H2 - The Energy - Storage - For - Tomorrow - Minor Project Report

Minor Project
H2 the energy storage for tomorrow & the

solution to the overloaded regional
electrical networks
(Deboutte, 2021)
Arnhem, version 2020

Master Engineering Systems
template minor project report i

FRONTMATTER
Project title:
H2 the energy storage for tomorrow & the solution to the overloaded regional electrical networks
Name/number of the group:
Name of students: Humayon Nauzadi & Stefan Bruins
Company: HAN
HAN Supervisor: Ballard Asare-Bediako
Date: < June, 2021 >
No part of this publication may be reproduced and/or made public, whether mechanically or electronically in print, or by
photocopy, microfilm, automated system or any other means what so ever, without prior written permission being obtained.
To this end, an application can be made to the director of the HAN program.
An exception to this rule applies to students solely, who are allowed to use this document to create their own Minor Project
report.
ii template minor project report

SUMMARY
Increasingly number of solar parks and solar panels on the roofs of the buildings contribute to the
congestion of the local electricity grids. As a consequence, the solar parks are disconnected from the
local and medium electricity networks as a protection mechanism of the grids. Which in its turn
results in significant reduction in profit for the solar park?
By adding a hydrogen production and storage plant next to the solar park the congestion problems of
the grids can be avoided and results in additional profit for the solar park operators and by using
hydrogen as an energy storage system it can have a positive contribution to balance the energy
market.
In this project two different solar parks (8 [MW] & 16 [MW]) located in the northern part of the
Netherlands are considered. After doing a literature study on that topic and figuring out the
maximum capacity of the electricity grids through which the solar parks are connected to the
network two different strategies are analysed. In the first one the objective is to maximize the grid
power and only use excess power to generate H2. In the second strategy the objective is to maximize
capacity of electrolyzer to generate H2 and deliver only the electrical power which cannot be used by
the electrolyzer to the grid.
Hereafter three different options for the production of H2 are considered. Production and local
storage of H2 to balance the energy market (option A), Production and storage of the H2 in the future
hydrogen grids operated by the Gasunie (option B) and Production and local storage of H2 to power
the FCEVs. First an analysis is carried out in other to find out whether the adventure with H2
production and storage is feasible for a solar park and determination the desirable size of the
electrolyzer and storage capacity. Based on the analysis described above the optimal size of the
components are determined. Capacity of electrolyzer 10 [MW], 20 [MWh] storage capacity and 10
[MW] fuel cell and the capacity of the cable is defined to be 5,44 [MW].
After the feasibility analysis an energy management system based on linear optimalisation technics is
used in order to optimize the profit of the solar park. The energy management system reacts on the
fluctuations of the electricity prices in the market and makes choices, whether to produce hydrogen,
store it locally, deliver it to the hydrogen grids or convert it back to electricity. Four scenarios based
on different electricity prices are analysed and the results are presented.
template minor project report iii

CONTENTS
Frontmatter ................................................................................................................................... ii
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem definition........................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Project Objectives ........................................................................................................... 2
1.4 Approach ....................................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Outline of the minor project report .................................................................................. 3
2 Literature survey .................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Regional grids ................................................................................................................ 4
2.2 Production profile of a solar park ..................................................................................... 6
2.3 Load profile .................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 Imbalance market........................................................................................................... 8
2.5 Electrolyzers ................................................................................................................... 9
2.6 Hydrogen storage ..........................................................................................................11
2.6.1 Pipeline storage .........................................................................................................13
3 Methods ................................................................................................................................14
3.1 Tooling .........................................................................................................................14
3.2 Description of research design ........................................................................................14
3.2.1 Scenarios A, B and C ..................................................................................................14
3.2.2 Feasibility analysis ......................................................................................................15
3.2 Sensitivity analysis .........................................................................................................16
3.3 Optimalization technique ................................................................................................17
4 Results ..................................................................................................................................19
4.1 8 MW solar park ............................................................................................................19
4.1.1 Maximal grid power....................................................................................................20
4.1.2 Maximum electrolyzer usage .......................................................................................23
4.2 16 MW solar park ..........................................................................................................25
4.2.1 Maximal grid power....................................................................................................26
4.2.2 Maximum electrolyzer usage .......................................................................................29
4.3 Comparison ...................................................................................................................30
4.4 Results of feasibility analysis ..........................................................................................32
4.5 Size of the equipment ....................................................................................................35
4.6 Energy management ......................................................................................................36
4.7 Optimization scenarios ...................................................................................................37
4.7.1 Scenario #1 ...............................................................................................................38
4.7.2 Scenario #2 ...............................................................................................................39
4.7.3 Scenario #3 ...............................................................................................................40
4.7.4 Scenario #4 ...............................................................................................................41
4.7.5 Scenario #5 ...............................................................................................................42
4.7.6 Summary ...................................................................................................................43
5 Discussion .............................................................................................................................45
iv template minor project report

