Engineering PapersSearch

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “hydrogen bond benchmarks”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

Full CI benchmark calculations on N2, NO, and O2 - A comparison of methods for describing multiple bonds

Full configuration interaction (CI) calculations on the ground states of N2, NO, and O2 using a DZP Gaussian basis are compared with single-reference SDCI and coupled pair approaches (CPF), as well as with CASSCF multireference CI approaches. The CASSCF/MRCI technique is found to describe multiple bonds as well as single bonds. Although the coupled pair functional approach gave chemical accuracy (1 kcal/mol) for bonds involving hydrogen, larger errors occur in the CPF approach for the multiple bonded systems considered here. CI studies on the 1Sigma(g +) state of N2, including all single, double, triple, and quadruple excitations show that triple excitations are very important for the multiple bond case, and accounts for most of the deficiency in the coupled pair functional methods.

Bauschlicher, Charles W., Jr.

Techno-Economic Analysis of Green Hydrogen Energy Storage in A Cryogenic Flux Capacitor

The Cryogenic Flux Capacitor (CFC) is a cold, dense energy storage core that is being studied in the cryo-compressed, about 300 bar and 80K, region of gaseous hydrogen (GH 2 ) storage and liquid hydrogen (LH 2 ) region near the normal boiling point. Hydrogen storage is improved by physically bonding the molecules within the nanoscale pores of the aerogel composite blanket material. The process of bonding or debonding is governed by principles of physical adsorption (physisorption) and thermodynamics. The large surface area afforded by the nanoporous aerogel (~1,000 m 2 /g) allows its storage performance to easily exceed capacities of high-pressure GH 2 storage for an equivalent volume. With the integrated aerogel, subscale tests have shown that storage is increased by about 36% over a simple tank filled with GH 2 at the same operating temperature and pressure. For LH 2 conditions, the CFC is shown to operate at improved densities, but testing is ongoing. For the techno-economic analysis (TEA), the source of hydrogen is compared between onsite steam methane reforming (SMR) and onsite solar photovoltaic (PV) panels providing power to electrolyzers to produce green GH 2 . The TEA compares pure hydrogen produced at a small scale for a 25 MW power system and at a large scale in a 500 MW power system. The system allowed for hydrogen imports and exports at a set price with a tank sized for 10 hours of power production. The two power producing technologies are a combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) and hydrogen fuel cells. The SMR system uses natural gas as an input and includes a carbon capture and storage (CCS) system. The levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH), and levelized cost of storage (LCOS) are developed based on the capital cost and operating cost of the systems. The results are shown for current costs using a 2021 benchmark and DOE projections for cost improvements by 2030. The TEA showed that onsite hydrogen generation from SMR has an LCOH of about 1.4 to 2 USD per kg over the life of the plant and the PV hydrogen production LCOH is about 5.2 to 5.5 USD per kg. The LCOS of conventional GH 2 systems is estimated to be $210/MWh and cost of storage for LH 2 systems is $205/MWh for fuel cell systems and $249/MWh for CCGT systems. CFC improved the LCOS of all these systems to $198/MWh, $191/MWh and $233/MWh respectively. The LCOE also improved with conventional systems between $171/MWh and $228/MWh improved by CFC to between $167/MWh and $212/MWh. Using projections for improvement in costs following DOE’s goals by 2030, green hydrogen improved to as low as $78/MWh LCOS and LCOE for conventional cases. CFC improved over conventional storage with the lowest LCOS being $62/MWh and the lowest LCOE being $73/MWh. These results correspond to an LCOH of $2/kg. Finally, the TEA shows how LCOE is improved for hydrogen conditioning and storage over conventional systems and caverns in the 10 to 50 hour range.

Joshua Schmitt