Policy Options for Hydrogen Vehicles and Infrastructure
Summary based on NREL Task Order NO. KACX-4-44452-02
Stefan Unnasch January 31, 2007 (408) 517-1563 [email protected] TIAX, LLC 15 Acorn Park Daniel Rutherford, Ph.D. Cambridge, Massachusetts (408) 517-1555 02140-2390 [email protected] TIAXLLC.com
© 2006 TIAX LLC Posted with permission from TIAX
0 Policy Options for Hydrogen Vehicles Presentation Outline
1 Background
2 Study methodology
3 Policy options for early transition
4 Policy options for late transition
5 Conclusions
1 Policy Options for Hydrogen Vehicles Presentation Outline
1 Background
2 Study methodology
3 Policy options for early transition
4 Policy options for late transition
5 Conclusions
2 Background Incentive Requirements Hydrogen fueled vehicles offer the potential for energy and environmental benefit; however….
• Early introduction costs will be higher than conventional fuels because of low production volumes and learning limited technology evolution • Vehicle costs may be higher than gasoline vehicles costs even if development goals are met (although improved fuel efficiency could result in more favorable lifecycle costs) • A hydrogen economy could take another 20 years to evolve without policy support • The objective of policy support would be to: – Reduce financial burden of vehicle and infrastructure during the transition – Support H2FCV sales if initial capital costs are higher than gasoline options but still worth the energy and environmental benefits – Facilitate safety, customer awareness, and technology adoption
3 Background Infrastructure Cost Policies for hydrogen should help manage the investment risk to stakeholders.
H2 Cash Flow vs H2 Station Coverage
. $40
$30 $20 The “valley of death” is a Low Coverage $10 Base Case challenge to both fuel and ow, billion dollars $0 vehicle stakeholders. 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 ($10) High Coverage ($20)
($30)
($40) Cumulative Cash Fl Year
1. Commercial phase starts 10 years after initial H2 introduction to each PADD region. 2015 for PADD 5 (West Coast). Source: TIAX NPV model
4 Background Project Objectives/Tasks
• Objective: identify and evaluate policy options to support the introduction of hydrogen vehicles and infrastructure •Tasks – Identify policy options – Evaluate options – Review analysis with stakeholders
5 Policy Options for Hydrogen Vehicles Presentation Outline
1 Background
2 Study methodology
3 Policy options for early transition
4 Policy options for late transition
5 Conclusions
6 Study Methodology Approach TIAX evaluated leading policy options that would support the introduction of hydrogen vehicles and infrastructure.
Review Options Criteria Policy Metrics
• DOE Scenario • Identify a range of Workshop options • Identify metric • Brainstorming • Fuel, vehicle customer, • Assess leakage implementation and competition Pros and Cons • Other alternative with other fuels fuels policy efforts • Introduction – long term •Evaluate • Carrot – stick • Legislative desirability initiatives • Directed to H2 – neutral Stakeholder Input
• We identified policy options and examined their strengths and weaknesses • Interview stakeholders • Revise pros and cons • Included innovative aspects and well-known options. • Assess leading policy • Next we will consider: options 1. Could it be legislated and implemented? 2. Does the magnitude of the incentive make a difference? 3. How would the incentive effect other fuels and industries? 7 Study Methodology Overview of Policies Government policies and incentives cover a wide range of hydrogen implementation needs.
• We analyzed a broad range of leverage points • Government cost share and tax credits are direct – Useful for the program during the transition – Well established mechanisms • In general, easy-to-implement measures are likely to be less effective and less focuses on hydrogen – Government fleet requirements appear attractive – Such programs tend to get watered down – Tax credits/deductions vs direct consumer payment • Environmentally based fuel neutral options may be more broadly supported than measures targeting hydrogen – Important in the commercial period, small $ during transition period – Competition from other fuels and energy sectors reduced H2 impact – Develop a metric that supports all of the benefits of hydrogen
8 Study Methodology Promising Policy Measures The leading policy measures cover a range of policy targets.
Type Target Measure Producer fuel payment Fuel Infrastructure support1 Carbon tax Incentives 50/50 vehicle cost share Capital costs Consumer tax credit for vehicle Fleet purchase program Outreach All Consumer education Consumer GHG cap and trade Mandates Manufacturer Modified CAFE standards
Fuel Renewable H2 under RFS/RPS
1. Examples include investment tax credits, loan guarantees, tax credits.
The details of each policy measure influence its potential effectiveness and political viability.
