec), Ms. Wittneben (MVV Energie) and moderated by Mr. Wilhelm (NOW), agreed that even if Germany is at the forefront of FC micro-CHP deployment in Europe, volumes still need to scale up in order for costs to be decrease. The policy framework currently in place should be continued, and even further improved, by making it even steadier, more coherent and more predictable.
• Dedicated support schemes that adequately and fairly reward FC mCHP based on an agreed timeline & KPIs, such as the German KfW 433, should be continued in order to develop further the already advanced German market.
• Germany is the strongest early market, this is due to regional funding opportunities, tolerance of higher cost heating systems and a more developed manufacturer and installer base, among other factors.
• As long as these fuel cell micro-CHP products can deliver system wide benefits in terms of primary energy savings, GHG (including CO2, NOx, SOx) reductions, RES integration, adequate support schemes should be designed to reward these technologies and facilitate their mass market uptake.
• In the German experience, partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers have proved essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in the country. The panellists agreed that manufacturers should address customer needs by delivering tailored solutions to the end-users. In addition to recognising fuel cell micro-CHP as one of the key technologies to deliver the energy transition in Germany by addressing the barriers and providing sufficient support, public authorities themselves can give a boost to the industry by investing in these innovative technologies.
• The momentum towards reaching mass commercialisation for these home energy solutions should continue with an ambitious implementation of the KfW 433, facilitating the customers’ access to these technologies and enabling the smart grid capabilities of micro-CHP systems.
The German success case provides a good example for other European markets, and projects like ene.field and PACE are contributing to the development of new markets around Europe while developing further the more advanced German market. If other Member States are to follow, with FC micro-CHP suppliers qualifying new routes to market and opening new markets, the development of a comprehensive policy framework is necessary with national authorities complementing the efforts of European institutions. National governments are also expected to address the lack of a common framework of European standards, which is seen as a great hindrance to market uptake with national stakeholders pointing at the need to update, improve and revise a large amount of the current standards for more consistent and better suited ones.
Italy
Local stakeholders Italian market for stationary fuel cells remains a very difficult one. Fuel cell micro-CHP technologies have a potential to deliver significant energy savings and emissions reductions in Italy, while helping to integrate renewable energy into the energy mix – especially due to the success of photovoltaic panels and windmills on the Italian landscape.
Fostering innovative manufacturing in Italy would also be associated with wider economic benefits, including the creation of green jobs.
In order for these benefits to reach Italian consumers and the overall economy, a supportive and stable policy framework is key to enable the market entry of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies.
Policy recommendations for the large-scale uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP in Italy include the following:
• High level recognition of fuel cell micro-CHP benefits is necessary in order unlock the market potential for these technologies. Taking an integrated approach to the energy system (across heating, cooling, electricity production, distribution and consumption) would enable policymakers to identify and reward the full decarbonisation and energy efficiency benefits of fuel cells.
• Counting on fuel cell micro-CHP as one of the key technologies to decarbonise and improve the energy efficiency of buildings, through the building codes, white certificates scheme or Conto Termico, would ensure a higher recognition of the technology and thus provide a more predictable environment for investors.
• Adapting existing funding instruments would represent a further push for fuel cell micro-CHP technologies in Italy. It is important that fuel cell micro-CHP is included in the tool box of technologies eligible for incentives, based on its high efficiency and decarbonisation potential (i.e. fuel cell micro-CHPs are labelled as A++ under the labelling scheme for space heaters). Support mechanisms like Conto Termico, should therefore also specify micro-CHP technologies as eligible in addition to the improvement of building envelope efficiency and the replacement of inefficient heating appliances with condensing boilers, biomass based boilers, heat pumps and hybrid systems.
• Removing administrative and regulatory barriers would facilitate the market entry of fuel cell micro-CHP, making it easier and less costly for small energy consumers to choose innovative, energy efficiency technologies. Lengthy bureaucratic procedures for the installation and authorisation process could be significantly improved in Italy (e.g. the complex “officina elettrica” authorisation process). Moreover, the connection to the electricity grid of fuel cell micro-CHP in Italy takes 2-3 months, which can be addressed by following the “install and inform” recommended procedure in Article 15.5 of the Energy Efficiency Directive. In addition, the applications for tax credits or white certificates should be simplified in order that small installations below 50 kWe can benefit from these incentives.
The Netherlands
Despite the very good level of awareness of market players and customers on micro-CHP, and even though micro-CHP is included in the national energy transition programme, previously existing support schemes for this technology have now been removed – although they were to be considered favourable, the Dutch industry was not yet at the right stage to take advantage of them.
The Netherlands is currently undergoing a phase of ‘gas out’ – and new buildings are not even allowed to have a connection to the gas grid. This attitude is clearly favouring a full electrification of the economy, which nevertheless does not take into account some relevant considerations.
• The use of electricity for heating and transport will still result in significant CO2 emissions, while increasing costs for grid operators in the short and medium term. Electricity storage is yet to cost-effectively cover for the residual load (defined as the difference between the electricity demand and renewable feed-in) during the times where the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing. Moreover, seasonal variations in residual loads can be quite difficult to manage without significant grid reinforcements.
• The cost-effective alternative to the all-electrification scenario consists of employing a technology mix that uses existing infrastructure and minimises the need for new electricity infrastructure, while maximising decarbonisation gains. Making use of flexible and highly efficient energy solutions, while using existing gas pipeline network, will already today reduce energy use and achieve significant CO2 emission reductions, compared to electricity based solutions.
The gas grid will also have an important storage capacity x-y times higher than the electricity grid at peak demand time.
In addition, as the fuel delivered by the gas grid becomes renewable (e.g. biogas, hydrogen), decarbonisation gains will become even more substantial.
• Grid operators should be given adequate tools to exploit the cost advantages of renewable CHP for infrastructure support: DSOs, which have shown a good interest in micro-CHP, should be thus empowered, since legislation currently prevents them from participating in the market.
• Additionally, cooperation among the available sustainable paths (i.e. solar, wind, renewable gas, cogeneration, heat pumps) should be increased to guide the energy transition in The Netherlands.
• With the increasing role of renewable gas applications in the Netherlands, support is needed for the deployment of new technologies. The sustainable contribution of these technologies should also be fully incorporated in calculation methods such as Energy Performance contracting (EPCs)
• Dutch houses are normally quite narrow and have very limited space to install a fuel cell. To overcome this issue, a solution might be provided by the set-up of energy co-operatives that invest in only one unit installed for several homes.
With more than 80% of Dutch houses using in-house gas boilers, The Netherlands is deemed to be among the markets in Europe where fuel cell micro-CHP products have the highest market potential for the near future. Therefore, the country should not miss the opportunity of reaping the benefits from the large-scale deployment of these products.
United Kingdom
The UK has been quite supportive in terms of policy framework when it comes to FC micro-CHP, with the existence of favourable Feed-in-Tariff (FiT) schemes. Nevertheless, the future of such FiT after 2019 is uncertain, as well as there is uncertainty around Brexit and the fate of EU funds directed to stationary fuel cells.
For fuel cell micro-CHP to go mainstream in the country (i.e. 10%-20% uptake of the total heating market) awareness among customers should be significantly increased, installations should become suitable for most properties and, once the mass market commercialisation has been achieved and costs have dropped down, the products should become subsidy-free. Therefore, the path for this energy solution to become mainstream is still very long, but the following recommendations could be relevant for the future large-scale uptake of the UK market:
• High-level recognition of the environmental and energy security contribution of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies towards the UK energy transition is key for the successful mass commercialization of these products in the UK. The country is indeed on the right track, being micro-CHP the only technology fuelled by a non-renewable energy source to be incentivised at national level with Feed-in-Tariffs.
• As long as these fuel cell micro-CHP products can deliver system wide benefits in terms of primary energy savings, GHG (including CO2, NOx, SOx) reductions, RES integration, adequate support schemes should be designed to reward these technologies and facilitate their mass market uptake.
• Addressing barriers to market (i.e. system up-front costs, maintenance costs and lack of evidence on performance and reliability), as well as technical barriers related to the products, is also necessary in order to ensure an environment favourable to the market development of fuel cell micro-CHP at both EU and national levels.
• Partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers are essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in the UK. It would contribute to an increase in awareness among the potential end-users, better informing them about the benefits of micro-CHP. Communication on fuel cell micro-CHP should be therefore increased and improved.
To conclude, the UK has shown a good general interest in hydrogen technologies, be they solutions for the transport sector or fuel cell micro-CHP. What emerged from the ene.field dissemination activities in the country, is that in the UK there is high potential for hydrogen-fuelled technologies not only at national level, but even more at regional and local level.
Conclusions
The six ene.field national dissemination workshops, as well as the three dissemination sessions, served as a powerful communication tool and policy accelerator to the project and, even more, to Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology at national and local level.
With Germany leading in Member State approach to supporting Fuel Cell micro-CHP, support is now available in other countries, including Belgium, France and UK, which are promoting the technology through mechanisms such as feed-in premiums, feed-in tariffs, white certificates/green certificates. Major European manufacturers, supported by the Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Joint Undertaking at the EU level and key European national governments, are now committed to bringing the technology closer to mass market by increasing scale and achieving further product cost reductions. And ene.field and its communication activities will have played a key role in the beginning of this pathway to a competitive Fuel Cell micro-CHP market in Europe.
Final dissemination event in Brussels
To address relevant EU stakeholders in Brussels and to draw attention to the project and its outcomes, as well as to ensure a wider awareness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration as smart energy solution for private homes, the ene.field project held its final dissemination event “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration: Generating Sustainable Heat and Power for your Home” on October 11th, 2017, at Autoworld museum in the heart of Brussels.
The event gathered between 120 and 130 engaged participants, among which key policymakers, Brussels stakeholders and other organisations, industry, research community and media representatives.
The event was organised in collaboration with the FCH JU and with the support of Grayling communication agency.
The topic: “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration: Generating Sustainable Heat and Power for your Home”
The current critical debate in the European Parliament and Council over the recently published “Clean Energy for All Europeans” Package made distributed energy solutions, including Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration, and energy efficiency more in general, a key topic of interest at the time of the event. This main topic attracted policy-makers from EU institutions as well as national/regional governments, and Brussels stakeholders at the ene.field event. The two more technical sessions on the flagship EU co-funded projects ene.field and PACE in the afternoon contributed instead to catch the attention of industry and research community representatives and of other oragnisations inside and outside Brussels.
The agenda of the day foresaw a variety of different activities targeting different groups of participants (i.e. a press conference, a Fuel Cell micro-CHO exhibition and a dedicated VIP tour of the exhibition, the conference itself). More details on these different sessions are available in the paragraphs below.
Press conference
The agenda of the day started with a press conference early in the morning (08.45 – 09.15) kicking-off the day-long event on the great potential and integration of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in Europe. During the press conference, moderated by Thomas Vanhauwaert (COGEN Europe), Mirela Atanasiu, Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU), Fiona Riddoch of the European Association for the Promotion of Cogeneration (COGEN Europe), and Ian Walker, Director at Element Energy, briefed journalists on the ene.field and PACE projects and answered their questions.
Several journalists and stakeholders representing well-known media and communication companies in Brussels (i.e. Energy Post, Revolve, Grayling) and specialised trade press from key countries where ene.field units were installed, joined the press conference.
Following the event, a dedicated media-package was prepared for journalists, including:
- The ene.field press releases published in the days leading to the event and on the day of the event
- The media coverage of the event
- A factsheet on Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration, ene.field and PACE
- Links to the ene.field videos
- Presentations of the event
- Pictures of the event
- Tweets suggestions
- Links to relevant websites
3.2 Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration exhibition & VIP tour
Together with the main conference, an all-day exhibition was organised to allow participants to the event to experience first hand real-size fuel cell micro-cogeneration units developed by major European manufacturers involved in ene.field and PACE.
The following units were on display during the event:
Manufacturer Unit on display
Bosch Buderus
SenerTec Dachs Innogen
SOLIDpower BlueGEN
Viessmann Vitovalor 300-P
Representatives of the manufacturers showcasing their units were present to illustrate the technology, its benefits and how it works to interested participants approaching them. Together with their units, manufacturers also had the possibility to have their brochures and roll-ups on display at the exhibition.
Before the official start of the conference, a VIP guided tour of the exhibition was organised for selected participants from EU institutions, national and local policy-makers, and Brussels stakeholders.
The tour took place from 09.15 to 10.00 and was guided by by Mr. Tilman Wilhelm, Head of Communication and Knowledge Management at NOW GmBH (the German National Organisation Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology).
Among the others, the VIP tour was joined by:
- Antonio Aguilo Rullan, FCH JU
- Mirela Atanasiu, FCH JU
- Michael Brown, Delta-ee
- Tudor Constantinescu, Principal Adviser to the Director General, DG ENER, European Commission
- Gert De Block, Secretary General, CEDEC
- Samuele Furfari, Policy Coordinator - Advisory to the Deputy Director General, DG ENER, European Commission
- Heinz Lehmann, Member of the Saxony Regional Parliament / Vice-President of the European Committee of the Regions Bureau
- Rainer Ortmann, Head of Department for Government and External Affairs, Bosch
- Dan Sobovitz, Speechwriter and online media, Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš ŠEFCOVIC - Energy Union, European Commission
The tour was followed by a VIP breakfast, restricted to the participants of the tour. The tour and the breakfast were together an excellent occasion to discuss at high-level how innovation and Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration can empower energy consumers, while contributing to the energy transition.
2 Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration exhibition at ene.field final dissemination event
3VIP guided tour of the Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration units exhibition
3.3 The conference
The actual day-long conference was split into three sessions. The morning session, titled The role of Fuel Cell micro-CHP in the future energy system was a high-level session focussing on policy at EU and regional level. The session opened with three keynote speeches by Tudor Constantinescu (DG Energy – European Commission) on “EU Climate & Energy Framework fostering innovation”, Heinz Lehmann (Committee of the Regions) on “The role of regions in promoting innovative energy solutionws”, and by Bart Biebuyck (FCH JU) on “The benefits of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration and its role in contributing to the EU’s climate and energy targets”.