6 Conclusions (and recommendations) .......................................................................................46
References ...................................................................................................................................47
Appendix A Nomenclature ........................................................................................................49
Appendix B 4 day part source code ...........................................................................................50
Appendix C full source code ......................................................................................................55
template minor project report v

1 INTRODUCTION
Global warming and climate change are one of the biggest challenges human beings are facing the
coming century and it is obvious and observable to all of us. New records on hot summer
temperatures, longer dry periods, forest fires, mild winters, acidification of the oceans etc. are
witnessed every single year and the list of those events is endless. All this can be traced back to
continuous increasing amount of greenhouse gasses released to the atmosphere by human activities
on earth each year. In order to limit the impact of global warming and climate change on humans
and other species living on this planet, a major agreement on climate change has been signed by the
representatives of 196 nations in Paris, France. (Encyclopedia, 2021) in 2015. The goal of the
agreement is to keep the average global temperature increase below 2.0 degrees Celsius measured
from the preindustrial period. (Encyclopedia, 2021). In order to head towards this joint goal all
industries have to anticipate in this large project specially the energy sector since it is responsible for
25% of the global CO2 emissions. (Agency, 2010). In order to meet the targets agreed in Paris the
Dutch government decided to reduce winning of the natural gas in the northern provinces of the
Netherlands. The local municipalities in the affected areas are installing increasing numbers of solar
parks in order to bring the energy transition in the Netherlands to the next level.
1.1 Background
As we all know the energy harvest from a solar park is very dynamic on daily, monthly and yearly
basis. In the summer the days are much longer and brighter than in the winter months, so the energy
harvest is much more than in the winter when the days are shorter, and the sun is much lower in the
sky. Even within a single day the energy production of a solar park around the noon is much higher
compared to the morning and somewhere close to the evening of the same day. This dynamic
character of the solar energy or radiation results in mismatch between energy demand and supply.
As side effect this results in overloading of the local and regional electricity network. In order to
protect the network from overloading and hazards the local grid operators disconnect the solar
farms contributing to this event from the network. Which in its turn result in energy and capital
losses for the solar farmers and contribute to the losses for the environment. Since this green energy
could be used somewhere else in the industry.
1.2 Problem definition

As described in previous paragraph the characteristic profile of the electricity production of a solar
farm results in overloading of the local and regional electricity network, mismatch between the
demand and supply of the electricity and disconnection of the solar farms from the network resulting
in losses for the soler farmers and the environment. Since this lost green energy, which is mostly
probable produced during the summer months when the days are longer and the energy demand is
lower than during the winter months, can be preserved in the form of hydrogen and should be used
in the winter months or during the time the demand in energy is higher than the supply. Figure 1
shows a typical harvest profile of a solar farm during a year, installed near Hogeveen. As can be seen
in the winter months much less electricity is generated compared to the summer months whereas
template minor project report 1

