1. A feasibility analysis of hydrogen delivery system using liquid
organic hydrides
Ameya U. Pradhan, Anshu Shukla, Jayshri V. Pande, Shilpi Karmarkar, Rajesh B. Biniwale*
National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Nagpur 440020, India
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 8 June 2010
Received in revised form
17 September 2010
Accepted 19 September 2010
Available online 16 October 2010
Keywords:
Hydrogen storage
Hydrogen delivery
Cycloalkanes
Dehydrogenation
Hydrogen station
Feasibility analysis
a b s t r a c t
The paper discusses the techno-economic feasibility of a hydrogen storage and delivery
systemusing liquidorganichydrides(LOH).Wherein, LOH(particularlycycloalkanes)areused
fortransportingthehydrogenin chemical bonded format ambienttemperature andpressure.
The hydrogen is delivered through a catalytic dehydrogenation process. The aromatics
formed in the process are used for carrying more hydrogen by a subsequent hydrogenation
reaction. Cost economics were performed on a system which produces 10 kg/h of hydrogen
using methylcyclohexane as a carrier. With proprietary catalysts we have demonstrated the
possibility of hydrogen storage of 6.8 wt% and 60 kg/m3
of hydrogen on volume basis. The
energy balance calculation reveals the ratio of energy transported to energy consumed is
about 3.9. Moreover, total carbon footprint calculation for the process of hydrogen delivery
including transportation of LOH is also reported. The process can facilitate a saving of 345
tons/year of carbon dioxide emissions per delivery station by replacing gasoline with
hydrogenfor passenger cars. There is an immense techno-economic potential for the process.
ª 2010 Professor T. Nejat Veziroglu. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Hydrogen is a fascinating energy carrier. It can be produced
from water by electrolysis. Its conversion to heat or power is
simple and clean. When combusted with oxygen, hydrogen
forms water; hence no pollutants are generated. Hydrogen is
being pursued as a future fuel all around the world for auto-
motive applications in internal combustion engines and in
fuel cells [1,2]. Hydrogen-fuelled vehicles will use fuel cells,
which can provide much higher energy conversion efficiency
as compared to internal combustion (IC) engines with zero tail
pipe emissions [1]. Nevertheless, its storage and delivery
(or in-situ production) is still a challenge [3,4]
The four major factors on which conversion of automotive
fossil fuel economy to hydrogen economy will depend
include: bulk production of hydrogen, transportation of
hydrogen from production facility to fuelling station, onboard
storage of hydrogen and utilization of hydrogen for energy
generation [1]. Production of hydrogen from hydrocarbon via
steam reforming or auto-thermal reforming is relatively
developed [5]. Similarly, as evident from the literature, the
developments in the field of fuel cell or IC engines using
hydrogen as fuel have reached a considerable level [2].
Hydrogen being a very flammable gas, its storage and trans-
port involves several safety issues. The major safety issue is
wide span of lower and higher explosion limits for H2
concentration in air. Transporting hydrogen using high pres-
sure (typically 300e500 psi) cylinders for storage is not an
attractive option as it involves high pressure hazards and
potential explosion hazards. Carrying hydrogen in liquefied
form attracts an energy penalty and thus is not viable. These
problems can be overcome if hydrogen is either adsorbed on
materials such as carbon based materials [6], metal hydrides
[7,8], magnesium alloys [9] or boranes [10]. While developing
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ91 712 2249885x410; fax: þ91 712 2249900; Mobile: þ91 9822745768.
E-mail address: rb_biniwale@neeri.res.in (R.B. Biniwale).
Available at www.sciencedirect.com
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/he
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8
0360-3199/$ e see front matter ª 2010 Professor T. Nejat Veziroglu. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.09.054

2. such hydrogen storage materials, capacity of the material in
terms of weight and volume is an important factor to be
considered. With a limited capacity it would result in a weight
penalty and CO2 emissions associated with transportation.
Also the adsorption and desorption kinetics has to be suffi-
ciently fast to provide a continuous H2 supply. Another
important requisite is to transport hydrogen containing media
at close to atmospheric temperature and pressure.
A novel approach for the supply of hydrogen is through
liquid organic hydrides (LOH) using a catalytic reaction pair of
dehydrogenation of cycloalkanes such as methylcyclohexane,
cyclohexane and decalin; and hydrogenation of correspond-
ing aromatics is a useful process for supply of hydrogen to
PEMFC [11e20]. This is one of the most promising methods
to store, transport and supply with in-situ generation of
hydrogen. The advantages of this system are: CO free
hydrogen at fuelling stations, reversible catalytic reactions,
recyclable reactants and products and relatively high
hydrogen contents (6e8 wt%) [19]. Due to high boiling points of
cycloalkanes, the present infrastructure such as oil tankers
and tank lorries can be used for the long-term storage and
long-distance transportation of hydrogen in the form of LOH.