The keynote speeches were followed by the première of the ene.field video “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in the Policy Debate”, highly enjoyed by the audience, and by the Plenary Session The role of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in the future energy system. This Plenary Session consisted of a panel discussion moderated by the journalist Clare Taylor, joined by representatives of the industry and by an ene.field field trial participants, who shared his positive experience. The session was closed by Klaus Gütling (Hessen Ministry of Economics) with his presentation on “Regions paving the way for the future of the energy transition”.
The two afternoon technical sessions focussed on ene.field and its findings, and on PACE. They consisted of presentations delivered by project’s partners and Work Packages leaders, presenting the projects, ene.field’s achievements, results and findings, PACE and the challenges ahead. Both sessions also included a panel discussion involving representatives of the projects’ consortiums and other stakeholders (i.e. FCH JU, Delta-ee). All the panellists were prepared to the discussion in advance with dedicated coordination calls led by COGEN Europe and attended by the panellists and the moderators, and were provided with guiding questions for the debate.
The full programme of the event is available on ene.field website.
The day ended with a networking cocktail in the exhibition room.
4 Bart Biebuyck (FCH JU) speaking at ene.field final dissemination event
5 Panel discussion at ene.field final dissemination event
4. Promotion and follow-up
On the weeks leading to the event, COGEN Europe, supported by the FCH JU and the other ene.field partners, led the promotion of the event. The promotion was carried out through several MailChimp campaigns, social media, website posts (ene.field FCH JU, COGEN Europe, HyER, etc.), newsletters (i.e. COGEN Europe, Hydrogen Europe, COGEN Flanders, etc.), targeted and personalised invitations (i.e. to high ranks in the industry, to EU key policy-makers, to journalists in Brussels and national specialised trade press), printed postcards (distributed at relevant events and at the European Parliament), a banner campaign on EurActiv, ene.field press releases, etc.
At the registration desk of the event, all the participants received a delegate pack including the following materials:
- Programme of the event
- List of participants
- ene.field brochure
- PACE brochure
- ene.field summary report
- A personalised badge
- Factsheet on Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration, ene.field and PACE (for journalists and speakers only)
On the day of the event, an ene.field press release was issued to additionally raise awareness on the successful end of the project and on the event.
In the following days, the speakers and the participants were officially thanked by COGEN Europe’s Managing Director and all the presentations delivered during the event were uploaded on ene.field website. The journalists who attended the event received a media-package and COGEN Europe started a collaboration with the journalist Clare Taylor for further promotion of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in the wake of the successful Brussels ene.field final dissemination event.
5. Partnership with the European Week of Regions & Cities
The ene.field final dissemination event took place as part of the European Week of Regions & Cities, being an official side event of the biggest event on EU regional and urban policy.
Conclusions
The presentations and discussions which took place at the event showed that the technology is working, it is reliable and market ready. The point was raised that it is key to put in place the right policy framework to encourage wide deployment of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in Europe. The ene.field final dissemination event served as a powerful communication tool and policy accelerator to Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology at national and local level.
The PACE project will ride the wave of the successful communication efforts carried out by ene.field throughout its five-years life, and culminated with its final dissemination event, thus paving the way to a competitive Fuel Cell micro-CHP market in Europe.
List of Websites:
www.enefield.eu
Ene.field is the largest European demonstration of the latest home energy solution for private homes, fuel cell micro-CHP. The project ran from 2012 to 2017 and during these five years it installed 1,046 Fuel Cell micro-CHP systems across 10 key European countries and demonstrated more than 5.5 million hours of operation and 4.5 GWh of power produced. Outputs of the project include: detailed performance data, lifecycle cost and environmental assessments, market analysis, commercialisation strategy.
The project has demonstrated that fuel cells can efficiently produce electricity and heat from natural gas. Large-scale roll-out of FC microchip units can help the EU fulfil energy policy aims and climate commitments. An environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of FC micro-CHP unit has been carried out as part of the project. This LCA concluded that in general the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a FC micro-CHP are lower than those of a gas condensing boiler or a heat pump in all the investigated scenarios. Furthermore, the FC micro-CHP generally leads to lower air pollutant emissions compared with the alternative systems.
From a technical point of view, the FC micro-CHP is ready for a large market penetration. In the best 6-month period of the field trial, the availability of the units to the end-user has been above 99%.
End-users participating in the ene.field project were very positive about the FC micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all aspects of their micro-CHP systems, especially the environmental profile of the technology. Based on the end-users’ perception, the following two areas with some room for improvement have been identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology.
With today’s capital and maintenance costs, FC micro-CHPs are more expensive than traditional heating technologies. However, as serial production begins, economies of scale will cause the costs to drop substantially. The conducted life cycle cost analysis (LCC) showed that the FC microchip can become economically competitive with volume manufacture. Increased sales encouraged by for example subsidies could therefore improve the near-term economics of micro-CHP units, and may be crucial for the technology to reach the mass market and hence for the EU to harvest the environmental and system benefits.
Comprehensive analysis carried out by the ene.field project shows that FC micro-CHP can deliver important system wide efficiency and decarbonisation benefits across Europe between 2020-2050, as it is expected to mainly displace more inefficient and carbon intensive generation up to 2050. This can be achieved at a lower cost for the energy system and the consumer compared to a scenario with no uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP 2. With the right policy framework in place, FC micro-CHP can deliver 32 million tonnes of CO2 emission reductions in 2030, while reducing infrastructure and operational cost for the energy system by more than € 6,000 (gross) for each kilowatt-electric of installed capacity until 2050.
The project has developed and implemented an effective communications strategy to inform and engage the different target groups who have a role to play in the wider market development and uptake of the product. These efforts culminated in six ene.field national workshops and three dissemination sessions origanized throughout 2016 and 2017 in the countries participating in the field trial, with the objective to raise awareness on the market readiness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology and its benefits, and on the project’s achievements. The final dissemination event entitled “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration: Generating Sustainable Heat and Power for your Home” was a day-long event and it took place on October 11th, 2017, at Autoworld museum in the heart of Brussels.
Project Context and Objectives:
The ene.field project is a major step to overcoming the challenges of commercialising fuel cell technology used in Combined Heat and Power (micro-CHP) mode in residential buildings. The project allowed ten of Europe’s leading micro-CHP developers to embark on a large field validation of the technology under a common analysis framework.
Fuel cell micro-CHP has long been promised as a major component in the push to decarbonise the housing sector, however, the technology has taken a long time to reach the market. This has been partly due to technological challenges and partly due to the inevitable difficulty of overcoming the initial barriers to commercialising any new technology which requires volume production, and significant levels of deployment to overcome market inertia.
A number of European manufacturers had reached the point where the technical challenges of residential fuel cell micro-CHP (micro FC-CHP) are resolved in small field trials and the scale up towards mass manufacture can begin. All suppliers will be demonstrating units which have been approved for customer release according to their own internal procedures for new product design and form the first production models of manufacturing scale up.
Ene.field aims at deploying and monitoring c.1,000 new installations of residential fuel cell CHP across 11 key Member States. It represents a step change in the volume of fuel cell deployment for this sector in each country. By learning the practical implications of installing, operating and supporting a fleet of fuel cells with real world customers, ene.field will demonstrate the environmental and economic imperative of micro FC-CHP, and lay the foundations for market exploitation. The primary outcomes from ene.field will be:
• Real world learning - demonstration of market potential, segmentation, cost and environmental benefits of micro FC-CHP
• Developed market focused-product specifications and harmonised codes and standards
• A more mature supply chain, readied for deployment of micro FC-CHP in 11 Member States.
• An evidence base on cost and environmental performance that can be used to accelerate policy support from governments and adoption by channels to market.
A large scale deployment enables suppliers to overcome the point of greatest risk in new product commercialisation where volumes remain low and a significant cost reduction is required to move the technology to a commercial proposition.
Ene.field addresses the diversity of end users with monitored installations in three of Europe’s climatic regions, a range of dwelling types and occupancy levels and as a result evaluate the techno-economic and environmental performance of the options available in the different residential heating markets across Europe. Such a suite of trials will ensure that a clearer picture is available for ‘best fit’ between technologies and markets, and that the range of FC-CHP technologies can together address all relevant market segments post-trial.
The ene.field framework also brings together partners who provide the route to market required for fuel cell micro-CHP commercialisation. An unprecedented number of utilities, housing providers and municipalities are brought together by the project to deliver the products to market and learn about their operation.
Ene.field involves Member States with significant experience in fuel cell micro-CHP (such as Germany) as well as those deploying residential FC micro-CHP for the first time. This will establish new markets for micro-CHP across Europe by developing field support networks and supply chain arrangements in these regions. The differences in codes, standards and regulations between Member States will also be investigated and where possible aligned.
Finally, to inform clear national strategies and policies on micro-CHP within Member States, ene.field will establish the future economics and CO2 savings of the technologies in their target markets and make recommendations on the most appropriate policy and financial incentives to support the commercialisation of domestic micro-CHP in Europe.
Background - The need for residential fuel cell CHP
Environmental need for residential fuel cell CHP: In the EU, the building sector is responsible for 40% of Europe’s energy consumption and 25% of its CO2 emissions, with nearly 20% of CO2 emissions from dwellings alone. Evidence is emerging that there is a very large “hard to treat” group of the existing housing stock (primarily urban and old homes), where significant decarbonisation is either technically challenging or prohibitively expensive.
Significant decarbonisation will require a broad suite of technologies and measures to be deployed, ranging from simple insulation to grid decarbonisation. Addressing the retrofit market is crucial if meaningful savings are to be realised; 80% of the homes we will live in in 2050 have already been built. Cost effective solutions are urgently required.
In an appropriate setting, micro FC-CHP can achieve carbon savings of up to 30%. Furthermore, the technology is well suited to the retrofit market, including the substantial “hard to treat” segment and is also compatible with new build properties. Micro FC-CHP systems can therefore be a vital component in decarbonising the residential sector.
Market opportunity for residential fuel cell CHP: By working with the existing boiler market channel, the potential exists for FC-CHP to deploy units quickly once the initial barriers to market entry have been overcome. With favourable policy support, the technology could potentially replace 30% of the 91 million gas boilers and water heaters in the EU by 2025, making a huge impact on emissions from the residential sector and representing at least 30GW of new clean generating capacity.
Other territories (such as Japan and South Korea) have already recognised the latent potential of micro FC-CHP. The need to bring efficient European micro FC-CHP technologies to market is therefore robust and immediate.
The challenge: As the technology moves towards commercialisation, a number of challenges are presented. The business and environmental case needs to be proved in practice, reflecting system operation in a diverse end user market. The supply chain needs to be matured to accept the new technology and the regulatory environment needs to be updated to ensure the technology has fair access to markets. More specifically there is a need to:
Confirm the business and environmental case by:
• Confirming volume / cost reduction potential
• Collecting operational data to identify market size and target segmentation
• Validating environmental benefits in various climatic zones in Europe
Ensure the product specification fully meets market requirements by:
• Confirming the way in which units are controlled to maximise energy & cost savings and environmental benefits
• Modifications of the basic micro FC-CHP systems to suit markets across the EU
• Achieving harmonised codes and standards.
Mature the supply chain through:
• Demonstrating routes to market and business models
• Engaging key stakeholders and end users
• Developing installation and maintenance skill sets
• Expanding the European supply chain for components and services
A large scale deployment addresses these barriers and is the focus of the ene.field proposal.
Objectives
The main aim of this demonstration project is to remove barriers to the roll-out of technically mature fuel cell micro-CHP systems through a large scale deployment. This will trigger important first steps in: the establishment of genuine product support networks, well-developed supply chains and the growth of new skills to support commercial micro-CHP rollout.
The deployment of large numbers of micro-CHP devices will also help to drive costs down, increase consumer awareness and establish new routes to markets, in preparation for commercial rollout.
Ene.field will be the most ambitious European micro FC-CHP deployment and will bring the European Union to the forefront of the global micro FC-CHP industry, helping to ‘catch up’ with initiatives in Japan and South Korea for example.
The detailed objectives of ene.field are to:
• deploy up to around 1000 fuel cell CHP units with consumers in residential properties across Europe, in order to demonstrate their techno-economic performance for a representative range of building types, sizes, occupancy types and lifestyles – all of which impact the operational characteristics of the FC-CHP and ultimately define the target market.
• implement all of the main FC-CHP technology variants including High Temp SOFC, Intermediate Temp SOFC, High temp PEM and Low Temp PEM, to characterise their strengths and limits.
• unite 10 of Europe’s leading fuel cell CHP manufactures under a common trial project, to build the critical mass required to maintain European leadership in a competitive international environment to rival similar efforts internationally (notably the ENEFARM initiative in Japan)
• explore options for standardisation between manufacturers, including common parts, branding and political messaging, to reduce barriers
• demonstrate the complete route to market for FC-CHP, including an approach to installation, support in the field and mechanisms for interacting with building owners (the ultimate customers for the products)
• establish well-developed supply chains and support networks and develop a relevant skills base, to prepare the main initial EU territories for micro-CHP for the commercial deployment of the technology
• develop a detailed dataset of the energy requirements of over 1,000 different homes; hence provide an authoritative analytic basis to optimise micro-CHP deployments across Europe and defend the environmental and economic case
• perform a socio-economic assessment exploring barriers to micro-CHP adoption in European Member States, based on feedback from end users, installers, utilities and other actors in the micro-CHP value chain.
• carry out a comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) to determine the true environmental impact of the technology, and compare against the incumbent and other low-carbon heating technologies
• develop clear recommendations on common regulations, codes and standards for micro FC-CHP, helping to drive down costs and remove barriers to market entry.
• establish a Utility Working Group to facilitate discussions on active control and future integration with low voltage network infrastructure
• determine a future commercialisation strategy for the technology by reviewing cost and volume projections with the manufacturers and by exploring different routes to market assess the requirements for future policy or financial incentives
• understand the future environmental case for micro-CHP by studying the effects on emissions of widespread deployment of micro-CHP under rather variable conditions (in the different Member States, different dwellings). And in particular the impact on their electrical grid systems in combination with higher percentage of fluctuating renewable energy.