energy demand during the winter is much higher compared to the summer period due to the heating
of the buildings and houses. Since more and more solar farms are going to be installed in the coming
years this problem will get bigger and bigger for the grid operators as well as for the solar farmers
and it will eventually affect the real customer who is the end user of this electricity . Figure 2 shows a
typical harvest profile of a solar farm installed in the south of Italy on a daily basis for a typical winter
day. Although in this project we are interested in a solar farm located in the north-part of the
Netherlands the shape of the graph will remain the same only the amplitude of the graph will be
different due to differences in the geographical position of the two countries. As can be seen the
harvest is at highest at midday and is zero for the period the sun is not shining, whereas the
consumer requires more even supply of that energy. Think of an household which needs electric
supply for its heat pump in order to heat up the house during a cold night, or warm water supply in
the mornings to get a shower and have electricity to cook the dinner when the sun is not shining
anymore. This are only a couple of examples of those extremes between supply and demand of
electrical energy generated in a solar farm.
Figure 1. Typical harvest from a solar farm near Hogeveen (Commission, 2019)
Figure 2. Typical harvest from a solar farm on a daily basis
1.3 Project Objectives

As described in previous paragraph the solar pharms are disconnected from the grids for most of the
time. In order to reduce energy loses due to disconnection of the solar farms, reduce the overloading
of the local electrical network and equalize demand and supply of the energy caused by the nature
2 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

how solar panels generate electricity the objectives of this project are translated in a main research
question.
How to maximize the profit of a solar farm by using hydrogen as a storage element?
In order to answer the main research question it is divided in couple of sub questions as described
below.
• What is the current capacity of the local and regional grids in the affected area?
• How much electricity is generated by a typical solar park in the norther provinces of the
Netherlands?
• What is the gap between energy supply and demand and in which period of time?
• How much energy needs to be stored?
• How to reduce energy losses due to disconnection of the solar farms?
• How to maximize the connection time of the solar farms to the local grids?
• How to reduce the overloading of the affected grids?
• How to reduce the gap between energy supply and demand by using hydrogen as a storage?
1.4 Approach
Based on literature research on energy yield of the Photo voltaic installations in the Netherlands,
load profile of the specific area where the installation is located, the available infrastructure for the
transportation of the electric power by means of distribution network a computer based model is
generated in order to investigate the impact and implication of the photo voltaic installation and its
size on the local and distribution networks. Hereafter the maximum amount of power delivery to the
distribution network is analyzed. Furthermore the required volume and type of the electrolyzer is
analyzed in order to secure the storage of the electrical energy, not delivered to the grids, in the
form of hydrogen.
1.5 Outline of the minor project report

In order to answer the main research question first a literature study is carried out which is
summarized in chapter 2. The used methods, assumptions and hypotheses in this research are
summarized in chapter 3. The results of the carried investigation is summarized in chapter 4. Those
results are discussed in chapter 5 and this research is closed with a short conclusion and
recommendation which is found in chapter 6.

2 LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1 Regional grids

According to Enexis (Enexis, Gebieden met schaarste voor teruglevering op het energienet, 2021) the
possibilities for delivering solar energy to the regional grid is quite limited. Figure 3 shows the level of
transmission capabilities of the regional grid.
Figure 3 Scarceness level Northern Netherlands (Enexis, Gebieden met schaarste voor teruglevering op
het energienet, 2021)

The red areas are already congested while the yellow areas only have limited transmission capability.
Only the white areas have sufficient transmission capability. As a result, the capacity for solar parks is
limited.
For the red and yellow areas it is an option to use congestion management (Enexis,
Congestiemanagement: onderzoek en uitkomst, 2021). Congestion management is a mechanism
where demand and supply (by usage of a financial reward) are balanced. The owner of a solar park
can determine at which price they are willing not producing energy.
Congestion due to solar parks can be caused by two effects:
- The cables and other equipments are not capable (due to the rating) of handling the required
power
- Due to the length of the cable power quality problems related to the voltage rise occur
Figure 4 shown an example single line diagram. The amount of current a cable can carry is dependent
on various aspects where the cross section is the most important property. Congestion can occur
when the power delivered by the solar panels results in a current which is higher than the cable can
carry.
Figure 4 Example single line diagram
Another aspect is shown in Figure 5. Due to the resistance of the cable a certain voltage drop occurs.
This voltage drop is dependent on the direction of the current. This means that when the solar panels
are delivering and there is no load, the voltage at the solar panels/load is higher than the voltage at
the transformer. And when there is a load and no solar power, the voltage at the solar panels/load is
lower than the voltage at the transformer.
In the past, when there were no solar panels, the problem of the voltage drop was resolved by
increasing the voltage at the secondary output of the transformer. With solar panels however, as
shown in Figure 5 this will result in an overvoltage which can be above the voltage as determined in
the grid code (230 volt ±10%).

