| Summary: | This paper presents a techno-economic analysis for three distinct vehicle drivetrains (hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCVs), battery-electric vehicles (BEVs), and diesel vehicles (ICE-D)) across a variety of applications in the medium- and heavy-duty (MD/HD) transportation market. The primary basis for evaluating each drivetrain is vehicle total cost of ownership (TCO). This paper analyzes the primary cost categories that contribute to TCO, capital and operational costs, as well as incentives and subsidies. The study also addresses the external social costs of FCVs and BEVs and provides a risk analysis for each zero-emissions (ZEV) drivetrain.
TCO analyses are developed across a variety of medium- and heavy-duty fleet applications. These fleet applications include Long-Haul Trucking (Class 8), Short-Haul Trucking (Class 8), Parcel Delivery (Class 4), Tipper Dump Trucks (Class 6), Refuse (Garbage) Trucks (Class 6), Forklifts (Class 3), School Buses (Class 6), Transit Buses (Class 7). Certain application segments are modeled under multiple scenarios to account for key operational differences, such as volume vs. weight limited fleet applications, or single vs. multi-shift operational schedules. TCO financial modeling for each drivetrain-application-scenario pairing illuminates which ZEV is a more natural fit within the MD/HD transportation fleet market segment. The results of the study demonstrate that the TCO of FCVs and BEVs are heavily influenced by several factors such as the initial purchase price, the price of hydrogen fuel, the cost of vehicle operator downtime, the vehicle charging rate, and the vehicle rated payload.
This study concludes that FCVs are a natural fit for long- and short-haul trucking applications that operate under weight-limited operations or follow a multi-shift schedule. However, there are current infrastructure limitations for this market. Most notably, hydrogen fuel station corridors do not currently exist in the United States outside of California. This infrastructure limitation illuminates the key challenge to the success of a future hydrogen economy: potential hydrogen economy end-users want the guarantee of significant hydrogen infrastructure developments before committing to hydrogen-powered equipment – but the funding required to support the hydrogen infrastructure upgrades will only be secured once future hydrogen end-users and customers are secured. Therefore, it is recommended that stakeholders and policymakers interested in developing the hydrogen economy and future hydrogen fuel cell markets push for infrastructure development by securing partnerships with fleet owners in the specific application segments where FCVs outperform BEVs from a TCO perspective.
|
|---|