• provide clear position papers and advice for policy makers on where and how to encourage the take up of fuel cell micro-CHP
Project Results:
Demonstration of 1000 fuel cell based micro-CHP units
The ene.field project (European-wide field trials for residential fuel cell micro-CHP) has been Europe’s (to date) largest demonstration project for FC micro-CHP (fuel cell based micro combined heat and power) systems. The project has demonstrated more than 1000 small stationary fuel cell systems for residential and commercial applications in 10 countries.
Fuel cells can efficiently produce electricity and heat from natural gas. Large-scale roll-out of FC microchip units can help the EU fulfil energy policy aims and climate commitments. An environmental life cycle assessment (LCA) of FC micro-CHP unit has been carried out as part of the project. This LCA concluded that in general the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a FC micro-CHP are lower than those of a gas condensing boiler or a heat pump in all the investigated scenarios. Furthermore, the FC micro-CHP generally leads to lower air pollutant emissions compared with the alternative systems.
From a technical point of view, the FC micro-CHP is ready for a large market penetration. In the best 6-month period of the field trial, the availability of the units to the end-user has been above 99%. Of the total failures observed, only 1-2% were due to the fuel cell stack itself.
End-users participating in the ene.field project were very positive to the FC micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all aspects of their micro-CHP systems, especially the environmental profile of the technology. Based on the end-users’ perception, the following two areas with some room for improvement have been identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology.
At today’s capital and maintenance costs, FC micro-CHPs are significantly more expensive than traditional heating technologies. However, as serial production begins, economies of scale will cause the costs to drop substantially. The conducted life cycle cost analysis (LCC) showed that the FC microchip can become economically competitive with volume manufacture. Increased sales encouraged by for example subsidies could therefore improve the near-term economics of micro-CHP units, and may be crucial for the technology to reach the mass market and hence for the EU to harvest the environmental and system benefits.
A number of aspects of the field trial turned out to be more challenging than originally anticipated. These aspects were routes to market, site selection, good business case for all involved partners, supply of components for the manufacturing, installation process and administrative procedures. These caused a delay in the deployment of units compared to the original plan. However, by the end of the project a total number of 1046 units have been installed which exceeds the target of 1000 units. The expected main route to market via utilities proved to be very difficult as less funding was available for demonstration projects than previously (e.g. for the German demonstration project Callux). The most successful approach for selling micro-CHP systems has been via installers through the heating market channels. A key element for a generally successful field trial is to establish good communication channels with end-users and installers beyond the basic technical discussion. The training of installers to ensure a smooth and faultless installation process is also key to successful deployment. During the project approximately 600 installers have been trained.
Germany has been the most successful market for ene.field in terms of deployment numbers. More than 750 of the 1000 units have been installed in Germany. Funding from the national support schemes helps decrease the investment costs, and therefore favoursthe ramping up of the installation numbers. Moreover, high electricity prices make the technology more attractive in Germany than in other European countries.
The installers of FC micro-CHP units find the systems easy to install. However, the time required for completing the installation is longer than desirable. The installation times are likely to decrease significantly as installers become more experienced with the technology. In addition, further standardisation of components and training of installers are also expected to reduce the installation time.
Lack of a common framework for European standards is seen as a large hindrance to further market uptake. Countries use international and European standards, but supplement these with national versions. This mix of standards leads to problems for manufacturers who want to commercialise products throughout Europe. Furthermore, the forms for approval of installation lack standardisation and are partly complex and lengthy. A systematic and simple approach is required for the registration of new technologies.
The FC micro-CHP technology is well suited for integration into smart grids. A smart grid is a power grid where information and communication technology is used to manage generation, consumption and distribution of electricity, typically to compensate fluctuations in power generation from renewable energy sources (grid-balancing and peak-shaving). The micro-CHP units can be remotely controlled and can adjust to external heat and power demands at seconds’ notice when at operating temperature. In order for micro-CHP units to contribute to grid stability, an estimated minimum of 1000 units need to be aggregated into a virtual power plant (1 MW).
The German support programme KFW433 will facilitate the commercialisation of the FC micro-CHP technology in the coming years. As a follow-up on the ene.field project, field demonstration of FC micro-CHP systems in Europe continues with the EU funded project PACE.
Introduction to FC micro-CHP technology
Fuel cells efficiently produce both electricity and heat from natural gas. This can be utilized in a combined heat and power (CHP) unit. Units with an electric capacity below 50 kW are usually referred to as micro-CHPs. Typical systems with capacity up to 5 kW are suitable for both residential use and small commercial buildings, see Figure 1.
(Placeholder for Figure 1)
FC micro-combined heat and power (FC micro-CHP) is a new technology that may replace the conventional gas boiler and provide homes with electricity as well as heat. FC micro-CHP units allow for significant increases in the efficiency of heat and power production compared with traditional heating appliances and grid distributed electricity and, hence, they may bring a reduction in the overall primary energy consumption of the households. FC micro-CHP units allow for very efficient heat and power production compared to traditional heating appliances and grid electricity. The efficiency of energy conversion is above 90%, which is comparable with the energy conversion for the most efficient big scale CHP power plants. The FC on-site energy production ensures it is used without loss of energy in transmission, a loss that might be 5-10% for electricity and heat transport from big scale CHP plants. As the systems are installed at the end-use premises they can furthermore reduce the load on the electricity infrastructure and even provide a local peak capacity and assist in balancing the electricity grid.
Various types of fuel cells exist. For micro-CHP applications, two main types are used:
• Solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC), which operate at high temperatures (600-850°C) and are made from ceramic materials (“solid oxide”)
• Polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cells which operate at lower temperatures (60- 160°C) and are based on polymer materials
Micro-CHP units are available in various sizes (electric capacity from 300 W – 5 kW) and have been optimised for various applications. They can operate in different modes: The systems may be designed 10 ene.field project to be heat-led which means that the operation is controlled by the heat demand of the building, or it may be electricity-led which usually means that it aims at a constant high electricity production.
FC micro-CHP units are complex systems including many components (see Figures 2 and 3). The systems can be designed in many ways for various purposes and can be more or less integrated. A typical FC micro-CHP system may include:
• Fuel cell module (see Figure 2), including:
- Fuel processor (with reformer separated or integrated with the fuel cell stack)
- Fuel cell stack (power section)
- Inverter (power conditioner)
• Balance of plant components (may include heat exchanger, system control, gas recirculation system, valves, pumps, etc. in connection with the fuel cell module)
• Back-up boiler (gas condensing boiler for peak heat demand) and hot water storage tank
• Periphery (may include heating circuits incl. controls, heating circuits pumps, domestic hot water station, energy management system, domestic hot water circulation pumps, etc.)
(Placeholder for Figures 2 and 3)
The ene.field project
The ene.field project has been Europe’s (to date) largest demonstration project for fuel cell based micro-CHP (micro combined heat and power) systems for private homes. The field trial brings real world learning of benefits and challenges of the technology. The project has deployed more than 1000 micro-CHP units in 10 EU member states, see Figure 4. This is a step change in the volume of FC micro-CHP deployment in Europe and an important step to move the technology towards commercialization, see Figure 5.
(Placeholder for Figures 4 and 5)
The five-year project started in 2012. The main aim was to remove barriers to the roll-out of FC microCHP systems through large-scale deployment. Apart from deployment, the project focused on analyses of:
• Performance and barriers
• Environmental impact assessment
• Cost and market projections
• Policies and political challenges
• Requirements for standardisations
Most of the units have been equipped with meters to monitor the technical performance. Three surveys have been made involving end-users and installers. A number of complex analyses based on various data input and modelling have helped to evaluate the status and potential of the technology. The project has involved 27 partners. Besides the manufacturers of fuel cell systems, several research institutes as well as utility companies have been involved as partners in the project. An overview of the project consortium is shown in Figure 6.
(Placeholder for Figure 6)
In the field trial, units have been demonstrated for 1-3 years. The first units were installed in 2013, but the majority of the units were installed in 2015 and 2016, see Figure 7.
(Placeholder for Figure 7)
Units with very different characteristics have been deployed, see Figure 8 and Table 1. In total,
• 603 SOFC units and
• 443 PEM units
have been demonstrated with more than 5.5 million hours of operation in total and more than 4.5 million kWh electricity produced. The 1046 units installed have a total capacity of approximately 1155 kW of distributed power generation.
(Placeholder for Figure 8 and Table 1)
Main findings of the field trial
A number of aspects of the field trial turned out to be more challenging than originally anticipated. These aspects were routes to market, site selection, good business case for all involved partners, supply of components for the manufacturing, installation process and administrative procedures. These caused a delay in the deployment of units compared to the original plan. However, by the end of the project a total number of 1046 units have been installed which exceeds the target of 1000 units.
The experience gathered during the ene.field project has highlighted the need for early discussions with all stakeholders involved and the need to determining – before the installation occurs – the specific requirements of the site proposed for the system. This in turn allows for more rapid and smoother installation on site.
A key element for a generally successful field trial is to establish good communication channels with end-users and installers beyond the basic technical discussion. The training of installers to ensure a smooth and faultless installation process is also key to successful deployment. Until the technology is broadly understood by this group of stakeholders, it is still recommended that the manufacturers remain involved in the commissioning process.
A large amount of time and effort is required for the preparation of the information needed for the administrative preparation of each site (e.g. paperwork for grid operators, approvals, etc.). Forms have not been standardised, and in some cases a vast amount of documents have to be completed. The lead time for completing the paper works varies significantly between countries. In some countries, approvals may typically take 2-3 months. The administrative preparation for the site can be problematic for installers and end-users as these groups have no experience with dealing with this process.
A more harmonized approach to permissions and approvals is required for the market to progress. A standardised simple registration of new technologies producing decentralised electricity would be a good first step and, until this becomes a reality, it is still recommended that the manufacturers remain involved in the administrative preparation process.
Routes to market
The two main routes to market strategies of the manufacturers were:
• Contact with end-users established via installers, sales staffs, architects, etc. These stakeholders were mainly motivated by the prospect of increasing their product portfolio.
• Contact with end-users established via utilities or energy service companies (ESCOs). These stakeholders were mainly motivated by the prospect of potential business cases.
The most successful approach to selling the micro-CHP systems was via installers through the heating market channels. Sales under ene.field have been conducted via installers for as much as 80% of the total number of contracts signed by one manufacturer.
At the beginning of the project, it was anticipated that sales through utility companies would be the dominant route to the market (or route to the field trial installations), see Figure 9. However, the route to market via utilities has proved to be very difficult as less funding was available for demonstration projects than was the case for earlier projects (e.g. the German Callux project). During the ene.field project, utility companies have mainly been interested in demonstrating only a small number of units and have only contributed with limited co-financing of the units.
Technical capabilities
The technical performance of all FC micro-CHP units in the field trial has been monitored. Performance data have been collected for 70% of the installed units in the ene.field project. Most of the units were subject to “standard monitoring”. Here, monthly data regarding gas consumption, calculated heat production, electricity production, operation hours and on/off cycles has been collected. 7% of the installed units were further equipped with sensors for “detailed monitoring”. In this case, data regarding e.g. electricity and heat production and consumption, electricity import and export, indoor and outdoor temperatures was collected every 15 minutes. Furthermore, all “issues encountered” (failures) were reported by manufacturers for all units in operation.
Efficiency
For the detailed monitoring, the fuel cell module (i.e. not including the backup gas condensing boiler) is equipped with a gas meter, power meter, heat meter and other sensors. All products have been tested in laboratories under controlled conditions. Efficiencies measured in the laboratory and in the field trial are shown in Table 2.
There are a range of uncertainties related to the field trial data. One example is the actual energy content (the lower heating value, LHV) of the natural gas used, as this varies across European locations. Nominal values have been collected for most sites.
To anonymise data for reasons of individual company confidentiality, the data from laboratory tests has been reported as average numbers for all the tested units. Unfortunately, this anonymization process limits the information which can be taken from the data, as an average number may cover data from both a 1 kW unit designed for optimal heat demand coverage and a 2.5 kW unit designed for constant operation and maximum electric efficiency. The averaged performance data from units does therefore not represent the performance of any of the individual tested units. This was the approach agreed by the ene.field consortium and used in the analysis of the performance data.
The efficiencies given in Table 2 are average numbers of all the systems tested even though the products are rather different in size, performance and optimal conditions. The laboratory testing includes 6 different SOFC products and 5 different PEM products. It should be noted that for the laboratory tests, the thermal and the electric efficiencies in the table cannot be added to calculate a total system efficiency as the two efficiencies may not have been realised under the same test conditions. Conclusions based on these data should be drawn with big reservation as each number represents a number of very different units as explained above.
The real-life data from the field trial has been taken from a period towards the end of the project where there was the highest number of units in operation. This gives the most robust data. The field trial includes very different types of units, ranging from early prototypes to commercially available products optimised for different applications. No conclusion can therefore be made regarding performance of individual unit types based on the average numbers presented here.
(Placeholder for Table 2)
Availability of installed units
Part of the monitoring of the FC micro-CHP units deployed in the ene.field project was an investigation of their availability to the end-users. The average availability has been calculated based on units in operation in 6-month periods. For the period with the highest availability, both PEM units and SOFC units have availability of more than 99%.
These results show that the technology is well on its way to very high robustness. In previous projects, such as Callux and SOFT-PACT, availability between 90% and 96% has been reported. For the upcoming field trial in the PACE project, a goal of 99% availability has been set. The results from ene.field clearly show that this is feasible.
As part of the end-user perception survey (reported in section 6), a more detailed analysis of availability has been made of 67 units, see Table 3. Of these systems, 45% experienced no failures in the first year of operation and an availability of 100%. Hence, 55% had 1 or more failures. However, the vast majority of these failures were only for short periods of time; 90% of the FC micro-CHP systems were available for at least 95% of the time.
(Placeholder for Table 3)
Smart grid capability
From a technical point of view, FC micro-CHP systems are well equipped for smart grid integration. Systems can typically be remotely operated and controlled. Furthermore, micro-CHP systems can adjust to external heat and power demands at seconds’ notice when at operating temperature. Fast response times and aggregation capabilities make micro-CHPs well suited for smart grid controlled distributed generation which can limit transmission losses in the grid.