The proposed system of hydrogen storage using liquid organic
hydrides will serve the transportation of hydrogen from
production facility to fuelling stations. Whereas for onboard
storage of hydrogen other methods such as gas cylinders or
systems based on metal hydrides will be useful.
In order to implement the process of hydrogen delivery
using LOH technology, it is important to examine the techno-
economical feasibility of the method. This study targets the
feasibility of the hydrogen transportation and delivery using
LOH as hydrogen carriers and a dehydrogenation reaction as
means of producing hydrogen at fuelling stations. The present
approach particularly focuses on the transportation of
hydrogen from production facility to fuelling stations.
2. Description of process
Hydrogen is produced in refineries and chloroalkali industries.
This hydrogen can be reacted with aromatics to form cyclo-
alkanes. Cycloalkanes can be transported by lorries or pipe-
lines to fuelling station site, and can be stored in storage
tanks. A detailed description of the proposed process is given
in our earlier report [19]. At the fuelling station a subsequent
dehydrogenation reaction supplies hydrogen to fuel cell
vehicles and recycles back the toluene to the hydrogen
production facility. Literature reports high selectivity and
stability for some noble metal and non-noble metal-based
catalysts for the dehydrogenation reaction [11e20]. Hydroge-
nation and dehydrogenation reactions are well established.
However R & D efforts are being devoted towards the devel-
opment of appropriate systems for achieving these reactions
at low temperatures with low energy inputs.
Fig. 1 depicts a system based on methylcyclohexane (MCH)
and toluene for the transportation of hydrogen. The system
boundary for the estimation of techno-economic feasibility
encloses the dehydrogenation setup at the fuelling station.
The MCH is fed to the reactor and exposed to the catalyst
heated at 350
C. MCH on dehydrogenation give toluene and
hydrogen. These products are separated using a condenser.
Hydrogen is passed through a hydrocarbon trap. With subse-
quent compression the clean hydrogen, free from COx, can be
supplied to the fuel cell vehicles. Liquid products thus
obtained are then sent to an extractive distillation unit, which
separates aromatics from unreacted cycloalkanes which are
recycled back to their respective storage. Pure toluene is sent
back to the refinery for hydrogenation or can be directly sold
in the market as a solvent.
3. Results and discussions
Several factors are considered while proposing the above
discussed method for hydrogen transportation from
a hydrogen production facility to fuel station. These include:
Use of various cycloalkanes
Development of an effective catalytic system consisting of
active, selective and stable catalysts
Development of reactors for effectively carrying out the
endothermic dehydrogenation reaction
Easy product purification, particularly to obtain clean
hydrogen
Economic estimations
Carbon footprint of the system
3.1. Cycloalkanes as candidates for hydrogen
transportation
Several cycloalkanes including cyclohexane, methyl-
cyclohexane, tetralin, decalin, cyclohexylbenzene, bicyclo-
hexyl, 1-methyldecalin, etc. may be used as a hydrogen carrier
as liquid organic hydrides. Each mole of cycloalkane has
potential to transport 3e6 moles of hydrogen. This results into
a high hydrogen capacity between 3 and 7.5 wt% [19]. Catalytic
dehydrogenation of these cycloalkanes delivers the hydrogen.
The endothermic energy requirement for these reactions is in
the range of 64e69 kJ/mol of H2. This is much lower than
energy that could be obtained by oxidation of H2 (248 kJ/mol).
Hydrogen storage capacities of cycloalkanes, boiling points,
and endothermic energy required for dehydrogenation are
compared in Table 1. Due to high boiling points of cyclo-
alkanes, the present infrastructure such as oil tankers and
tank lorries can be used for the long-term storage and long-
distance transportation of hydrogen in the form of LOH [19].
Methylcyclohexane was selected for feasibility study as the
dehydrogenation product toluene is relatively safe solvent
as compared to benzene produced during dehydrogenation
of cyclohexane. Further, both the methylcyclohexane and
toluene are liquid at ambient conditions unlike naphthalene
produced by dehydrogenation of decalin. The ready avail-
ability of methylcyclohexane was also an important
consideration.
3.2. Development of catalysts for dehydrogenation of
cycloalkanes
The dehydrogenation of cycloalkanes can be effectively
carried out using the metal catalysts well dispersed on
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8 681

3. a high surface area support [11e20]. The mechanism of
reaction involves adsorption of cycloalkanes on metallic site
with rapid or simultaneous abstraction of the hydrogen
atom via tetrahedral metal atom and formation of a pi-bond.