Figure 5 Example overvoltage/undervoltage problem
2.2 Production profile of a solar park

The production profile of a solar park is primary dependent on the solar radation. This is dependent
on the weather conditions and the date. The weather conditions (sunny, cloudy, partly cloudy) have a
large impact on the solar radiation as shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6 Example of solar radiation at three different days in March 2015: cloudy day on 14th, partly cloudy day
on 15th and sunny day on 17th (Opálková, 2018)

The length of a day obviously is a second aspect which determines the production of a solar park.
Figure 7 shows the length of day, sunset and sunrise in the Netherlands.
Figure 7 Average length of day, sunrise and sunset (Infonu, n.d.)
According to Tennet the solar park can get approximately 0,1 [€/kWh] delivered to the grid. As Figure
8 shows it is 42% of the total price a client is paying for electricity.
Figure 8. Electricity price beakdown. (TenneT, 2021)
2.3 Load profile

The average load profile (Klaassen, 2015) for a household in the Netherlands is shown in Figure 9. It
can be seen from this figure that the load peaks in the evening, especially in the winter periods (when
unfortunately the solar radiation is low).

Figure 9 Standard load profile for an average household in the Netherlands
2.4 Imbalance market

One of the biggest challenges is the difference in load profile of a household (Figure 9) in comparison
with the solar radiation during a day (Figure 6) which is part of the congestion problem. The
congestion problem is limited when electricity production was consumed locally. From a financial point
of view this results in big price variation in the energy imbalance market (high prices when energy is
scarce and vice versa). The energy imbalance market is market where at an interval of 5 minutes
imbalances between production and consumption are settled. A rather extreme example of this price
variation is shown in Figure 10 where the price for electricity has changed from - €490/MWh to +
€640/MWh in 1.5 hours.
Figure 10 Imbalance prices in Belgium at 24/05/2021