For micro-CHPs to positively contribute to grid stability in the context of the emerging smart grid model, the viability of aggregation of multiple units into a virtual power plant needs to be considered. At a capacity of 1 kW per system, an estimated minimum of 1000 units in a virtual power plant is required (1 MW). The rewards for the aggregator and installation owners will need to outweigh the Learning points from demonstration of 1000 FC based micro-CHP units 21 administrative and coordination costs required for such a complex operation if the virtual power plant model is to gain ground.
The analysis of the smart grid capability is based on a survey among manufacturers and utility companies. See the full report at the project website http://enefield.eu/category/news/reports/ for further information.
Installation process
An installer survey polled the installers about the perceived ease or difficulty of various aspects of the FC micro-CHP installation and the time taken to carry out the installation.
The installers reported that the systems were generally easy to install. Regarding the installation time, all installations took at least 2 days, with most installations taking 4-6 days.
As an installation requires multiple visits to the installation site by a handful of professionals before, during and after installation, these numbers are more reasonable than they may appear at first glance, especially when compared with a standard gas boiler that requires 2 days of installation. As a natural consequence of demonstrating new technology, many of the installations represent a first or an early installation for the installers. Therefore, the installation times are likely to decrease significantly as installers become more experienced with the FC micro-CHP installation process. Given that the shortest installation times in the project were 2 days it is reasonable to assume that this is a reasonable a target for normal installation by an experienced installer in the future.
For the future, further integration and standardisation of components and further training of installers may be ways of reducing the required installation time.
Grid connection
Early in the ene.field project, an overview was made of requirements, guidelines and issues in relation to connection of FC micro-CHPsto the gas grid and the power grid. The report covers several European countries.
The installation procedure is similar in most countries, but with national supplements such as requirement for an additional electric breaker and for outdoor installation of the breaker so that the network operator has constant access.
The most frequently observed issue relates to the inverter which is sensitive to disturbances on the grid as well as to power outages. This often leads to a sudden stop of the micro-CHP as the inverter will trigger the safety system and thereby shut down the whole system.
Environmental life cycle assessment
As part of the project, Fuel Cell – micro CHP (FC-µCHP) units are assessed in terms of their environmental performance in different settings. The settings vary notably in terms of a home’s space heating demand. This, in turn, is a function of the dwelling type (i.e. Single Family Home (SFH) and Multi-Family Home (MFH)), its level of insulation (i.e. new/renovated and old buildings) and climate zone (i.e. northern, central and southern) that vary in terms of outside temperatures that are also a function of solar irradiance. The FCµCHP systems considered are complemented with a gas condensing boiler (GCB) and a heat store. As a second aim of this study, the systems are compared with other low-carbon, incumbent techniques, notably a stand-alone GCB and for single family homes an air-water heat pump (HP). All homes equipped with these devices are connected to the electricity grid.
Four technologies are assessed, i.e. SOFC-µCHP, PEM FC-µCHP, GCB and HP. They are generic, meaning that they do not correspond to a specific existing system. All systems compared provide the same function, i.e. their ability to satisfy the heat and electricity demand of a given home in a specific, but generic European setting with an associated energy demand. The amount of heat and electricity produced varies between FC-µCHPs. Except for the end-of-life (decommissioning and waste treatment or recycling), the whole life cycle is assessed quantitatively.
Following the requirements regarding how to carry out an LCA of FCs as laid out in the HyGuide guidance document, a critical review of the study has been carried out by an external panel consisting of three experts.
The environmental performance of FC-µCHP is substantially influenced by the amount and kind of electricity production replaced. Two key assumptions were therefore varied, i.e. the power production mix replaced by the FC-µCHP’s electricity produced (so-called replacement mix) and the annual amount of Full Load Hours of FC-µCHP systems.
The following environmental impact categories were primarily assessed: greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (termed “climate change”), metal, fossil fuel and other resource uses (“resources depletion”), water use (“water depletion”), human exposure to airborne particulate matter (“respiratory effects”), and acidification of soils and water bodies (“acidification potential”).
Note that this LCA covered many more impact categories.
MAIN FINDINGS
In the following, first the results for the setting in which most of the FC-µCHP units have been installed in ene.field’s field trial, i.e. existing buildings in central climate, are compared with the results of a recent study by Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015). Afterwards, main findings are presented for contrasting cases of the investigated scenarios, covering different European climate zones, levels of insulation, single and multi-family homes, and fuel cell types.
The current study generally confirms the main environment related conclusions drawn by Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) concerning residential applications of FCµCHP: the main two drivers for emission savings by heat-led FC-µCHPs relative to a gas condensing boiler installed in single-family homes are a low heat demand of a given dwelling and a high carbon intensity of the electricity production replacement mix. Reversely, the lower the carbon intensity of the replacement mix is (or becomes) the lower the CO2 emission savings by FC-µCHP systems. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) limited their analysis to the life cycle stages “domestic heat (and power) production” in single-family homes and “electricity production in the grid”. Compared to a gas condensing boiler in a partially renovated semidetached single family home located in Germany, they found CO2 emission savings by a generic FC-µCHP system of 33%. For a similar setting and considering the same life cycle stages but taking further GHG emissions into account, the current study finds that FC-µCHP systems may achieve CO2–equivalent emission savings of between 45% and 50%, depending on the FC type, when the electricity production mix replaced is as carbon intensive as a hard coal fired power plant and the heat-led FC-µCHP systems run up to 5333 full load hours per year (data not shown in this summary). When extending the assessment of this setting to the whole life cycle (i.e. including processes other than those in the life cycle stages “domestic heat (and power) production” in single-family homes and “electricity production in the grid”), the CO2–equivalent emission savings are in the range of what Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) found (32% to 36%, cf. Figure 1). When increasing the full load hours to numbers that have been demonstrated in the field trials of the ene.field project, equal to about 6000 h/a, the emission savings further increase to more than 40%. Figure 1 additionally shows the annual life cycle CO2-Eq savings achievable by FC-µCHPs when further increasing the full load hours and taking replacement mixes corresponding to the German average electricity mix (in green) or to the ENTSO-E mix (in blue). The current study also confirms the Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) study regarding the substantially lower air pollutant emissions of FCµCHPs compared to the alternative systems analysed.
(Placeholder for Figure 9)
The environmental assessment being wider in scope than the Roland Berger Strategy Consultants (2015) study, the main findings of ene.field’s LCA can be summarised as follows:
• In general, the FC-µCHPs have a better environmental performance and in no case worse than the HP and the stand-alone GCB in all settings concerning the prioritised impact categories (only “climate change” results are partially depicted graphically in the summary, cf. the next point). According to the HyGuide guidance document, the default case is to assume that all electricity produced or replaced in the grid corresponds to the average European electricity production mix (i.e. the ENTSO-E mix). For this replacement mix, the FC-µCHPs are compared to the stand-alone GCB in all settings over the entire life cycle by assuming default full load hours of 4750 h/a for the PEM FC-µCHPs and of 5333 h/a for the SOFC-µCHPs. Under these conditions, FC-µCHPs lead to 6-26% lower GHG emissions, 7-49% lower resource uses, 21-65% lower particulate matter induced impacts, 25-73% lower acidification impacts and 54-118% lower water uses. The upper values usually correspond to new buildings located in southern Europe (low heat demand), while the lower values usually correspond to existing buildings located in northern Europe (high heat demand). Moreover, the environmental gain of FC-µCHPs, compared to GCBs, is more evident in multi-family homes than in single family homes because of more electricity production replaced in the grid (resulting from more full load hours at a higher rated capacity).
• Life cycle GHG emissions of the FC-µCHPs are generally lower and in no case worse than for the GCB and the HP analysed in all of the investigated settings also when changing the replacement mixes or when increasing the amount of full load hours (data not shown in the summary). Compared to the stand-alone GCB in single family homes4 with differing insulation levels across Europe over the entire life cycle, heat-led FC-µCHPs, running between 4750 and 5333 full load hours per year, lead to 6-15% lower GHG emissions when replacing an electricity generation mix that is as carbon-intensive as the ENTSO-E mix and to 28-67% lower GHG emissions when replacing an electricity generation mix that is as carbon-intensive as a hard coal fired power plant. When additionally increasing the full load hours to 6000h, the corresponding numbers amount to 8-18% and 36-76%, respectively.
• The FC-µCHP efficiencies and the full load hours of operation throughout the year are the main FC-µCHP systems’ characteristics influencing the final LCA results. The full load hours vary depending on the size of the FC-µCHP total output relative to the home’s demand and whether the FC-µCHP is heat-led or electricity-led. While generally important, the replacement mix is not FC-µCHP system-specific.
• Different elements of the systems’ life cycle contribute substantially to their environmental performance. The operation of the FC-µCHP, GCB and HP have the most influence on the GHG emissions of the systems. The process of manufacturing these systems is most important for impacts related to resource uses. The electricity supply from / to the grid, and the natural gas supply for the FC-µCHP and GCB operation are important for all environmental impact categories.
• Measured data obtained from ene.field’s field trial was used for plausibility checks against the values assumed in the LCA. The data also motivated a sensitivity analysis to increase the assumed full load hours. The main obstacle in using field trial data in the LCA itself is the diversity of the real world: the measured units have technical specifications and are installed in dwellings that differ from those analysed in the LCA. This is because there is variability notably in terms of degrees of insulation and size of the dwellings, user behaviour and occupancy, differing rated capacities and modes of operations (e.g. recovery times, night setback) and actual weather conditions (changing especially the heating demand). Resources allocated to the LCA were not sufficient to take account of all of these aspects.
• Comparison with the literature: Ene.field’s LCA undertook to analyse different systems in different settings across Europe which none of the studies found in the literature did. The studies found are not immediately comparable with this study because of differing scopes, assumptions and the applicable replacement mix. Nevertheless, this study confirms the general finding that FC-µCHP systems with backup lead to smaller GHG emissions compared to gas condensing boilers.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND OUTLOOK
Drawing on the insights gained by the LCA, the following can be concluded:
• Diversity of systems: FC-µCHP systems and their modes of operation are diverse. Analysing generic systems for assumed generalized operation modes has given results which are indicative in general terms of the FC-µCHP environmental performance tendency. It is recommended that further work analysing individual existing systems with measured data will provide insights to the manufacturers into which parts of a given FC deserve improvements. For instance, evidence from the ene.field field trials has shown that the full load hours assumed in the LCA may well be exceeded leading to stronger environmental advantages.
• Flexible modulating systems allow FC-µCHP powered by natural gas to operate in times when carbon intensity tends to be high in the electricity grid. In addition, FCµCHP are independent from insolation and winds. As a result, already the currently available FC-µCHPs can supply heat and electricity also in times when heat demand is high and heat and electricity from renewable sources are less abundant or missing such as in winter. Further techno-economic study of different modes of flexible operation, including an improved grid-oriented operation strategy, could be useful.
• Hydrogen and other low carbon renewable fuels: As an innovative technology, FCµCHP can operate either on natural gas or on hydrogen. Comparative analysis using hydrogen or other low carbon renewable fuels (e.g. biogas and methane from power to gas) would be helpful in understanding the possible future roles of the technology.
• FC-µCHPs’ role on the political agenda: Energy efficiency is high on the political agenda, especially after the publication of the Winter Package by the European Commission in November 2016. The main priority of this package is energy efficiency, followed by renewable energies and energy access. Thanks to their high efficiency (cogeneration of heat and electricity) and fuel flexibility (e.g. biogas and power-to-gas hydrogen), FC-µCHPs have the potential to play a key role in the ongoing energy transition.
• Extending the technological comparison: The comparison of the FC-µCHPs was limited to an air-water heat pump for single family homes and a stand-alone gas condensing boiler for both single family homes and multi-family homes. In all cases, the systems were complemented with electricity from the grid. The resources foreseen in the ene.field project did not allow further low-carbon systems, notably biomass based heating systems, Stirling, Otto or diesel engine-based µCHP, solar thermal or photovoltaic combined with other heating systems, or district heating, to be evaluated. Further comparisons with other systems would be of value to the sector in understanding its positioning among innovative solutions.
This study exclusively dealt with residential, stationary FC applications. It therefore does not allow conclusions on other FC applications, including in the commercial, industrial and transport sectors.
Economy
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Fuel cell micro-combined heat and power (FC mCHP) is an innovative, emerging technology which promises significant increases in the efficiency of heat and power production compared to traditional heating appliances and grid electricity. This can lead to several benefits for the European energy system including CO2 emissions reductions, reduced peak loads on electricity networks and reduction of electricity transmission losses. However, the near term economic proposition is challenging.
At today’s capital and maintenance costs FC mCHP are significantly costlier than traditional heating technologies. However, as serial production begins, economies of scale can be unlocked, and previous studies suggest these costs are expected to drop significantly. Over the last two years, deployment of FC mCHP in Europe has gone from 10s of units to thousands, and several European manufactures have made considerable steps towards commercialisation. In turn, this has led to updated estimates of cost and technical improvements that can be made as production scales increase.
This study examines the Life Cycle Cost of fuel cell mCHP, compared to incumbent technologies based on an aggregated, updated set of manufacturer cost and performance projections. These suggest increased electrical efficiency, reduced costs and longer stack lifetimes than have been previously estimated. Life-cycle costs for fuel cell mCHP technologies have been compared for a number of key European markets, based on typical household heat demands and gas and electricity price data.
The analysis suggests that in the most attractive markets, fuel cell CHP can become competitive with all incumbents (including gas condensing boiler) on a Life Cycle Cost basis when manufactured at scales of 5,000 – 10,000 units per manufacture (cumulative) for the smallest (0.7kWe) systems, and larger systems (2-5kWe) can become competitive when produced at scales of 1,000 units per manufacturer (cumulative). This is shown below for the case of 0.7kWe systems in single family homes in Germany.
Overall, the analysis suggested the following key conclusions:
Economies of scale are crucial for improving the value proposition of FC mCHP
Future improvements to the economics of FC mCHP are likely dominated by the reduction in capital cost which are driven by production volume. Therefore, scaling up production is of paramount importance to the economics of the stationary fuel cell.
FC mCHP has the best economic performance in buildings with high heat loads
Fuel cells are likely to perform well in settings where there is high heat demand, they can be operated for long run hours, and where the spark spread is high.