Thus the products of the reaction include hydrogen and
aromatics. Rapid removal of the hydrogen atom from the
active site and subsequent formation of molecular hydrogen
is an essential step to avoid the reverse reaction on the
catalyst’s surface. Several monometallic and bimetallic
catalysts are proposed for this reaction. A brief review for
the catalysts reported has been covered in our earlier report
[19]. A proprietary catalyst (i.e. NEERI DeH2) developed by
our group exhibits excellent activity in terms of hydrogen
production rates, 958 mmol/gmet/min as compared to the
best reported 744 mmol/Lcat/min for a continuous fixed bed
reactor system using MCH.
Fig. 1 e Schematic diagram for hydrogen delivering plant delivering 10 kg/h using dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane.
Table 1 e Hydrogen storage capacity of various cycloalkanes, their boiling points and endothermic energy requirement for
dehydrogenation.
Storage Media Hydrogen storage capacity Boling point
(
C)
Endothermic dehydrogenation
energy (kJ/mol of H2)
wt% mol/L
Cyclohexane 7.2 27.77 80.7 þ68.8
Methylcyclohexane 6.2 23.29 101 þ68.3
Tetralin 3.0 14.72 207 þ64.2
cis-Decalin 7.3 32.44 193 þ64.0
trans-Decalin 7.3 31.46 185 þ66.7
Cyclohexylbenzene 3.8 17.63 237 þ65.9
Bicyclohexyl 7.3 32.0 227 þ66.6
cis-syn-1-Mehtyldecalin 6.6 29.31 213.2 þ63.9
trans-anti-1-Mehtyldecalin 6.6 28.52 204.9 e
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8682

4. Another important aspect of catalyst design is use of
support for structured catalyst. Besides requiring a high
surface area of the support, its structured nature is also
important. Using Al2O3 or carbon pellets placement of catalyst
in the reactor is difficult, particularly for heating the catalyst,
except in the case of a packed bed reactor. As explained in the
next section, if plate type heaters are used then the contact
between heater and pellets is not continuous and results in
poor heat transfer to the catalyst. Earlier, we have reported the
use of carbon cloth and alumite plates as support for metal
catalysts [18,19]. This structured catalyst is suitable for
placement of catalyst in the reactor.
3.3. Development of reactors for catalytic
dehydrogenation of cycloalkanes
Dehydrogenation of cycloalkanes being an endothermic
reaction demands supply of heat. The catalyst’s surface is
thus required to be at temperatures in the range of 300e400
C.
Since the reactant, i.e. methylcyclohexane, is fed to the
reactor in liquid form the surface temperature of the catalysts
may be lowered by losing energy in vaporizing the reactant
and product. However, in the case of vapor phase reaction,
wherein the cycloalkanes are introduced as vapors, the
contact between reactant and solid catalysts may be poor. In
our work we have used two different types of reactors e
namely a packed column reactor and an advanced spray-
pulsed reactor. The packed column reactor is simple to
operate and particularly useful when the source of heat is
a solar concentrator.
It is reported in the literature including our earlier studies
[16e20] that creation of unsteady state conditions on the
surface of the catalysts helps in improving the activity and
stability of the catalysts for dehydrogenation of cycloalkanes.
Several attempts including superheated film conditions,
spray-pulsed reactors, etc. have been reported for creating
unsteady conditions. We have used a spray-pulsed reactor, as
described in detail elsewhere and briefly herein, to create
alternate wet and dry conditions over the catalyst surface. The
catalyst is kept on a plate type heater and the reactant is
introduced as an atomized spray over the catalysts. A fine
nozzle installed at the top of the reactor is used for creating
the atomized spray and for injecting cycloalkanes at
a controlled injection pulse frequency and pulse width. During
the injection step, reactant reaches the heated catalyst’s
surface in fine droplets and evaporates to form a dense vapor
phase in close vicinity to the catalyst surface. This improves
the catalyst-reactant contact. During the interval between two
injection pulses, i.e. dry step, the product and unreacted
reactant gets removed from the surface of the catalyst. The
alternate wet and dry conditions thus help in keeping the
catalyst’s surface clean and active for longer stability of
the catalyst. Also, the surface of the catalyst can be main-
tained at high temperature favoring the dehydrogenation
reaction. Using several reactors in combination with a time
phase lag between injections would provide the hydrogen on
a continuous basis.
Selection of the reactor is based on the application for
which the hydrogen is required and the method used for
heating the catalyst. In the case where the solar concentrators
are used for heating the catalyst, then tubular packed bed
reactors are useful. Even a microchannel reactor could be
a good option. Whereas when electrical heaters are used,
either reactor can be employed.
The catalysts on a laboratory scale have been evaluated for
their hydrogen evaluation rate at various conditions. The
reaction conditions were optimised for an advanced spray-
pulse injection reactor. The optimum temperature for the
dehydrogenation of cycloalkanes is in the range of 300e350
C.
