1,512
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

A techno-economic assessment for fuel cells hybrid systems in stationary applications

, , , &
Pages 889-912 | Received 27 Mar 2023, Accepted 12 Jul 2023, Published online: 09 Aug 2023

Figures & data

Figure 1. World total final consumption (TFC) by fuel (Mtoe).

Figure 1. World total final consumption (TFC) by fuel (Mtoe).

Figure 2. Historical installed capacity by fuel type in Colombia.

Adapted from (UPME Citation2023).

Figure 2. Historical installed capacity by fuel type in Colombia.Adapted from (UPME Citation2023).

Figure 3. LCOE of different types of technology in the period 2020–2022.

Adapted from (NREL Citation2022).

Figure 3. LCOE of different types of technology in the period 2020–2022.Adapted from (NREL Citation2022).

Figure 4. Schematic of the hybrid system in HOMER.

Figure 4. Schematic of the hybrid system in HOMER.

Figure 5. HOMER algorithm scheme.

Figure 5. HOMER algorithm scheme.

Figure 6. Community load profile, including workdays and weekends.

Figure 6. Community load profile, including workdays and weekends.

Figure 7. Average speed wind map from Colombia in February (left) and October (right) (m/s).

Figure 7. Average speed wind map from Colombia in February (left) and October (right) (m/s).

Figure 8. Wind speed (m/s) in the municipality of Uribia-Guajira.

Figure 8. Wind speed (m/s) in the municipality of Uribia-Guajira.

Figure 9. XANT M-24-ETR power curve.

Data adapted from (XANT Citation2017).

Figure 9. XANT M-24-ETR power curve.Data adapted from (XANT Citation2017).

Table 1. Equipment considered in the analysis.

Table 2. Search space during optimisation.

Table 3. Result of cost minimisation for the scenario d = 12%, i = 13.44% and average wind speed 4 m/s.

Table 4. Result of cost minimisation for the scenario d = 12%, i = 13.44% and average wind speed 6.2 m/s.

Table 5. Result of cost minimisation for the scenario d = 12%, i = 13.44% and average wind speed 7.5 m/s.

Figure 10. Result of the cost minimisation for the scenario d = 12%, i = 13.44% (a, b, c), d = 17%, and i = 20.44% (d, e, f), with average wind speed 4 m/s (a, d), 6.2 m/s (b, e), and 7.5 m/s (c, f).

Figure 10. Result of the cost minimisation for the scenario d = 12%, i = 13.44% (a, b, c), d = 17%, and i = 20.44% (d, e, f), with average wind speed 4 m/s (a, d), 6.2 m/s (b, e), and 7.5 m/s (c, f).

Figure 11. Cash flow for the selected scenario and configuration.

Figure 11. Cash flow for the selected scenario and configuration.

Table 6. Summary of the costs associated with the recommended system (values in thousands of dollars).

Figure 12. Average monthly performance during one year of operation of the selected system.

Figure 12. Average monthly performance during one year of operation of the selected system.

Figure 13. Performance hour-by-hour of the selected system during February and October.

Figure 13. Performance hour-by-hour of the selected system during February and October.