At scale, FC mCHP can become economically competitive
The analysis has shown that FC mCHP units are likely to become competitive with competitor systems when produced at volumes of 5,000 to 10,000s of units per manufacturer. In countries with lower spark spreads e.g. the UK, the economics are more challenging, but can be improved significantly by increasing self-consumption of electricity. Thus, in less competitive countries, the long-term business case for FC mCHP may not only rely on achieving economies of scale, but could also require manufacturers to explore options to support customers to maximise on-site consumption of the electricity produced. Due to their lower capital costs per kWe installed, 2 – 5 kWe units could become competitive with other low carbon heating systems and with gas condensing boilers at around 1,000 - 5,000 UPM. However, a series of non-economic barriers concerning installation of CHP in multi-family homes may need to be resolved to unlock such deployment volumes.
Subsidies can improve the near-term economics of FC mCHP, but can have the same effect for competitor technologies Subsidies for low carbon heating technologies will increase the competitiveness of fuel cells with condensing boilers, and conventional mCHP. However, depending on the subsidy regime, other low carbon generation and heating technologies (e.g. PV – condensing boiler hybrid systems and air source heat pumps) may be even more competitive when subsidised. Therefore, the fuel cell cannot rely exclusively on subsidies, and should be subsidised only to allow production volumes to increase to drive down capital costs.
Supply chain
An analysis of the EU FC micro-CHP supply chain has been carried out. From a supply chain point of view, the main challenges for the FC micro-CHP technology are:
• Significant increase of production volume and reduction of systems costs, for example by outsourcing to suppliers
• Simplification of maintenance and part replacement procedures
• Development of maintenance networks of trained installers in more markets
• Reduction of system complexity and costs of components
• Development of collaborative strategies between key players
The study provides an evaluation of maturity, competition and standardisation levels of the microCHP industry in Europe as well as an analysis of the barriers and opportunities for the development of the supply chain. The full European Supply Chain Analysis Report can be found on the project website.
Cost and market projections
An analysis of the future cost and market for FC micro-CHP systems has been made and is summarized below.
A model has been created to simulate the potential for CHP uptake in Europe from 2015 to 2050. In order to guarantee a dependable model, the input data (i.e. the housing stock, the heating technology parameters, the cost down trajectory for product cost and the future energy landscapes) has been taken either from reliable sources (e.g. the Roland Berger report or from the manufacturing companies), or it has been attempted to make realistic assumptions where no data was available. The analysis considers three scenarios that differ in how widespread distributed generation solutions, where electricity is generated directly at the consumer, are. The characteristics of the three scenarios are shown in Table 4.
(Placeholder for Table 4)
The analysis of the three scenarios shows the following:
• In the Untapped Potential scenario there is little commitment to distributed generation, and fossil fuels make up most of the energy mix. Distributed generation by FC CHP is expected to have a market share of only a few percent in 2050. Applying incentives (such as subsidies) can cause an early uptake, but this is not expected to make FC CHP a viable technology in the long run.
• The Patchy Progress scenario, in which the share of renewables has increased, describes a landscape for which, without incentives, FC CHP will only become competitive towards 2050. However, with capital cost support for FC or a high feed-in tariff, the uptake is dramatically enhanced, making FC CHP the dominant heating technology (of the options included in this assessment) from 2030 onwards.
• For the Distributed Systems scenario, no incentives are required to make FC CHP the dominant technology. However, the uptake is still enhanced by all incentive schemes. FC micro-CHP will become dominant as early as 2027 when incentivised by FC capital support or a high feed-in tariff.
Macro-economic and macro-environmental impact
The use of micro-CHP systems is appealing due to two fundamental reasons: (i) the efficiency of energy conversion is above 90%, much higher than the efficiency of Combined-Cycle Gas Turbine (i.e. around 60%), (ii) the systems are installed at the end-use premises reducing the need for energy transport infrastructure and losses. The micro-CHP can also provide a local peaking capacity (back-up), and it can become an alternative to the conventional boiler in a smart home environment where the electricity and heat demand can be managed more efficiency. The study involves analyses on the impact of micro-CHP on the capacity and operation of the electricity systems across Europe and the impact on CO2, gas consumption across different uptake scenarios and system backgrounds.
In order to evaluate the system benefits of micro-CHP, a range of simulation studies has been carried out to examine the impact of micro-CHP on the European electricity systems (generation, main transmission, and distribution systems) for different future scenarios. The analysis considers today’s grid mix and the impact of likely changes in the future, based on national energy plans and their central projections for the change in the generation mix through time. The benefits of micro-CHP are quantified by finding the performance differences between two systems: (i) a system without micro-CHP, called the Reference scenario, where the electricity was supplied by a portfolio of generation with no micro-CHP and the heat demand was met using electricity-heat pump, (ii) a system with micro-CHP, called the micro-CHP scenario, where the electricity demand was supplied by a portfolio of generation including micro-CHP which also supplied the heat demand. The performance differences between the two systems, i.e. with and without micro-CHP determine the whole-system costs or benefits of micro-CHP on the system.
In order to capture the range of whole-system implication of integrating micro-CHP in Europe, two uptake scenarios, i.e. low (minimum) and high (maximum) scenarios, developed by Element Energy considering different support policies are used in the studies. The average hourly profiles of heat generated by micro-CHP in the ene.field trial are applied in the study to reflect the actual average load factor of the micro-CHP.
The values of micro-CHP in reducing the infrastructure cost (generation [G CAPEX], transmission networks [T CAPEX], distribution networks [D CAPEX], and Heat Pumps [HP CAPEX]) and operating cost [OPEX] are presented in Figure 10, expressed in €/kW electrical capacity of micro-CHP. These values reflect the cost-saving of the system with micro-CHP in comparison to the cost of a system without micro-CHP, i.e. heat demand is supplied by HP. It is important to note that the CAPEX of micro-CHP is not included in the results; the OPEX of micro-CHP has been included.
(Placeholder for Figure 10)
The total (gross) benefits are around €6000 - €7300/kW, with the 2040 cases as an exception. While the magnitude of the benefits is relatively similar, the savings may come from different sources. In the short and medium term, the savings are dominated by the savings in displacing the capacity of HP, power generation, and distribution network capacity. In the long run, the OPEX savings become higher. The OPEX savings can also become higher when the firm generating capacity in the system is scarce, as illustrated in the cases for 2040.
The results show that micro-CHP can:
• Displace capacity of central generators. The capacity value of micro-CHP is comparable to traditional gas-fired plant providing it can be dispatched as back-up,
• Displace the capacity of alternative heat sources,
• Reduce operating costs. Net energy consumption is reduced indicating higher energy efficiency,
• Release network capacity / postpone reinforcement at distribution and transmission networks.
Some of the benefits can only be realised if the micro-CHP can provide grid services; this has implications for the design and control of the micro-CHP, for example: enabling remote operation capabilities for the system operator to access and use micro-CHP to support the grid. While the remote control technologies exist and they can be integrated into the micro-CHP easily, it also requires stronger control coordination between transmission and distribution system operators if they are operated by separate entities. It is observed that the benefits (per kW) are not too sensitive to the penetration levels of micro-CHP projected which indicate that there is no significant barrier for the micro-CHP at the levels being studied.
In the short term, based on the to-date level of renewables and efficiency of the micro-CHP, it is sufficient if micro-CHP operates in heat-led mode. Combined electrical and heat-led is required when micro-CHP can be a least-cost alternative source to displace high marginal cost generators such as peaking plant (e.g. when the efficiency of micro-CHP is high, or when the generation mixes are not optimal). The studies also find that micro-CHP is competitive against HP in the short and medium term; however, when the renewable penetration in the system is sufficiently high (>70%), a combination of micro-CHP and HP may form an optimal portfolio.
Wide deployment of micro-CHP is not only improving the efficiency of the overall system but also reducing carbon emissions. The magnitude of the carbon saving per kW installed micro-CHP in Europe is estimated between 370 – 1100 kg CO2 per year. In the short and medium term, at least when the use of conventional coal/gas/oil-fired plant is still dominant, the impact of micro-CHP in reducing carbon emissions is expected to be relatively significant. The results are shown in Figure 11.
(Placeholder for Figure 11)
In the long term, when the supply of electricity is mainly from low-carbon generation sources, the use of natural-gas fuel cell micro-CHP becomes less attractive, in the context of carbon reduction. Alternative fuel for micro-CHP, especially from sustainable and low-carbon sources will be needed.
End-user’s perception
Two surveys have been conducted to collect information about end-user expectations and experience with the FC micro-CHP systems. The end-users participating in the ene.field project were very positive to the micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all the aspects of their microCHP systems. It is especially worth noting that their perception of the environmental profile of the technology was entirely positive. However, two areas with room for improvement were identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology.
End-users were asked how satisfied they were with their micro-CHP systems with respect to a number of criteria. The questions included satisfaction with:
• Comfort and warmth
• Heating and hot water production
• Electricity generation
• Overall satisfaction
The survey responses showed that the overall satisfaction was very good (an average score of 3.9 out of 5). Satisfaction with comfort and warmth, space heating, hot water production, and environmental performance scored higher than the average (4.3 out of 5), while the satisfaction with running costs and ease of use/controllability scored slightly lower than average (3.5 and 3.6 respectively).
The lowest scoring aspects of the systems are the most likely to be potential barriers to wider adoption of micro-CHP systems. Although running costs depend on wider political and economic factors and are not completely within the control of the manufacturers, improving the ease of use/controllability of the systems is something that is within the control of manufacturers. This could be down to improved system design, system documentation or after-sales support.
Based on the survey responses, 75% of the properties in which the units were installed were residential properties – and generally quite modern (post 1970s), large detached or semi-detached houses with gas heating systems.
The end-users had relatively high household incomes. The remaining 25% were non-residential properties, including schools and office buildings. The end-user surveys have been analysed and reported in more details in the Non-economic barriers report [3] to be found at the ene.field project website.
Policies and political challenges
The project has also prepared policy recommendations to support the widespread deployment of fuel cell micro-cogeneration systems, while providing a review of policy frameworks at the EU and national levels expected to impact the uptake of the technology in the coming decade. It highlights the benefits of fuel cell micro-cogeneration in relation to Europe’s energy and climate objectives, taking into account ene.field findings that provide definite evidence on the macro-economic and microenvironmental impact of the technology.
Comprehensive analysis carried out by the ene.field project shows that FC micro-CHP can deliver important system wide efficiency and decarbonisation benefits across Europe between 2020-2050, as it is expected to mainly displace more inefficient and carbon intensive generation up to 2050. This can be achieved at a lower cost for the energy system and the consumer compared to a scenario with no uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP. With the right policy framework in place, FC micro-CHP can deliver 32 million tonnes of CO2 emission reductions in 2030, while reducing infrastructure and operational cost for the energy system by more than € 6,000 (gross) for each kilowatt-electric of installed capacity until 2050.
Despite these benefits, EU and national policy impacting FC micro-CHP is fragmented and in the most part ill-suited for an energy solution providing both heat and power. The current policy approach of favouring energy efficiency (“energy efficiency first” principle) as a main tool in decarbonising energy should be supportive of micro-CHP deployment, but the individual focus of the legislation fails to consider the whole energy system. The full benefits of FC micro-CHP deployment risk remaining unrecognised, unless the key policy barriers are addressed
• Focus on energy reduction at the end-user level instead of on energy system – i.e. final energy vs. primary energy reduction (e.g. Article 7 in the Energy Efficiency Directive)
• Addressing heat or electricity separately rather than total energy (e.g. Eco-design & energy labelling of space heating appliances)
• Enabling electricity-using technologies over other decarbonisation and energy efficiency solutions, specifically in the heat sector (e.g. promoting an inadequate primary energy factor value for electricity (EU PEF))
• Greater focus on renewable electricity rather than fairly rewarding renewable energy across all energy vectors and networks (e.g. heat and gas)
• Allowing renewable energy to count as energy efficiency (e.g. Energy Savings Obligation in the Energy Efficiency Directive)
• Electricity self-production and self-consumption is often penalised through disproportionately high grid connection and grid tariffs compared to real grid use
• In addition, administrative barriers (e.g. for grid connection or support scheme access) at the national level persist and, thus, hinder the large-scale deployment of micro-CHP systems.
All of the 10 European countries which took part in ene.field face challenges in decarbonising their domestic heat supply. In addition, with an increasing penetration of intermittent renewable electricity and the growing role of electricity in heating and transport, ensuring grid stability is also becoming a priority. So far Germany is leading in Member State approach to supporting FC micro-CHP technology, which represents a benchmark of best practise for support in the sector, as has happened with other innovative renewables technologies. Germany has put in place a dedicated programme (KfW433) to encourage early adopter uptake of FC micro-CHP and promote the further industrialisation of this technology. Other countries, including Belgium, France, UK, are supporting FC micro-CHP through more general mechanisms (i.e. feed-in premiums, feed-in tariffs, white certificates/green certificates).
The choice of accounting methodologies to implement building codes or other policies at the national level, also seems to affect the market entry prospects of the technology. ene.field workshops were held with policymakers and other interested stakeholders in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, UK, and the findings show market interest and requests for tailored support schemes to help the early adopter market to take hold.
The EU and national policy frameworks should create a level playing field for renewable energy, decarbonisation and energy efficiency solutions across the whole energy system (electricity, gas, heat networks). Only such an approach will deliver a comprehensive, balanced and cost-effective energy transition for the European consumer.
A more comprehensive approach to energy policy will also better recognise the system wide benefits of FC micro-CHP, thus untapping the important efficiency, decarbonisation and flexibility potential of this energy solution. To achieve this the ene.field project proposes the following policy recommendations:
• A coherent, steady and predictable policy framework is the key for the European heating sector to invest in new products and develop new business models.
• Consumer and energy system benefits of micro-CHP systems should be fully recognised and rewarded by policy at the EU and national levels
• In particular, accounting methodologies used in key decarbonisation and energy efficiency policy mechanisms, including building codes, energy labelling, Covenant of Mayors, should fully reflect the benefits of FC micro-CHP for consumers and the energy system as a whole. This will be an important driver for the micro-CHP technology to reach the mass market.