In our previous study we have reported optimization of the
pulse injection frequency and pulse width for feeding cyclo-
alkanes to the reactor [18,20]. Accordingly for the catalysts
referred in this study for dehydrogenation of methyl-
cyclohexane the best feed conditions obtained were pulse
injection frequency of 0.33 Hz and pulse width of 10 ms.
3.4. Mass and energy balance on the process
The process of delivering hydrogen using LOH is described in
Fig. 1. In order to establish the flow of raw materials, products,
product separation and various process parameters, a detailed
mass and energy balance for the process has been worked out.
The basis for calculations was taken from laboratory data (our
own work) on catalyst performance for generating hydrogen
at 10 kg/h with continuous operation of 100 h. As depicted in
Fig. 1 the mass balance has been carried out for targeted
delivery of 10 kg/h of hydrogen. The delivery pressure is about
1e1.2 bar and the temperature is ambient. In order to main-
tain the flow through the reactor, hydrogen is used as a sweep
gas. Initially an external source of hydrogen may be used to
start the reaction. Once the system is able to generate the
hydrogen, a part of the hydrogen is recycled back as the sweep
gas. The reactor is designed to generate about 12 kg/h of
hydrogen. Out of the total 12 kg/h of hydrogen generated, 10
kg/h is supplied to the vehicles after compression. The
balance of 2 kg/h of hydrogen is recycled back to the reactor,
after compression, at a pressure of 2.5e3 bar. Estimated
requirement of MCH at the conversion efficiency of 90% is 216
kg/h. The products hydrogen and toluene are separated by
using a condenser. The condensable product contains about
22 kg/h of MCH. The separation of MCH and toluene is carried
out in an extractive distillation unit. An evaporative loss of
0.3% from storage of MCH and toluene has been estimated by
considering the maximum ambient temperature of 40
C.
Similarly, other process losses have been estimated as 0.1%
and evaporative losses during transportation is estimated as
0.5%. This amounts to a total loss of MCH of about 0.9%.
The energy requirement for the hydrogen delivery process
consists of energy for carrying out the reaction at 320e350
C,
energy required for pumping MCH to the reactor, energy for
the condenser, energy for extractive distillation, energy
required for compression of hydrogen, and for process
equipment. When the required energy is compared with the
energy that can be evolved by hydrogen combustion, an
energy efficiency factor can be calculated using:
Energy efficiency ¼ Energy generation potential of
hydrogen supplied/Total fossil fuel energy supplied.
Based on the energy balance estimates are given in the
Table 2. The total energy consumption for production of
hydrogen during is 5.10 kW/kg and the energy that can be
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8 683

5. made available by hydrogen is 20.02 kW/kg. This indicates
a favourable energy ratio in terms of energy produced/energy
consumed. The energy efficiency ratios when the compressor
is not considered and when it is considered are 4.36 and 3.92
respectively.
The major energy requirement out of the total energy for
dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane is for the heat of
reaction. This requirement is about 67.12%. Separation of
products and unreacted reactant contributes to 13.7% of the
total energy requirement. This clearly indicates that the scope
of energy reduction is rather marginal as most of the energy
required is for heat of reaction. Energy efficient pumps and
separation units could be designed for reduction in the energy
requirement.
3.5. Financial feasibility analysis of the manufacturing
process
Cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out for hydrogen
delivery using dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane.
Assuming the cost of methylcyclohexane at the rate of 0.97
USD/kg and the selling price for toluene considered about 0.89
USD/kg the cost of hydrogen production at present estimates
would be approximately 5.33 USD/kg delivered at the fuelling
station.
The following assumptions were considered:
10 kg/h of hydrogen production.
300 working days per year.
16 h working per day.
Most importantly the cost of hydrogen delivery will not
increase significantly even if the distance of delivery is increased.
Therefore the hydrogen delivery using LOH is a cost-effective
process having favourable energy efficiencies. The technology,
which is offered, should be based on realistic assessment of cost
and benefit, keeping in view the technical and economic feasi-
bility. Many of the potential benefits of this technology assure
sufficient incentives to the manufacturers to achieve the desired
goals. A key component, therefore, must be the cost-effective
production of Hydrogen to ensure compliance with standards.
The cost of each system component includes the cost of raw
material, manufacturing, assembly and mark-up. Mark-up
refers to the additional cost percentage to account for payment
to workers, overhead expenses and profit. The final resulting
“cost” is thus actually a projected “price” of the hydrogen
generated at the fuelling station. In addition, the projected cost
of hydrogen to the consumer (potentially an FCV motorist) is
provided in this report, with inclusion of taxes. The detailed
financial analysis is done considering the various cost
components involved in the process to arrive at optimum plant
capacity. As the capacity of the plant (amount of hydrogen
produced) increases, the fixed capital and the operating capital
both increase but evidently an increase in fixed capital is not as
proportional as increase in the operating capital. With increase
in the capacity of the plant, the payback period decreases.
