SANDIA REPORT SAND2019-10191 R Printed August 2019 H2@RailSM Workshop Workshop and report sponsored by the US Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Fuel Cell Technologies Office, and the US Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration. Prepared by Mattie Hensley, Jonathan Zimmerman Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New MexiCo 87185 and Livermore, California 94550 Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831 Telephone: (865) 576-8401 Facsimile: (865) 576-5728 E-Mail: [email protected] Online ordering: http://www.osti.gov/scitech Available to the public from U.S. Department of Commerce National Technical Information Service 5301 Shawnee Rd Alexandria, VA 22312 Telephone: (800) 553-6847 Facsimile: (703) 605-6900 E-Mail: [email protected] Online order: https://classic.ntis.gov/help/order-methods/ 2 ABSTRACT This report serves as the proceedings of the H2@RailSM Workshop held by the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Fuel Cell Technologies Office (FCTO) and the US Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) on March 26-27, 2019 at Michigan State University in Lansing, MI. The workshop was specifically held to help identify needed research to accelerate technology development and industry commercialization regarding the use of hydrogen fuel cell systems in locomotives and rail applications. Experts and stakeholders from academia, government, and industry met at the workshop to assess the state of the art on rail propulsion. Discussions focused specifically on using fuel cells, operational requirements, and lessons learned about early fuel cell rail projects, and the identification of current technology gaps and collaborative R&D needed to close these gaps. This report summarizes the diverse perspectives and constructive ideas generated by the dedicated individuals who attended the workshop. Prepared by: Sandia National Laboratories 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are extended to US Department Of Energy Fuel Cell Technologies Office (FCTO) Director Sunita Satyapal and Melissa Shurland, US Department Of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Program Manager, Office of Research, Development and Technology, for overall management of the workshop. Special thanks to Pete Devlin, Technology Development Manager for FCTO and Dr. Shuk Han Chan, FCTO Fellow, for leading the planning and organizing of the workshop. We are grateful of Sanjay Gupta of Michigan State University for delivering the opening remarks that inspired and helped frame this workshop and Andreas Hoffrichter of Michigan State University’s Center for Railway Research and Education. The workshop organizers wish to thank those who presented informative briefings at the workshop on the status of relevant technologies and key challenges, including Mark Maday, Phani Raj, Momoko Tamaoki, Carrie Schindler, Elena Hof, Leanna Belluz, Seky Chang, Michael Fore, Michael Cleveland, Mark Duve, Scott Nason, Reid Larson, Alan Mace, Rob Harvey, Jens Steger, Andreas Frixen, Andreas Hoffrichter, Rajesh Ahluwalia, Brian Ehrhart, and Lynn Harris. We gratefully acknowledge the valuable ideas and insights contributed by the stakeholders who participated in the H2@RailSM Workshop. The willingness of these experts to share their time and knowledge has helped to identify current and emerging opportunities to accelerate the development and deployment of hydrogen rail technologies. Participating organizations are listed in Appendix B of this report. 4 CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................9 1. Technical Sessions ..................................................................................................................................... 12 1.1. Introductory Remarks .................................................................................................................... 12 1.1.1. Welcoming Remarks from Michigan State University ................................................ 12 1.1.2. Welcoming Remarks from Fuel Cell Technologies Office ......................................... 12 2. Session I: Domestic Government Perspectives ................................................................................... 14 2.1. Federal Railroad Administration Program R&D Overview ..................................................... 14 2.2. Federal Railroad Administration Locomotive Alternative Fuels and Cryogenic Commodity Transportation Projects and Regulations ....................................................... 14 2.3. California State Perspectives ......................................................................................................... 15 2.4. San Bernardino County Transportation Authority .................................................................... 15 2.5. Panel Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 16 3. Session II: Overview of International Status ........................................................................................ 17 3.1. Hydrogen Rail Status in Germany ................................................................................................ 17 3.2. Hydrogen Rail Status in Canada ................................................................................................... 17 3.3. Hydrogen Rail Status in South Korea .......................................................................................... 18 3.4. Panel Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 18 4. Session III: Industry Perspectives ........................................................................................................... 19 4.1. Operator Perspectives .................................................................................................................... 19 4.1.1. The American Association of Railroads ........................................................................ 19 4.1.2. BNSF Railway .................................................................................................................... 19 4.1.3. Norfolk Southern Railway ............................................................................................... 19 4.1.4. Panel Discussion ................................................................................................................ 20 4.2. Technology Developer Perspectives ............................................................................................ 20 4.2.1. Chart Industries ................................................................................................................. 20 4.2.2. Ballard ................................................................................................................................. 21 4.2.3. Hydrogenics ....................................................................................................................... 21 4.2.4. Stadler US ........................................................................................................................... 21 4.2.5. Alstom ................................................................................................................................. 22 4.2.6. Panel Discussion ................................................................................................................ 23 5. Session IV: Hydrogen Rail Assessment ................................................................................................. 24 5.1. Hydrogen Rail Development ........................................................................................................ 24 5.2. Total Cost of Ownership for Line Haul, Yard Switchers and Regional Passenger Locomotives ............................................................................................................................. 24 5.3. Hydrogen for Rail Applications ...................................................................................................