• Simplified administrative procedures to access the grid or different support scheme should be introduced for the potential users or FC micro-CHP
• Accounting for the decarbonisation and flexibility potential of gas networks (renewable gas), as part of a comprehensive energy and climate strategy
(Placeholder for Table 5)
Non-economic barriers to large-scale market uptake of fuel cell based micro-CHP technology
The project looked at the current non-economic barriers to mass uptake of the fuel cell (FC) micro combined heat and power (micro-CHP) technology and compiled a report entitled Non-economic barriers to large-scale market uptake of fuel cell based micro-CHP technology (or, in short, the Non-economic barriers). The report considers technical, consumer and political barriers. It is based on data from the ene.field trial programme and draws on the knowledge and expertise of the ene.field project partners.
The large-scale market introduction of fuel cell (FC) based micro combined heat and power (microCHP) systems in residential application faces a broad range of challenges, including non-economic barriers, which require special attention. This report identifies the non-economic barriers in terms of product perception by consumers or installers, supply chain limitations, policy and political environment and the performance of the system in operation, and proposes actions to address them to facilitate the market uptake of FC micro-CHPs. Complementing the right market conditions, awareness among end-users and supply chain, as well industry’s further efforts to speed up the industrialisation of FC micro-CHP production, a coherent, steady and predictable policy framework, is key to recognise and incentivise investments by the European heating sector in advanced products and new business models contributing to a more efficient, reliable and cleaner energy system.
The comprehensive review of the policy and political context, conducted as part of the ene.field project, concluded that the multiple consumer and energy system benefits of FC micro-CHP are not adequately recognised and rewarded by most policy at the EU and national levels.
In addition to high level recognition of fuel cell micro-CHP at both EU and national levels, removing barriers and fully accounting for the consumer and system level benefits in building codes, energy labelling and other secondary policy instruments is key to ensure that the right drivers are in place, once the mass market commercialisation stage has been reached. Promoting innovative business models to accompany the roll out of FC micro-CHP will also help consumers derive further benefits from the technology.
A lack of a common framework of European standards is seen as a great hindrance to market uptake. Manufacturers points to a need for updating, improvements or revisions for a large amount of the current standards. Issues include lack of consistency between different standards dealing with similar topics and standards that refer to too general co-generation systems fitting poorly with the reality of FC micro-CHP technology. The sheer amount of standards that are in some way relevant to FC micro-CHP installation makes it hard for the manufacturers to keep an overview.
From a supply chain point of view the main challenges for the FC micro-CHP technology is significant increase of production volume, simplification of maintenance and part replacement procedures and reduction of system complexity and the cost of components. In the same thread, cost reduction is necessary for market introduction of the technology. Here the main can be grouped into three main areas of work: increase in volume, system simplification and development of collaborative strategies between key players.
From the more technical point of view of field installation, the largest problem identified is the sheer time some installations take. Here component standardisation may be a way of decreasing the required installation time. Additionally, while training of installers has progressed tremendously in active markets such a Germany lack of such training may be a barrier for market entry in smaller dormant markets.
Lastly, while customers participating in the ene.field project were found to be overwhelmingly positivity to the FC micro-CHP technology two main areas where improvements would be desirable was identified: running costs and ease of use of the technology. This latter point was most notable when asked about satisfaction with heating and hot water and therefore it should be noted that issues with the backup boiler or heating circuit might just as well have caused this.
Standardisation
An overview of the current regulations, codes and standards in Europe and at national level has been made in relation to the installation aspects of FC micro-CHP systems and an additional report has been made based on experience from the field trials. The main conclusions were:
• Countries use international and European standards, but supplement with national versions.
• A mix of standards leads to problems for manufacturers who want to commercialise the products throughout Europe.
• Energy labelling of FC micro-CHP systems was found to be unfair compared with other energy systems. The current methodologies used to calculate the seasonal space heating energy efficiency were found to poorly represent the performance of micro-CHP units, and this is what determines the energy label.
The lack of a common framework of European standards is seen as a large hindrance to market uptake. Manufacturers point to a need for updating, improvements or revisions of a large amount of the current standards. The issues include lack of consistency between different standards dealing with similar topics, and standards that refer to too general co-generation systems fitting poorly with the reality of the FC micro-CHP technology. The considerable amount of standards that in some way are relevant to FC micro-CHP installation makes it hard for the manufacturers to keep an overview.
The upcoming review in 2017-2018 at the EU level of the Energy Labelling & Ecodesign Regulations for Space Heaters represents an opportunity to amend the methodology for micro-CHP to fully account for the efficiency benefits of these technologies – which is not the case today.
Sulphur content in natural gas
The presence of sulphur and sulphur based components in natural gas may be harmful to fuel cells. For the design of suitable desulfurizers, it is crucial for the fuel cell manufacturers to have information about the sulphur content of the locally used natural gas, when they want to install FC micro-CHP devices across Europe.
A detailed mapping of natural gas odorisation practices in the European countries has been made, focusing on sulphur and sulphur based components. The mapping provides information on the type and amount of naturally occurring sulphur and sulphur containing odorants in the natural gas.
In general, the most critical aspect is the absence of a maximum concentration for the odorants injected into the natural gas in many countries. However, most of the countries have a total sulphur content limit. In addition, it is possible to obtain a range of most probable sulphur concentration. The full report can be downloaded from the ene.field project website.
Training and field support
Early in the ene.field project, an evaluation of the state of field support arrangements, training and certification was made. Towards the end of the project, the initial work was followed up by a survey among manufacturers and utility companies to review lessons learnt and future needs.
During the ene.field project, the training of installers has progressed tremendously in active markets such as Germany. Approximately 600 installers have been trained in the course of the project. Some of the manufacturing companies have been training well above 100 installers each. However, the absence of organised training may be a barrier for market entry in new markets.
A good training process reduces the installation time and avoids installation related errors. The training should ensure a good understanding of both the fuel cell and the CHP technologies. The content of the courses should have a general common core with additional modules such as safety, regulation and standards, as well as micro-CHP operation and maintenance. Training courses and training done internally by the manufacturers seemed to cover the present needs.
Future activities
The PACE project is the natural next step following the ene.field project. PACE stands for “Pathway to a competitive European fuel cell micro-cogeneration market”. The aim is to install more than 2,500 FC micro-CHP units in 11 countries in the period 2016-2021. The focus areas are:
• Product innovation and cost reduction
• Supply chain development
• Policy collaboration
• Demonstration and verification of primary energy savings
• Testing grid benefits
Like the ene.field project, PACE is supported by the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCHJU). Further information can be found on the PACE project website www.pace-energy.eu Furthermore, in the upcoming years the German programme KFW433 will enable large-scale deployment of FC micro-CHP units by subsidies. Figure 14 shows the development in some major FC micro-CHP projects and support schemes.
Conclusion
The ene.field project has demonstrated more than 1000 fuel cell based micro-CHP units in 10 countries. From a technical point of view, the FC micro-CHP technology is ready for large market penetration. In long periods of time, the availability of the units to the end-user has been above 99%. Of the failures encountered, only 1-2% of them were caused by the fuel cell stack itself.
A number of aspects of the field trial turned out to be more challenging than originally anticipated. These caused a delay in the deployment of units compared to the original plan. However, by the end of the project a total number of 1046 units have been installed which exceeds the target of 1000 units. The expected main route to market via utilities proved to be very difficult. The most successful approach for selling the micro-CHP systems was via installers through the heating market channels.
A key element for a successful field trial is to establish good communication channels with end-users and installers beyond the basic technical discussion. The training of installers to ensure a smooth and faultless installation process is also key to success.
Large-scale market uptake of FC micro-CHP systems may help the EU fulfil energy policy aims and climate commitments. In the investigated scenarios, the life cycle emissions of greenhouse gas (GHG) of a FC micro-CHP are in general lower than those of a gas condensing boiler or a heat pump. Generally, the use of micro-CHP units also leads to lower air pollutant emissions compared with the alternative systems.
At today’s capital and maintenance cost levels, FC micro-CHPs are significantly costlier than traditional heating technologies. As serial production begins, economies of scale will cause the costs to drop significantly. A life cycle cost analysis (LCC) has shown that the FC micro-CHP technology can become economically competitive. Subsidies can improve the near-term economics of micro-CHP systems, and may be crucial for the technology to reach the mass market.
Germany has proved to be the most successful market in Europe in terms of deployment numbers. Funding from the national support schemes helps decrease the investment costs and thereby favours the ramping up of the installation numbers.
A lack of a common framework of European standards is seen as a large hindrance to the market uptake. Countries use international and European standards but supplement with their own versions. Moreover, the forms for approval of installation lack standardisation and the process may be complex and lengthy.
The end-user participating in the ene.field project were very positive to the micro-CHP technology. In general, they were very satisfied with all aspects of their micro-CHP systems, especially the environmental profile of the technology.
The German support programme KFW433 will facilitate the commercialisation of the FC micro-CHP technology in the coming years. As a follow-up on the ene.field project, the field demonstration of FC micro-CHP systems in Europe continues with the EU funded project PACE.
Potential Impact:
Impact of trials
The project has accelerated the commercialisation of FC micro-CHP and paved the way to large scale deployment of the technology. This full scale field demonstration of proven systems in real end user environment has demonstrated fit-for-purpose technical system performance and provide extended operational experience of FC micro-CHP from manufacturers.
Through the deployment of close to 1050 micro-CHP units across 10 European countries, a volume capable supply chain has been initiated both in terms of product manufacture and field support. As a result of the initiation of this project, mCHP manufacturers and their supply chain partners have been able to begin to lay down mass manufacturing facilities and accelerate cost-down initiatives.
Field demonstration and training measures carried out under the trial programs has prepared market partners such as utilities, installers and end customers for the market launch of fuel cell systems for home energy supply.
Macro-economic and macro-environmental impact
The use of micro-CHP systems is appealing due to two fundamental reasons: (i) the efficiency of energy conversion is above 90%, much higher than the efficiency of Combined-Cycle Gas Turbine (i.e. around 60%), (ii) the systems are installed at the end-use premises reducing the need for energy transport infrastructure and losses. The micro-CHP can also provide a local peaking capacity (back-up), and it can become an alternative to the conventional boiler in a smart home environment where the electricity and heat demand can be managed more efficiency. The study involves analyses on the impact of micro-CHP on the capacity and operation of the electricity systems across Europe and the impact on CO2, gas consumption across different uptake scenarios and system backgrounds.
In order to evaluate the system benefits of micro-CHP, a range of simulation studies has been carried out to examine the impact of micro-CHP on the European electricity systems (generation, main transmission, and distribution systems) for different future scenarios. The analysis considers today’s grid mix and the impact of likely changes in the future, based on national energy plans and their central projections for the change in the generation mix through time. The benefits of micro-CHP are quantified by finding the performance differences between two systems: (i) a system without micro-CHP, called the Reference scenario, where the electricity was supplied by a portfolio of generation with no micro-CHP and the heat demand was met using electricity-heat pump, (ii) a system with micro-CHP, called the micro-CHP scenario, where the electricity demand was supplied by a portfolio of generation including micro-CHP which also supplied the heat demand. The performance differences between the two systems, i.e. with and without micro-CHP determine the whole-system costs or benefits of micro-CHP on the system.
In order to capture the range of whole-system implication of integrating micro-CHP in Europe, two uptake scenarios, i.e. low (minimum) and high (maximum) scenarios, developed by Element Energy considering different support policies are used in the studies. The average hourly profiles of heat generated by micro-CHP in the ene.field trial are applied in the study to reflect the actual average load factor of the micro-CHP.
The values of micro-CHP in reducing the infrastructure cost (generation [G CAPEX], transmission networks [T CAPEX], distribution networks [D CAPEX], and Heat Pumps [HP CAPEX]) and operating cost [OPEX] are presented in Figure 10, expressed in €/kW electrical capacity of micro-CHP. These values reflect the cost-saving of the system with micro-CHP in comparison to the cost of a system without micro-CHP, i.e. heat demand is supplied by HP. It is important to note that the CAPEX of micro-CHP is not included in the results; the OPEX of micro-CHP has been included.
(Placeholder for Figure 10)
The total (gross) benefits are around €6000 - €7300/kW, with the 2040 cases as an exception. While the magnitude of the benefits is relatively similar, the savings may come from different sources. In the short and medium term, the savings are dominated by the savings in displacing the capacity of HP, power generation, and distribution network capacity. In the long run, the OPEX savings become higher. The OPEX savings can also become higher when the firm generating capacity in the system is scarce, as illustrated in the cases for 2040.
The results show that micro-CHP can:
• Displace capacity of central generators. The capacity value of micro-CHP is comparable to traditional gas-fired plant providing it can be dispatched as back-up,
• Displace the capacity of alternative heat sources,
• Reduce operating costs. Net energy consumption is reduced indicating higher energy efficiency,
• Release network capacity / postpone reinforcement at distribution and transmission networks.
Some of the benefits can only be realised if the micro-CHP can provide grid services; this has implications for the design and control of the micro-CHP, for example: enabling remote operation capabilities for the system operator to access and use micro-CHP to support the grid. While the remote control technologies exist and they can be integrated into the micro-CHP easily, it also requires stronger control coordination between transmission and distribution system operators if they are operated by separate entities. It is observed that the benefits (per kW) are not too sensitive to the penetration levels of micro-CHP projected which indicate that there is no significant barrier for the micro-CHP at the levels being studied.
In the short term, based on the to-date level of renewables and efficiency of the micro-CHP, it is sufficient if micro-CHP operates in heat-led mode. Combined electrical and heat-led is required when micro-CHP can be a least-cost alternative source to displace high marginal cost generators such as peaking plant (e.g. when the efficiency of micro-CHP is high, or when the generation mixes are not optimal). The studies also find that micro-CHP is competitive against HP in the short and medium term; however, when the renewable penetration in the system is sufficiently high (>70%), a combination of micro-CHP and HP may form an optimal portfolio.
Wide deployment of micro-CHP is not only improving the efficiency of the overall system but also reducing carbon emissions. The magnitude of the carbon saving per kW installed micro-CHP in Europe is estimated between 370 – 1100 kg CO2 per year. In the short and medium term, at least when the use of conventional coal/gas/oil-fired plant is still dominant, the impact of micro-CHP in reducing carbon emissions is expected to be relatively significant. The results are shown in Figure 11.