From the cost estimations, carried out on different plant
capacities, it has been observed that the capacity of a plant of
10 kg/h is suitable with respect to demand and economic
criteria. A total of 300 working days in a year with 16 h working
per day were considered for the calculation of equipment
capacities. For the above mentioned production schedule
the cost of fixed capital and operating cost requirement
has been estimated and reported subsequently. Tables 3e6
depict the cost involved in plant and machinery, electrical
power requirement, manpower, and annual operation
Table 2 e Energy efficiency estimation.
Sr. No. Description Quantity
A) Calculations for energy Consumption during the process
1. Methylcyclohexane requirement (kg/day) 3465.5
2. Energy requirement for dehydrogenation
a) Heat of reaction @62 kJ/mol (kW) 547.07
b) Energy required for pumps and instrumentation (kW) 8.53
c) Energy required for chillers (kW) 54.4
d) Energy required for illumination and plant accessories (kW) 13.2
Sub Total (a to d) (kW) 623.2
3. Energy required for separation of unconverted methylcyclohexane
and toluene afterreaction (kW)
112
4. Energy required for compression of hydrogen (kW) 80
Grand total of energy consumption (kW) 815.2
In terms of per kg of hydrogen the energy required (kW/kg) 5.10
B) Energy production by hydrogen made available through LOH
5. Total hydrogen produced (kg/day) or 160
In terms of (kmol/h) 4.96
6. Energy that can be released by hydrogen (kJ/mol) 242
7. Gross energy available by hydrogen produced (kW/h) 333.65
8. Total energy available at 60% efficiency of fuel cell stacks (kW/h) 200.19
9. Total energy available in 16 h (kW) 3203
In terms of per kg of hydrogen the energy available (kW/kg) 20.02
10. Ratio of energy generated/energy consumed
a) Without considering the energy requirement for compressor 4.36
b) With considering the compressor energy need 3.92
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8684

6. maintenance cost respectively. The cost of plant and
machinery has been estimated on the basis of prevailing costs
in the local market for fabrication of various equipments. The
details of equipment are given in Table 3 and a schematic of
the process flow sheet without finer details in depicted in
Fig. 1. Based on the local sources the plant and machinery cost
is estimated at 11106 USD. As shown in Table 4 the cost esti-
mate for energy requirement for per day operation for 16 h is
178 USD/day. Table 5 shows manpower calculations using
Indian standards. Production cost is calculated by finding
annual operation and maintenance cost, utilities cost and
manpower costs as shown in Table 6. Total project cost was
calculated as shown in Table 7 as 327000 USD.
According to the break-up of total cost of the plant about
37.36% cost is of plant and machinery. The second major
component of the cost is working capital contributing 18.07%.
The implication of fluctuations in the price of methyl-
cyclohexane may affect the working capital cost. Whereas
technical know-how/engineering fees, cost of plant and
machinery would remain the same for the same capacity of
the plant. However cost reduction in the plant and machinery,
preoperative and contingencies cost may be attempted to
reduce the total cost of the project.
Out of the total working capital the major cost is due to raw
materials (69.5%) and utilities (22.6%). The cost of raw mate-
rials was considered as the cost of methylcyclohexane and the
basic cost of hydrogen for a year. The cost of hydrogen if to
be purchased from hydrogen production facility would be
approximately 1.5 USD/kg. This assumption is based on the
projected cost of the hydrogen from coal gasification or
hydrocarbon reforming as available in the open literature.
The pricing of hydrogen as projected by different reports in
the literature ranges between 2 and 5 USD/kg (untaxed). The
cost of CO2 sequestration in case of hydrogen production from
steam reforming would generally offset the price of hydrogen.
Based on the estimated cost of production of hydrogen at
fuelling station using dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane
(including re-hydrogenation of toluene for subsequent cycles)
a comparison has been carried out for pricing of hydrogen.
The sales price of hydrogen (including taxes) to the customer
was varied from 7 to 7.75 USD/kg. Effect of this variation on
cumulative cash accruals is depicted in Fig. 2. In order to
obtain a reasonable payback period, price of hydrogen was
selected as 7.45 USD/kg. Cost benefit analysis as seen in
Table 8 indicates that hydrogen if sold at 7.45 USD/kg, results
in an annual profit of 58770 USD (after tax). The effective
payback period was calculated based on the assumption that
Table 3 e Plant and machinery taking 1 USD [ 47 Rs.
Equipment Required
No.