9 Study Methodology Staged Implementation
The leading policy measures could be implemented in two stages:
Stage Measure 50/50 vehicle cost share Consumer tax credit Early transition Producer fuel payment
(2010-2025) Renewable H2 under RFS/RPS Fleet purchase program Consumer education Late transition Carbon tax (2025+) Modified CAFE standards GHG cap and trade
10 Policy Options for Hydrogen Vehicles Presentation Outline
1 Background
2 Study methodology
3 Policy options for early transition
4 Policy options for late transition
5 Conclusions
11 Policy Options for Early Transition Producer fuel payment Expand ethanol producer payment to include hydrogen. • Revise ethanol tax credits to include hydrogen - Provide credit in proportion to WTT GHG emissions - Make credit dependent on U.S. production (e.g. renewable based
hydrogen or CO2 sequestered in the U.S.) - Fund through excise tax on gasoline, with highway trust fund reimbursed for loss of revenue • Support capital investment in early hydrogen infrastructure – Link support to hydrogen sales • Effects – Links program for hydrogen with other U.S. fuel production programs –Promotes H2 production, not just capacity – Provides early revenue source to fuel producers
– Creates market pull for low CO2 –H2 pathways and efficient FCVs 12 Policy Options for Early Transition Producer fuel payment Experience with ethanol suggests that the price of gasoline is an important factor, while government incentives were an important driver.
Ethanol Production versus Fuel Prices, 1982-2006
MTBE Ban
Oxygenate Requirement 5000 $3.00
4500 $2.50
) 4000 s n 3500 llo
a $2.00 g )
n 3000 al g io / ill 2500 $1.50 $ m ( ce ( i n r o i 2000 p t c
u $1.00
d 1500 o r P 1000 $0.50 500
0 $0.00 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Year annualized
ethanol production gasoline price ethanol price production credit Source: Renewable Fuels Association, Nebraska Energy Office 13 Policy Measures for Early Transition 50/50 Cost Share Government cost share of vehicle programs can help cover the cost of vehicles in the near term.
• 50/50 cost share has historically been used to fund vehicle programs – Provides a source of funding when FCV costs exceed retail – Support participation and funding from state and local agencies – Consider phased program for continuity and participation of local funding • Innovative fleet program participants may be needed - 20,000 vehicles per year cannot be placed in traditional fleets - Perhaps rental car, travel on government business, Home Depot, etc - Carmakers need to demonstrate the type of vehicle sold to the retail customer
14 Vehicles can cost several billion $ towards the end of the transition.
• 50/50 cost share mechanism is well established • Cost is significant to carmaker • Tax credit is well established and does not need to go thought the annual budget process. • Provide better business case to business and buyer Local Carmaker DOE 35
) 1600
M 30 ORNL HyTrans 1400 M Cost Sharing and Subsidies, Scenario 3, Fuel Cell
$ 25 Success Example 1200 ) ( M t s 20 2.0 1000 M r $ ( /Y
s 15 800 t 1.5 s llar Co o o l a 10 600 1.0 l C 004 D u 2 f n 400 o Scenario3 Station nI fr. 5 s 0.5 n vehiclScenario3 esFuel Subsidy nnua A An 200 illio Scenario3 Vehicles
0 B 0.0 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0 2020 15 Policy Options for Hydrogen Vehicles Presentation Outline
1 Background
2 Study methodology
3 Policy options for early transition
4 Policy options for late transition
5 Conclusions
16 Policy Options for Late Transition Consumer Tax Credit Provide tax credit to purchasers of hydrogen FCVs.
• Credit should be directed towards vehicle with hydrogen attributes – up to $10,000 for 100 mi/kg • Direct payment would be more attractive to consumers at little extra cost to the government, but politics favor tax credit – Base credit on WTW GHG, use of renewable energy, U.S. production, etc. • Effect – Creates market pull for H2 FCVs – Helps manufacturers to sell more expensive vehicles – Some part of incentive lost to “free rider” sales
17 Policy Options for Late Transition Consumer Tax Credit
Effectiveness of the tax credit depends on market conditions.
New Prius Sales by Month, 2005-2006 $3150 incentive $500 incentive ($2000 Tax Deduction) $1575 incentive 12000 $4.00
Incentive effect? ) $3.50 s e l
c 8000 i h )
Three month al e g /
V moving average $ ( ( G s F
e Raw $3.00 l a R Sales i n a r o f i S l a y C
hl 4000 nt o
M $2.50
0 $2.00 Jan-05 Apr-05 Jul-05 Oct-05 Jan-06 Apr-06 Jul-06 Oct-06 Source: Green Car Congress, CEC. 18 Policy Options for Late Transition Consumer Tax Credit
Effectiveness of the tax credit depends on market conditions.