(Placeholder for Figure 11)
In the long term, when the supply of electricity is mainly from low-carbon generation sources, the use of natural-gas fuel cell micro-CHP becomes less attractive, in the context of carbon reduction. Alternative fuel for micro-CHP, especially from sustainable and low-carbon sources will be needed.
Based on these results and the analysis, it can be concluded that micro-CHP technologies are important for the future European energy system development in both short and long run. The micro-CHP can also complement the operation of other low-carbon technologies such as HP.
As the system benefits of micro-CHP are now clear, it is important that appropriate mechanisms are put in place to encourage wide deployment of this technology in the European system. Without acknowledgement of its system benefits, the micro-CHP may not be able to compete with other low-carbon technologies, and this may lead to a sub-optimal development of this technology.
Impact of dissemination
Customer acceptance and awareness of these new products by the public plays an important role in market preparation. By deploying a large number of units under a consistent brand (ene.field) the project has begun to stimulate confidence in the product group and greater awareness of micro FC-CHP technology in the general public.
The dissemination plan identified four key target groups and the communication activities have been centred around them. The messages to the target groups are
• End-users - "FC mCHP will reduce the customers' energy costs, while maintaining their home comfort."
• Utilities - "FC mCHP allows the utility to continue to serve its customers in a changing energy environment."
• Policy-makers - "FC mCHP is an innovative step towards reaching the 2030 environmental targets."
• Project Community - "ene.field is delivering important contributions to the development of FC mCHP."
General communication tools
The project website ww.enefield.eu launched in Month 3 of the project and has been kept up to date all through the duration of ene.field. It includes, among others:
• Public reports (or public summaries of reports) on the findings of the project
• Interactive European map on the main page to allow the end-users recruitment
• Detailed information about the technology
• Information about “how to get a FC mCHP unit”
• Different posts for the news, press release and newsflashes.
In the course of the project 16 press releases and 7 newsflashes have been published. In addition to the publication on the website, news items are also circulated on the mailing lists of COGEN Europe reaching a high number of various stakeholders directly (approx. 1000 people in COGEN Europe's mailing list).
Ene.field videos
The project has also developed videos for the target audiences that capture the main messages of the project in a spectacular and engaging format. The four videos are on the website of the project:
http://enefield.eu/news/watch-the-ene-field-videos-and-find-out-more-about-fuel-cell-micro-cogeneration-and-how-it-supports-the-eus-energy-transition/
National dissemination events
In order to draw attention to the work of the project and ensure a wider awareness and use of the outcomes, the consortium organized dissemination workshops in the countries where trials were organised. The aim was to inform the workshop participants of the project results and ideas and inputs were be collected from the audience (local policy-makers, academics, industries, DSO, ESCOs, utilities, operators and end-users).
With the objective to draw attention on the project and its outcomes, as well as to ensure a wider awareness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration as smart energy solution for private homes, the ene.field project organised six national dissemination workshops in the countries where field trials were taking place.
The workshops were held between June 2016 and March 2017 in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, and United Kingdom.
The aim of each workshop was to inform participants about the ene.field project findings and the potential of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration solutions for enabling energy transition at European and national level.
The findings from the workshops show market interest and requests for tailored support schemes to help the early adopter market to take hold.
The main take-home message from the series of workshops was that Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration solutions are ready to enter people’s homes, enabling consumers to efficiently produce their own heat and power, and thus reducing their energy bills and environmental footprint. In order to realise the potential of FC mCHP, there is a need for a clear vision on policy and market development at both EU and national levels. This will ensure that innovative European manufacturers can bring product costs down, and reach mass commercialisation by scaling up production.
The series of six workshops had a significant impact, since it gathered in total more than 350 representatives from local policy-makers, academics, industries, DSO, ESCOs, utilities, operators and end-users. In order to strengthen the impact, most of the workshops were organised in conjunction with other events or trade fairs focussing on themes linked to Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration (i.e. ISH Fair, ‘Hydrogen and Fuel Cells into the Mainstream’ Conference, ATEE Journée Cogénération, etc.).
All the workshop followed a standard format, with presentations delivered by the invited speakers, followed by a panel discussion with possibility to ask questions from the audience and by networking opportunities.
Each of the events featured at least:
- A speaker from the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU), the European Union’s Public Private Partnership co-funding the ene.field project, to provide an overview of the FCH JU’s scope and ambitions , as well as to present the EU energy and environment legislative framework
- A speaker from the ene.field consortium, introducing the project and covering its main findings, while offering an EU policy perspective.
- One or more speakers from the national industry, presenting the political and technical challenges for the widespread deployment of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in that given country.
The promotion and the follow-up of the workshops was led by COGEN Europe, with the support of project’s partners, via communication tools such as mass-email campaigns, press releases, realisation of videos and publication of posts on ene.field website.
ene.field dissemination sessions
Informative sessions on ene.field and its findings were also organised in Austria, Hungary, and Luxembourg.
• The session in Austria (October 10th, 2016, Wien) was held as part of a workshop organised by the Austrian Energy Agency and by ÖVGW, the Austrian Association for Gas and Water, with the title “Fuel cells: Why is Austria not taking off?”. It was Stefano Modena (SOLIDpower) to introduce ene.field with a 25 minutes presentation.
• The ene.field session in Hungary took part during COGEN Hungary Annual Conference, on the Balaton Lake on 22nd March 2016, with a presentation in Hungarian delivered by Janos Vajda, Project Manager at COGEN Europe.
• The session in Luxembourg on 22nd June 2017 was a restricted round table between industry and Luxembourgish public authorities, at the presence of the Energy Commissioner of Luxembourg. Fiona Riddoch, as ene.field project coordinator, joined the meeting and presented ene.field on behalf of COGEN Europe.
These three sessions, together with the six national dissemination workshops, contributed to the ene.field objective to raise awareness on the market readiness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology and its benefits, and on the project’s achievements.
Fuel Cell micro-CHP policy overview and recommendations by country
Over the course of 2016-2017, the ene.field project organised policy and stakeholders workshops in more than six European countries participating in the field trial. The conclusions and policy recommendations presented below were derived from the exchange with industry and policymakers held during or as a follow up to the national workshops. They are adapted to the national policy and market conditions in each country at the time of the analysis.
Belgium
The policy framework for FC micro-CHP in Belgium looks positive, even if the level of awareness and of support to the technology varies significantly among the three federal regions – being currently higher in Brussels and Wallonia and lower in the Flanders, where there are no support schemes in place, but green certificates.
Belgian suppliers and installers are committed to deliver fuel cell micro-CHP products to consumers, while cutting down costs and aiming for even higher electrical and total efficiency for their technologies. For a successful FC micro-CHP market entry, however, industry efforts need to be complemented by high level political commitment.
The following recommendations emerged for Belgian market and policy framework in the course of ene.field:
• High-level recognition of the environmental and energy security contribution of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies towards the Belgian energy transition is key for the successful mass commercialisation of these products in Belgium.
• As long as these fuel cell micro-CHP products can deliver system wide benefits in terms of primary energy savings, GHG (including CO2, NOx, SOx) reductions, and RES integration, adequate support schemes should be designed to reward these technologies and facilitate their mass market uptake.
• Addressing non-economic and administrative barriers is also necessary in order to prevent further cost being incurred in early commercialisation. One such example is recognising fuel cells as eligible under the EPB methodology, which is time consuming and very costly for this emerging technology. Further harmonisation of standards and requirements between the three Belgian regions would also be beneficial.
• Partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers are essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in Belgium. In addition to recognising fuel cell micro-CHP as one of the key technologies to deliver the energy transition in Belgium by addressing the barriers and providing sufficient support, public authorities themselves can give a boost to the industry by investing in these innovative technologies.
• Having more engagement by the equipment manufacturers and the whole supply chain will also lead to a more dynamic market in Belgium.
To conclude, with a technical potential for fuel cell micro-CHP technologies in Belgium assessed by COGEN Flanders at 200,000 units by 2030, Belgium should not miss the opportunity of reaping the benefits from the large-scale deployment of these products.
France
Even with an energy mix where nuclear has a strong footprint, in France there is still good ground for further deployment of fuel cell micro-CHP units, especially if fuelled by green gas. Nevertheless, without a fair valorisation of the technology and an adequate recognition of its benefits in the upcoming national building code Réglementation Environnementale, coming into force in 2019 and replacing the current Réglementation Thermique 2012 (RT2012), the large-scale uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies in France is endangered. In this context, the adoption of the following recommendations would be beneficial for the FC micro-CHP market development, even more with regards to the implementation of the new building code:
• Concerning the definition of the perimeter, optimisation is made at a building level rather than at a territory level, and this is a burden for CHPs. Optimisation at territory level would fully and fairly into account energy savings from decentralised power production instead.
• In the existing Réglementation Thermique 2012, ICE and Stirling micro-CHP technologies are relatively well integrated, being considered as an alternative to renewables, as they achieve significant energy savings. On the other hand, for fuel cell micro-CHPs, which have just entered the market, an application will be sent to the authorities under the RT2012, in order for fuel cell units to become eligible as of 2017 under the current building code. Nevertheless, the assumptions around the CO2 intensity of electricity from the grid (based on an average calculation of CO2 content for the different energy uses within the building), as well as the system boundaries to be included in the new building code, could undermine the position of fuel cell micro-CHP and might even lead to their exclusion from the list of eligible technologies. In this context, a marginal or seasonal calculation of CO2 intensity of power would more fairly account for benefits deriving from fuel cell micro-CHP instead and the introduction of a carbon bonus would better reflect CO2 savings.
• In the process of adoption of the new building code, an experimentation phase is ongoing, called Label Energie Carbone, and because of the bad positioning of fuel cell micro-CHP, mainly due to the calculation of CO2 intensity on an average base, FC micro-CHP might be even excluded from the experimentation phase.
• Partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers are essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in France. At this stage, as the new building code proposal might represent a major barrier for kick-starting the French market of FC micro-CHP, the key actors to target in the process of drafting and implementing the Réglementation Environnementale, are the French Government on one hand – and namely the Direction générale de l'Énergie et du Climat (DGEC) and the Direction de l'habitat, de l'urbanisme et des paysages (DHUP) – and the industry on the other hand – i.e. the Club Cogénération of the ATEE, Engie and GRDF, and the nuclear lobby, promoting a lower CO2 intensity.
To conclude, high-level and fair recognition of the environmental and energy security contribution of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies towards the French energy transition is key for the successful mass commercialisation of these products in France. The ultimate aim is to show France that the European Union is supportive of fuel cell micro-CHP technology, and that even with an energy mix where nuclear has a strong footprint, there is still good ground for further deployment of fuel cell units, especially if fuelled by green gas.
Germany
The workshop panel, comprised of Ms. Atanasiu (FCH JU), Mr. Brosziewski (B.KWK) Mr. Dauensteiner (IBZ), Mr. Schumacher (NOW), Mr. Stengel (SenerTec), Ms. Wittneben (MVV Energie) and moderated by Mr. Wilhelm (NOW), agreed that even if Germany is at the forefront of FC micro-CHP deployment in Europe, volumes still need to scale up in order for costs to be decrease. The policy framework currently in place should be continued, and even further improved, by making it even steadier, more coherent and more predictable.
• Dedicated support schemes that adequately and fairly reward FC mCHP based on an agreed timeline & KPIs, such as the German KfW 433, should be continued in order to develop further the already advanced German market.
• Germany is the strongest early market, this is due to regional funding opportunities, tolerance of higher cost heating systems and a more developed manufacturer and installer base, among other factors.
• As long as these fuel cell micro-CHP products can deliver system wide benefits in terms of primary energy savings, GHG (including CO2, NOx, SOx) reductions, RES integration, adequate support schemes should be designed to reward these technologies and facilitate their mass market uptake.
• In the German experience, partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers have proved essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in the country. The panellists agreed that manufacturers should address customer needs by delivering tailored solutions to the end-users. In addition to recognising fuel cell micro-CHP as one of the key technologies to deliver the energy transition in Germany by addressing the barriers and providing sufficient support, public authorities themselves can give a boost to the industry by investing in these innovative technologies.
• The momentum towards reaching mass commercialisation for these home energy solutions should continue with an ambitious implementation of the KfW 433, facilitating the customers’ access to these technologies and enabling the smart grid capabilities of micro-CHP systems.
The German success case provides a good example for other European markets, and projects like ene.field and PACE are contributing to the development of new markets around Europe while developing further the more advanced German market. If other Member States are to follow, with FC micro-CHP suppliers qualifying new routes to market and opening new markets, the development of a comprehensive policy framework is necessary with national authorities complementing the efforts of European institutions. National governments are also expected to address the lack of a common framework of European standards, which is seen as a great hindrance to market uptake with national stakeholders pointing at the need to update, improve and revise a large amount of the current standards for more consistent and better suited ones.
Italy
Local stakeholders Italian market for stationary fuel cells remains a very difficult one. Fuel cell micro-CHP technologies have a potential to deliver significant energy savings and emissions reductions in Italy, while helping to integrate renewable energy into the energy mix – especially due to the success of photovoltaic panels and windmills on the Italian landscape.
Fostering innovative manufacturing in Italy would also be associated with wider economic benefits, including the creation of green jobs.
In order for these benefits to reach Italian consumers and the overall economy, a supportive and stable policy framework is key to enable the market entry of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies.
Policy recommendations for the large-scale uptake of fuel cell micro-CHP in Italy include the following:
• High level recognition of fuel cell micro-CHP benefits is necessary in order unlock the market potential for these technologies. Taking an integrated approach to the energy system (across heating, cooling, electricity production, distribution and consumption) would enable policymakers to identify and reward the full decarbonisation and energy efficiency benefits of fuel cells.
• Counting on fuel cell micro-CHP as one of the key technologies to decarbonise and improve the energy efficiency of buildings, through the building codes, white certificates scheme or Conto Termico, would ensure a higher recognition of the technology and thus provide a more predictable environment for investors.