Cost
(Thousand USD)
Reactor 2 22.55
Storage tanks 3 17.23
Resistance temperature
Detector (RTD)
6 6.38
Pressure gauge 4 1.70
Level transmitter 4 0.85
Flow meters 6 1.28
Control valves 2 3.83
Frequency controller 1 2.13
Safety interlocking 2 2.13
Gas chromatograph 1 13.83
Extractive distillation columns
(For MCH toluene separation) 2 12.77
Distillation column 1 4.26
Air compressor 1 0.43
Water pump and Storage 1 0.96
Fuel pumps 10 0.74
Chiller 1 6.38
Condenser (heat exchanger) 2 12.77
Phase separating vessel 2 0.85
Total 111.06
Table 4 e Electric power requirement cost of electricity
(per unit i.e. kW-h) [ 0.149 USD/kW-h (Indian standards).
Plant Operation No. of Units Power
(kW-h/day)
Energy for dehydrogenation 1 Heater 8 Pumps 502.50
Energy for hydrogenation 1 Heater feed pumps 500
Energy for lighting and
illumination
Lump Sum 13.2
Chiller and instrumentation 1 54.72
Extractive distillation 3 80
Distillation of hydrogenation
products
1 48
Total (kW-h/day) 1198.42
Power Cost (USD/day) 178.49
Table 5 e Manpower requirement.
Category No. of
People
Total Salary
USD/Month
Supervisor 1 255.32
Operators (skilled) 2 340.43
Cleaners (unskilled) 2 212.77
Total 5 808.51
Annual man power cost (Thousand USD) 9.70
# Man Power calculation is based on Indian Standards. It might
differ from country to country.
Table 6 e Annual operation maintenance and cost of
hydrogen production.
Item Cost (in
Thousand USD)
Raw Material/Chemicals. 164.51
Cost on Utilities. 53.55
Annual Manpower cost 9.70
Annual cost of Repairs. 5.55
Depreciation on PM @ 10% 11.11
Depreciation on LB @ 5% 1.06
Interest on capital
(@ 25% of total capital) @ 12%
10.44
Total annual expenditure for 48,000 kg
hydrogen production.
255.92
Therefore the cost of hydrogen production is 5.33 USD/kg
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8 685

7. the fuelling station will operate at 50, 70, 95 and 100% capacity
for the first, second, third and fourth year respectively. From
the fourth year of operation 100% capacity utilization is
expected. The cash inflow estimates shown in Table 9 results
in a payback period of 6.41 years.
4. Comparison with hydrogen carrying
pipelines
When the LOH based system is compared with a pipeline
transport system for hydrogen, it can be seen that pipeline
installation requires huge investments per km of pipeline.
According to estimates provided by NREL, DOE, USA [21] and
ANL, USA [22] the hydrogen pipeline cost may be of the order
of 400000 USD per mile. This cost may be higher for the
pipeline with diameter more than 3 inches (0.075 m). Although
it is argued in the literature that the variation in pressure
simply can vary the hydrogen storage/delivery capacity of
pipeline, compression of hydrogen is an energy intensive
operation. Whereas calculations show LOH based systems
with 10 kg/h hydrogen delivery had an overall installation cost
of approximately 327000 USD (as shown in Table 7). This
includes all preoperative as well as three months operative
costs. Unlike in the case of pipelines, the costs of trans-
portation do not vary largely depending on the distance if LOH
approach is used. Use of pipelines has limitations when the
distance of transport is high. For an example, in this case
wherein the hydrogen transportation upto 300 km is consid-
ered the approximate cost of hydrogen pipelines could be of
the order of 800 million USD. Moreover due to high flamma-
bility of hydrogen, transportation of using pipelines is risky
as well.
5. Reduction in total carbon footprint
emission
Estimation of total carbon footprints is an increasingly
important evaluation tool for decision making. Especially
applied during the planning phase, it can pinpoint process
steps with a high environmental impact and thus, provide
guidance towards optimising the actual technology imple-
mentation. One of the main goals of this study was the
assessment of the environmental impact of hydrogen fuel
transported in the form of liquid organic hydrides.
Table 7 e Total project cost.
Item Costs
(Thousand USD)
Land (on existing fuel pumps) Nil
Site development 21.28
Building and civil work 5.32
Plant and machinery:
Indigenous 111.06
Imported Nil
Erection/Commissioning (10% of P M) 11.10
Technical know how and engineering fee 53.19
Misc. Assets:
Electrical Fittings 2.17
Deposits 6.38
Fire fighting/Others 4.22
Preliminary and preoperative 21.28
Contingency provision 31.91
Margin money for working capital
(3 Months OM)
59.09
Total cost of Project 327
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 2 4 6 8 10
Number of years
Cummulativecashaccrual(1000USD)
7.0 USD/kg
7.25 USD/kg
7.45 USD/kg
Project Cost
7.75 USD/kg
Fig. 2 e Variation in cumulative cash accruals for varying
sales price of hydrogen.