New Prius Sales by Month, 2005-2006 $3150 incentive $500 incentive ($2000 Tax Deduction) $1575 incentive 12000 $4.00
Incentive effect? ) $3.50 s e l
c 8000 i h )
Three month al e g /
V moving average $ ( ( G s F
e Raw $3.00 l a R Sales i n a r o
RFG Price f i S l a y C
hl 4000 nt o
M $2.50
0 $2.00 Jan-05 Apr-05 Jul-05 Oct-05 Jan-06 Apr-06 Jul-06 Oct-06 Source: Green Car Congress, CEC. 19 Policy Options for Late Transition Carbon Tax Revenue neutral carbon tax on energy. • Tax all primary energy based on non-sequestered, non- biomass carbon content
– Consider taxing embedded CO2 of imported products – Redistribute tax to affected stakeholders 1) Equal refund to all U.S. residents over age 18 regardless of driving habits 2) Tie to other tax reforms to balance concerns about funding non taxpayers 3) Compensate energy industry for share of lost revenue • Effect
– Increases price of fuels with high CO2 emissions – Creates market pull for low CO2 H2 pathways and efficient FCVs
20 Policy Options for Late Transition Carbon Tax A carbon tax would impact other fuel pathways. $0.90 Effect of $50/ton CO2 carbon tax $0.80 2.5 c/kWh $0.70
$0.60 g
k $0.50 or
$0.40 H2 with 70% WTT gge / reduction in GHG $ $0.30 2.4 x FE improvement $0.2/gal EtOH $0.20
$0.10
$- RFG H2 (FCV) E85 (corn) E85 (cellulose) Coal Power
21 Policy Options for Late Transition Modified CAFE Modify existing CAFE regulations to provide incentive for H2 FCVs
• Use framework of existing regulations as incentive for high efficiency and hydrogen vehicles – Provide extra incentive for H2 FCVs with rationale based on low GHG and renewable production (i.e. count 1 kg of hydrogen as 0.1 kg of petroleum) – Provide funding to carmakers for anticipated increase in vehicle costs • Effect – Undesirable mandate – Economic dislocation – Carmaker resistance with and without funding
22 Policy Options for Late Transition Modified CAFE The introduction of FCVs will impact CAFE standard during the early transition. CAFE Equivalent Fuel Fconomy for Mid-sized Cars with FCV Introduction, 2005 - 2025
80
70 pg)
m 60 ( y onom c
e 50 l e u f e at g
e 40 ggr a
30
20 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Year
ICE only Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Hypothetical CAFE standard one-forth size of SOTU proposal 23 Study methodology Subsidiary Policy Measures Some measures have such significant drawbacks that they need to be considered in a limited way or implemented in an innovative way.
Measure Drawback Capital cost payment Should be limited to early production. Better to link of fuel infrastructure payments to fuel production Successful for CNG and HEV early transition, but benefit is Parking/HOV lane/ city quickly diluted. Limited number of cities are ideal for city car driving benefits (NYC, SF, London). Unfunded mandate. No positive incentive to consumer. Fleet purchase rule Extensive coordination requirements. Easy to avoid compliance Manufacturer mandate Very unpopular: key stakeholder not motivated to succeed Manufacturer Tax Value of tax credit varies widely among Credit carmakers due to individual tax situations Consumer education Impact impossible to estimate.
24 Policy Options for Hydrogen Vehicles Presentation Outline
1 Background
2 Study methodology
3 Policy options for early transition
4 Policy options for late transition
5 Conclusions
25 Conclusions
• Tax credits and producer fuel payments can provide a targeted incentive for hydrogen • Environmentally-based measures accomplish energy security and GHG reduction goals but are prone to “leakage” into other sectors and fuels – Most direct impact for a large number of vehicles • External conditions, including the cost of incumbent transportation fuels and regulatory mandates, will likely influence both H2 availability and demand for FCVs
26 Extra slides follow
27 Policy Options for Late Transition Consumer Tax Credit Evidence of effectiveness of tax credit mixed.
Incremental Costs and Consumer Preferences for Hybrid Electric Vehicles
100%
HEV60 e c HEV n 0
e HEV20 r e f e r 75% P ng i s s e pr x
E 50% s r e Incentivized um Sales ons C 25% of
t 2006 Prius n
e Tax Credit c r e P
0% 0481216 Incremental Cost (thousand $) Source: "Comparing the Benefits and Impacts of Hybrid Electric Vehicle Options", EPRI, 2001.
28