• Adapting existing funding instruments would represent a further push for fuel cell micro-CHP technologies in Italy. It is important that fuel cell micro-CHP is included in the tool box of technologies eligible for incentives, based on its high efficiency and decarbonisation potential (i.e. fuel cell micro-CHPs are labelled as A++ under the labelling scheme for space heaters). Support mechanisms like Conto Termico, should therefore also specify micro-CHP technologies as eligible in addition to the improvement of building envelope efficiency and the replacement of inefficient heating appliances with condensing boilers, biomass based boilers, heat pumps and hybrid systems.
• Removing administrative and regulatory barriers would facilitate the market entry of fuel cell micro-CHP, making it easier and less costly for small energy consumers to choose innovative, energy efficiency technologies. Lengthy bureaucratic procedures for the installation and authorisation process could be significantly improved in Italy (e.g. the complex “officina elettrica” authorisation process). Moreover, the connection to the electricity grid of fuel cell micro-CHP in Italy takes 2-3 months, which can be addressed by following the “install and inform” recommended procedure in Article 15.5 of the Energy Efficiency Directive. In addition, the applications for tax credits or white certificates should be simplified in order that small installations below 50 kWe can benefit from these incentives.
The Netherlands
Despite the very good level of awareness of market players and customers on micro-CHP, and even though micro-CHP is included in the national energy transition programme, previously existing support schemes for this technology have now been removed – although they were to be considered favourable, the Dutch industry was not yet at the right stage to take advantage of them.
The Netherlands is currently undergoing a phase of ‘gas out’ – and new buildings are not even allowed to have a connection to the gas grid. This attitude is clearly favouring a full electrification of the economy, which nevertheless does not take into account some relevant considerations.
• The use of electricity for heating and transport will still result in significant CO2 emissions, while increasing costs for grid operators in the short and medium term. Electricity storage is yet to cost-effectively cover for the residual load (defined as the difference between the electricity demand and renewable feed-in) during the times where the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing. Moreover, seasonal variations in residual loads can be quite difficult to manage without significant grid reinforcements.
• The cost-effective alternative to the all-electrification scenario consists of employing a technology mix that uses existing infrastructure and minimises the need for new electricity infrastructure, while maximising decarbonisation gains. Making use of flexible and highly efficient energy solutions, while using existing gas pipeline network, will already today reduce energy use and achieve significant CO2 emission reductions, compared to electricity based solutions.
The gas grid will also have an important storage capacity x-y times higher than the electricity grid at peak demand time.
In addition, as the fuel delivered by the gas grid becomes renewable (e.g. biogas, hydrogen), decarbonisation gains will become even more substantial.
• Grid operators should be given adequate tools to exploit the cost advantages of renewable CHP for infrastructure support: DSOs, which have shown a good interest in micro-CHP, should be thus empowered, since legislation currently prevents them from participating in the market.
• Additionally, cooperation among the available sustainable paths (i.e. solar, wind, renewable gas, cogeneration, heat pumps) should be increased to guide the energy transition in The Netherlands.
• With the increasing role of renewable gas applications in the Netherlands, support is needed for the deployment of new technologies. The sustainable contribution of these technologies should also be fully incorporated in calculation methods such as Energy Performance contracting (EPCs)
• Dutch houses are normally quite narrow and have very limited space to install a fuel cell. To overcome this issue, a solution might be provided by the set-up of energy co-operatives that invest in only one unit installed for several homes.
With more than 80% of Dutch houses using in-house gas boilers, The Netherlands is deemed to be among the markets in Europe where fuel cell micro-CHP products have the highest market potential for the near future. Therefore, the country should not miss the opportunity of reaping the benefits from the large-scale deployment of these products.
United Kingdom
The UK has been quite supportive in terms of policy framework when it comes to FC micro-CHP, with the existence of favourable Feed-in-Tariff (FiT) schemes. Nevertheless, the future of such FiT after 2019 is uncertain, as well as there is uncertainty around Brexit and the fate of EU funds directed to stationary fuel cells.
For fuel cell micro-CHP to go mainstream in the country (i.e. 10%-20% uptake of the total heating market) awareness among customers should be significantly increased, installations should become suitable for most properties and, once the mass market commercialisation has been achieved and costs have dropped down, the products should become subsidy-free. Therefore, the path for this energy solution to become mainstream is still very long, but the following recommendations could be relevant for the future large-scale uptake of the UK market:
• High-level recognition of the environmental and energy security contribution of fuel cell micro-CHP technologies towards the UK energy transition is key for the successful mass commercialization of these products in the UK. The country is indeed on the right track, being micro-CHP the only technology fuelled by a non-renewable energy source to be incentivised at national level with Feed-in-Tariffs.
• As long as these fuel cell micro-CHP products can deliver system wide benefits in terms of primary energy savings, GHG (including CO2, NOx, SOx) reductions, RES integration, adequate support schemes should be designed to reward these technologies and facilitate their mass market uptake.
• Addressing barriers to market (i.e. system up-front costs, maintenance costs and lack of evidence on performance and reliability), as well as technical barriers related to the products, is also necessary in order to ensure an environment favourable to the market development of fuel cell micro-CHP at both EU and national levels.
• Partnerships between industry, policymakers and customers are essential for the promotion of fuel cells micro-CHP in the UK. It would contribute to an increase in awareness among the potential end-users, better informing them about the benefits of micro-CHP. Communication on fuel cell micro-CHP should be therefore increased and improved.
To conclude, the UK has shown a good general interest in hydrogen technologies, be they solutions for the transport sector or fuel cell micro-CHP. What emerged from the ene.field dissemination activities in the country, is that in the UK there is high potential for hydrogen-fuelled technologies not only at national level, but even more at regional and local level.
Conclusions
The six ene.field national dissemination workshops, as well as the three dissemination sessions, served as a powerful communication tool and policy accelerator to the project and, even more, to Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology at national and local level.
With Germany leading in Member State approach to supporting Fuel Cell micro-CHP, support is now available in other countries, including Belgium, France and UK, which are promoting the technology through mechanisms such as feed-in premiums, feed-in tariffs, white certificates/green certificates. Major European manufacturers, supported by the Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Joint Undertaking at the EU level and key European national governments, are now committed to bringing the technology closer to mass market by increasing scale and achieving further product cost reductions. And ene.field and its communication activities will have played a key role in the beginning of this pathway to a competitive Fuel Cell micro-CHP market in Europe.
Final dissemination event in Brussels
To address relevant EU stakeholders in Brussels and to draw attention to the project and its outcomes, as well as to ensure a wider awareness of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration as smart energy solution for private homes, the ene.field project held its final dissemination event “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration: Generating Sustainable Heat and Power for your Home” on October 11th, 2017, at Autoworld museum in the heart of Brussels.
The event gathered between 120 and 130 engaged participants, among which key policymakers, Brussels stakeholders and other organisations, industry, research community and media representatives.
The event was organised in collaboration with the FCH JU and with the support of Grayling communication agency.
The topic: “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration: Generating Sustainable Heat and Power for your Home”
The current critical debate in the European Parliament and Council over the recently published “Clean Energy for All Europeans” Package made distributed energy solutions, including Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration, and energy efficiency more in general, a key topic of interest at the time of the event. This main topic attracted policy-makers from EU institutions as well as national/regional governments, and Brussels stakeholders at the ene.field event. The two more technical sessions on the flagship EU co-funded projects ene.field and PACE in the afternoon contributed instead to catch the attention of industry and research community representatives and of other oragnisations inside and outside Brussels.
The agenda of the day foresaw a variety of different activities targeting different groups of participants (i.e. a press conference, a Fuel Cell micro-CHO exhibition and a dedicated VIP tour of the exhibition, the conference itself). More details on these different sessions are available in the paragraphs below.
Press conference
The agenda of the day started with a press conference early in the morning (08.45 – 09.15) kicking-off the day-long event on the great potential and integration of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in Europe. During the press conference, moderated by Thomas Vanhauwaert (COGEN Europe), Mirela Atanasiu, Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU), Fiona Riddoch of the European Association for the Promotion of Cogeneration (COGEN Europe), and Ian Walker, Director at Element Energy, briefed journalists on the ene.field and PACE projects and answered their questions.
Several journalists and stakeholders representing well-known media and communication companies in Brussels (i.e. Energy Post, Revolve, Grayling) and specialised trade press from key countries where ene.field units were installed, joined the press conference.
Following the event, a dedicated media-package was prepared for journalists, including:
- The ene.field press releases published in the days leading to the event and on the day of the event
- The media coverage of the event
- A factsheet on Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration, ene.field and PACE
- Links to the ene.field videos
- Presentations of the event
- Pictures of the event
- Tweets suggestions
- Links to relevant websites
3.2 Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration exhibition & VIP tour
Together with the main conference, an all-day exhibition was organised to allow participants to the event to experience first hand real-size fuel cell micro-cogeneration units developed by major European manufacturers involved in ene.field and PACE.
The following units were on display during the event:
Manufacturer Unit on display
Bosch Buderus
SenerTec Dachs Innogen
SOLIDpower BlueGEN
Viessmann Vitovalor 300-P
Representatives of the manufacturers showcasing their units were present to illustrate the technology, its benefits and how it works to interested participants approaching them. Together with their units, manufacturers also had the possibility to have their brochures and roll-ups on display at the exhibition.
Before the official start of the conference, a VIP guided tour of the exhibition was organised for selected participants from EU institutions, national and local policy-makers, and Brussels stakeholders.
The tour took place from 09.15 to 10.00 and was guided by by Mr. Tilman Wilhelm, Head of Communication and Knowledge Management at NOW GmBH (the German National Organisation Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology).
Among the others, the VIP tour was joined by:
- Antonio Aguilo Rullan, FCH JU
- Mirela Atanasiu, FCH JU
- Michael Brown, Delta-ee
- Tudor Constantinescu, Principal Adviser to the Director General, DG ENER, European Commission
- Gert De Block, Secretary General, CEDEC
- Samuele Furfari, Policy Coordinator - Advisory to the Deputy Director General, DG ENER, European Commission
- Heinz Lehmann, Member of the Saxony Regional Parliament / Vice-President of the European Committee of the Regions Bureau
- Rainer Ortmann, Head of Department for Government and External Affairs, Bosch
- Dan Sobovitz, Speechwriter and online media, Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš ŠEFCOVIC - Energy Union, European Commission
The tour was followed by a VIP breakfast, restricted to the participants of the tour. The tour and the breakfast were together an excellent occasion to discuss at high-level how innovation and Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration can empower energy consumers, while contributing to the energy transition.
2 Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration exhibition at ene.field final dissemination event
3VIP guided tour of the Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration units exhibition
3.3 The conference
The actual day-long conference was split into three sessions. The morning session, titled The role of Fuel Cell micro-CHP in the future energy system was a high-level session focussing on policy at EU and regional level. The session opened with three keynote speeches by Tudor Constantinescu (DG Energy – European Commission) on “EU Climate & Energy Framework fostering innovation”, Heinz Lehmann (Committee of the Regions) on “The role of regions in promoting innovative energy solutionws”, and by Bart Biebuyck (FCH JU) on “The benefits of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration and its role in contributing to the EU’s climate and energy targets”.
The keynote speeches were followed by the première of the ene.field video “Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in the Policy Debate”, highly enjoyed by the audience, and by the Plenary Session The role of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in the future energy system. This Plenary Session consisted of a panel discussion moderated by the journalist Clare Taylor, joined by representatives of the industry and by an ene.field field trial participants, who shared his positive experience. The session was closed by Klaus Gütling (Hessen Ministry of Economics) with his presentation on “Regions paving the way for the future of the energy transition”.
The two afternoon technical sessions focussed on ene.field and its findings, and on PACE. They consisted of presentations delivered by project’s partners and Work Packages leaders, presenting the projects, ene.field’s achievements, results and findings, PACE and the challenges ahead. Both sessions also included a panel discussion involving representatives of the projects’ consortiums and other stakeholders (i.e. FCH JU, Delta-ee). All the panellists were prepared to the discussion in advance with dedicated coordination calls led by COGEN Europe and attended by the panellists and the moderators, and were provided with guiding questions for the debate.
The full programme of the event is available on ene.field website.
The day ended with a networking cocktail in the exhibition room.
4 Bart Biebuyck (FCH JU) speaking at ene.field final dissemination event
5 Panel discussion at ene.field final dissemination event
4. Promotion and follow-up
On the weeks leading to the event, COGEN Europe, supported by the FCH JU and the other ene.field partners, led the promotion of the event. The promotion was carried out through several MailChimp campaigns, social media, website posts (ene.field FCH JU, COGEN Europe, HyER, etc.), newsletters (i.e. COGEN Europe, Hydrogen Europe, COGEN Flanders, etc.), targeted and personalised invitations (i.e. to high ranks in the industry, to EU key policy-makers, to journalists in Brussels and national specialised trade press), printed postcards (distributed at relevant events and at the European Parliament), a banner campaign on EurActiv, ene.field press releases, etc.
At the registration desk of the event, all the participants received a delegate pack including the following materials:
- Programme of the event
- List of participants
- ene.field brochure
- PACE brochure
- ene.field summary report
- A personalised badge
- Factsheet on Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration, ene.field and PACE (for journalists and speakers only)
On the day of the event, an ene.field press release was issued to additionally raise awareness on the successful end of the project and on the event.
In the following days, the speakers and the participants were officially thanked by COGEN Europe’s Managing Director and all the presentations delivered during the event were uploaded on ene.field website. The journalists who attended the event received a media-package and COGEN Europe started a collaboration with the journalist Clare Taylor for further promotion of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in the wake of the successful Brussels ene.field final dissemination event.
5. Partnership with the European Week of Regions & Cities
The ene.field final dissemination event took place as part of the European Week of Regions & Cities, being an official side event of the biggest event on EU regional and urban policy.
Conclusions
The presentations and discussions which took place at the event showed that the technology is working, it is reliable and market ready. The point was raised that it is key to put in place the right policy framework to encourage wide deployment of Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration in Europe. The ene.field final dissemination event served as a powerful communication tool and policy accelerator to Fuel Cell micro-Cogeneration technology at national and local level.
The PACE project will ride the wave of the successful communication efforts carried out by ene.field throughout its five-years life, and culminated with its final dissemination event, thus paving the way to a competitive Fuel Cell micro-CHP market in Europe.
List of Websites:
www.enefield.eu