Table 8 e Cost benefit analysis.
Item Cost USD/kg
Sales price of hydrogen (USD/kg) 7.45
Basic cost of production 5.33
Royalty on sales price @ 1% 0.07
Local tax, octroi @ 5% 0.27
Sales overhead 0.03
Total cost of manufacturing 5.70
Profit per kg of hydrogen 1.75
Annual profit before tax (Thousand USD) 83.96
Annual profit after tax @ 30%(Thousand USD) 58.77
Table 9 e Pay back period Total project cost [ 327
Thousand USD.
Year Percentage
production
capacity
utilization
Net Cash
Inflow
(Thousand USD)
Cumulative
Cash Inflow
(Thousand USD)
1 50 29.38 29.38
2 70 41.14 70.52
3 95 55.83 126.36
4 100 58.77 185.13
5 100 58.77 243.90
6 100 58.77 302.68
7 100 58.77 361.45
8 100 58.77 420.23
Payback period ¼ 6.41 years.
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8686

8. The function of the product, i.e. hydrogen, is to serve as
fuel for motor vehicles. This produces water when used as fuel
in an FCV that lead to zero tail gas emissions. The total CO2
emissions calculated for LOH system include the CO2 emis-
sions attributed to the energy requirement for dehydrogena-
tion and emissions from transportation of LOH using tank
lorries. Furthermore, if the distance travelled by the FCV is
compared to that of a gasoline powered vehicle, the total
carbon footprint reduction is remarkably high for LOH based
hydrogen transport and delivery system. As detailed in Table
10, for the basis for estimation of CO2 emissions avoided
a distance of 300 km for hydrogen transportation is consid-
ered. The CO2 emissions due to transportation of LOH and
dehydrogenation reaction at a fuelling station have been
estimated about 17,400 and 503,300 kg/year. This amounts to
total carbon foot print of 520 tons/year. A gallon of gasoline
equivalent (gge) of hydrogen is about 1 kg. A fuel cell driven
passenger car would cover about 74 km per kg of hydrogen. It
is considered that a gasoline driven car gives mileage of 15
km/l of gasoline. Using a proper emission factor for CO2
emissions from gasoline driven cars, for a total car-kms
travelled of 350,000 km/year the carbon foot print would be
866 tons/year. Considering that a fuelling station with 10 kg/h
of hydrogen delivery capacity would serve to fuel cells vehi-
cles there by avoiding use of gasoline, the carbon foot print
reduction of 345 tons/year can be achieved. This amounts to
a 40% reduction in CO2 emissions as compared to normal
gasoline driven vehicles by enabling the use of fuel cell vehi-
cles through supply of hydrogen using LOH system.
6. Conclusions
Several advantages associated with liquid organic hydrides
(LOH) for storage and supply of hydrogen include relatively
high hydrogen storage capacity, carrying hydrogen in chemi-
cally bonded form at near ambient conditions, easy delivery of
hydrogen, and purity of hydrogen for applications in fuel cell
vehicles. In view of LOH as a potential hydrogen delivery
option, the economic analysis carried out reveals a high
feasibility. The near future cost of hydrogen for a plant of
capacity of 10 kg/h has been estimated as 7.47 USD/kg
including all expenses and taxes. Although the analysis is
carried out in an Indian context, it nevertheless is useful for
estimating the potential for other countries. Further, estima-
tions of carbon footprint exhibit the possibility of a large
saving on carbon emissions by facilitating hydrogen supply
using this option. In view of the excellent activity of our
proprietary catalyst the option is highly feasible.
Acknowledgements
Financial support received from Ministry of New and Renew-
able Energy, New Delhi is acknowledged. The authors Ms.
Anshu Shukla and Ms. Jayshri Pande would like to acknowl-
edge CSIR for their Senior Research fellowships.
r e f e r e n c e s
[1] Satyapal S, Petrovic J, Read C, Thomas G, Ordaz G. The U.S.
Department of Energy’s National Hydrogen Storage Project:
progress towards meeting hydrogen-powered vehicle
requirements. Catal Today 2007;120:246e56.
[2] Chalk SG, Miller JF. Key challenges and recent progress in
batteries, fuel cells, and hydrogen storage for clean energy
systems. J Power Sources 2006;159:73e80.
[3] Schlapbach L, Zuttel A. Hydrogen-storage materials for
mobile applications. Nature 2001;414:353e8.
[4] Ananthachar V, Duffy JJ. Efficiencies of hydrogen storage
systems onboard fuel cell vehicles. Sol Energ 2005;78:687e94.
[5] Biniwale RB, Kariya N, Ichikawa M. Production of hydrogen-
rich gas via reforming of iso-octane over NieMn and RheCe
bimetallic catalysts using spray pulsed reactor. Catal Lett
2005;100:17e25.
[6] Hirscher M, Becher M, Hauska M, Quintel A, Skakalova V,
Choi YM, et al. Hydrogen storage in carbon nanostructures.
J Alloys Compd 2002;330e2:654e8.
[7] Latroche M. Structural and thermodynamic properties of
metallic hydrides used for energy storage. J Phys Chem Solids
2004;65:517e22.
Table 10 e Annual savings in Carbon footprint assuming total distance of travel for transport once [ 300 km, mileage of
a fuel cell car [ 73.6 miles/kg of hydrogen and gasoline car mileage [ 15 km/l.
Sr. No. Description Value
A Dehydrogenation and hydrogenation processes
1 Number of electrical units consumed (kW/day) 1198
2 Units per year (kW/Year) 359,526
3 Amount of CO2 emitted in the process of dehydrogenation and hydrogenation (kg/year) 503,336
B Transportation of LOH
4 Average distance travelled (km/year) 25,800
5 Mileage (km/l) for a tanker carrying LOH 4
6 Total diesel consumed (l/year) 6450
7 Amount of CO2 emitted in the transport (kg/year) 17,415
C So Total Carbon footprint of the process (kg/year) [ (3) D (7) 520,751
8 Hydrogen produced in one year (kg/year) 48,000
9 Distance that could be travelled by fuel cell vehicle (mile/year) 353,280
10 CO2 being evolved by normal Gasoline vehicle to travel the same distance (kg/year) 866,713
D CO2 that can be saved (kg/year) 345,962
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8 687

9. [8] Muthukumar P, Prakash Maiya M, Srinivasa Murthy MS.
Experiments on a metal hydride-based hydrogen storage
device. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2005;30:1569e89.
[9] Vijay R, Sunderesan R, Maiya MP, Murthy SS. Comparative
evaluation of MgeNi hydrogen absorbing materials
prepared by mechanical alloying. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2005;30:501e8.
[10] Fakioglu E, Yurum Y, Veziroglu TN. A review of hydrogen
storage systems based on boron and its compounds. Int
J Hydrogen Energy 2004;29:1371e6.
[11] Taube P, Taube MA. Liquid organic carrier of H2 as a fuel for
automobiles. Adv Hydrogen Energy 1981;2:1077e82.
[12] Ali JK, Newson J, Rippin DWT. Exceeding equilibrium
conversion with a catalytic membrane reactor for the
dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane. Chem Eng Sci 1994;
13:2129e34.
[13] Kariya N, Fukuoka A, Ichikawa M. Efficient evolution of
hydrogen from liquid cycloalkanes over Pt-containing
catalysts supported on active carbons under wetedry
multiphase conditions. Appl Catal A Gen 2002;233:91e102.
[14] Hodoshima S, Arai H, Saito Y. Liquid film type catalytic
decalin dehydrogenation-aromatization for long-term
storage and long distance transportation of hydrogen. Int
J Hydrogen Energy 2003;28:197e204.
[15] Hodoshima S, Arai H, Takaiwa S, Saito Y. Catalytic decalin
dehydrogenation/naphthalene hydrogenation pair as
a hydrogen source for fuel-cell vehicle. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2003;28:1255e62.
[16] Kariya N, Fukuoka A, Utagawa T, Sakuramoto M, Goto Y,
Ichikawa M. Efficient hydrogen production using
cyclohexane and decalin by pulse spray mode reactor with Pt
catalysts. Appl Catal A Gen 2003;247:247e59.
[17] Hodoshima S, Nagata H, Saito Y. Efficient hydrogen supply
from tetralin with superheated liquid-film-type catalysis for
operating fuel cells. Appl Catal A Gen 2005;292:90e6.
[18] Biniwale RB, Kariya N, Ichikawa M. Dehydrogenation of
cyclohexane over Ni based catalysts supported on activated
carbonusingspray-pulsedreactorandenhancementinactivity
by addition of a small amount of Pt. Catal Lett 2005;105:83e7.
[19] Biniwale RB, Rayalu S, Devotta S, Ichikawa M. Chemical
hydrides: a solution to high capacity hydrogen storage and
supply. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007;33:360e5.
[20] Shukla AA, Gosavi PV, Pande JV, Kumar VP, Chary KVR,
Biniwale RB. Efficient hydrogen supply through catalytic
dehydrogenation of methylcyclohexane over Pt/metal oxide
catalysts. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010;35:4020e6.
[21] Melendez M, Milbrandt A. Hydrogen infrastructure transition
analysis, A report by National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
USA, NREL/TP-540e38351 January 2006.
[22] Mintz M, Folga S, Molburg J, Gillette J. Argonne National
Laboratory Transportation Technology RD Centre,
Transport research board, January 16, 2002.
i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 3 6 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 6 8 0 e6 8 8688