It is to be expected that caused by high penetration of supply driven alternative energy sources such
as wind and solar, the price fluctuations will increase. To be able to participate in this market (Tennet,
2018) a minimum of 1MW of power should be delivered during 5 minutes. There are however at this
moment developments that smaller parties (with the use of blockchain technology) can participate in
this market, an example is RepubliQ bij Vandebron (community, 2018).
It is interesting to investigate the viability of the use of the energy storage in this project during these
price fluctuations in the imbalance market.
2.5 Electrolyzers
In order to find out a suitable electrolyzer for the solar park characteristics of different type of
mentioned devices are investigated and compared to each other. The first electrolyzer investigated is
the PEM (Proton Exchange Membrane). Thanks to the solid membrane it separates the produced
gases in this case hydrogen and oxygen and functions as an insulation between the electrodes. beside
that it has a good partial load performance, a high current density, fast response time and allows high
pressures resulting in low ohmic losses. This kind of electrolyzer is suitable to be used beside a soler
park which has a very dynamic energy harvest. (Wikipedia, Polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis,
2021). The downside of the PEM electrolyzer is that it is expensive due to the use of materials like
gold, iridium, platinum and titanium in different parts of the device. Beside that it has a fast
degradation rate due to the number of starts and stops of the electrolyzer.
The second electrolyzer considered for this purpose is the Alkaline, which has a cheaper catalysts
compared to PEM and therefor a relatively low cost, higher durability due to exchabgeable electrolyte.
De disadvantage of the alkaline electrolysis is its low current density, low degree of purity due to
crossover of the gases and low operational pressure. (Vuksic, 2014).
The third investigated electrolyzer is the AEM (anion exchange membrane), which combines the
advantages of the PEM and Alkaline whereas keeping the costs relatively low, since no noble materials
are required in this electrolyzer. It uses a semipermeable membrane designed to conduct anions
instead of protons as it is the case in PEM. The AEM electrolyzer works in an alkaline environment
where less expensive non platinum group metals catalysts have high stability that results in no need
for expensive noble materials. For example, a much cheaper stainless steel replaces titanium in the
bipolar plates. Beside that lower degree of water purity maybe used within the AEM electrolyzers and
due to good separation of hydrogen and oxygen a safe operation of the electrolyzer is achieved.
Furthermore, the produced hydrogen is directly pressurized at 35 bar and can be stored. Finally, a
high purity hydrogen production of (99,9%) is achievable thanks to the dryer integrated in the
system. (Enapter, 2020).
After comparing the tree different type of electrolysers the AEM, in this case the Model T, is
considered to be the logic choice for this project. One single module can produce 12 [Nm3] of H2 with
a mass of 1.08 [kg] in 24 hours. The individual modules can be stacked in order to increase
production up 10 [Nm3/h]. According to (Enapter, 2020) when the produced hydrogen is properly
stored there are no losses related to storage of the gas. Figure 11 shows hydrogen productivity of a
single module and the corresponding power consumption. According to the graph the lowest
production rate of a module is 60% (300 [NL/h]), this specific rate is chosen in order to increase the
devices safety. As can be seen the energy consumption is increasing nearly linearly by increasing the
hydrogen production. The energy content of 1 normal cube meter [Nm3] of H2 is 3 [KWh] (Enapter,
2020).

Figure 11. Power consumption of a AEM electrolyser module. (Enapter, 2020)
Table 1 shows an overview of the capital expenses for a single electrolyzer Model T and EL2.1 as can
be seen the model T which will enter the market in 2023 is much cheaper than the existing model EL
2.1 and has a longer lifetime reducing the price of produced hydrogen furthermore.
Table 1. Capital expenses for a single electrolyzer Model T and EL2.1 (Chrometzka, 2020)
Table 2 shows an overview of the operational expenses for a single electrolyzer Model T and EL2.1. As
can be seen the operational costs of the two electrolyzers are nearly the same.
Table 2. Operating expenses for running a single electrolyser Model T and EL2.1 (Chrometzka, 2020)
Figure 12 shows the total costs per [kg] produced hydrogen based on three different scenarios of the
electricity prices. As can be seen the electrolyzer capital expenses, costs for water and maintenance
are fixed, the only variable expenses are the electricity costs which can drop to zero when there is a
overproduction of the green electricity. Pushing the total costs of the green hydrogen further down to
1.75 [€/kg] (Chrometzka, 2020).

Figure 12. Costs of hydrogen based on variating electricity prices (Chrometzka, 2020).
According to (Duurzaammbo, 2021) the current price of green hydrogen in the market is about 10
[€/kg] and can be used to power hydrogen cars, busses, trucks and ships but also for heating
purposes and the heavy industry like steel production.
2.6 Hydrogen storage

Hydrogen can be stored physically in three different forms namely compressed gas, cooled-
compressed and as liquid. Storage in liquid form requires very low temperatures below 20,35 [K] since
this is the boiling point of hydrogen. Storage of hydrogen as a gas requires high pressures between
35 and 70 [MPa] (energy, 2021). As shown in Figure 13 hydrogen has almost three times the energy
content of gasoline based on mass, on a volume basis, however, it has only one forth of the energy
content of gasoline. The hydrogen used in electric vehicles based on fuel cells therefor has to be
compressed in gas form up to 70[MPa] in order to increase the density and decrease the volume of
the gas per [kg]. (energy, 2021). Compression of hydrogen is very costly and requires additional
energy.
Figure 13. Comparison of specific energy per mass and per volume.

Figure 14 shows the cost for a 700 [bar] storage system and the target cost of the system in the
future as can be seen the storage of 1 kwh costs 14,19 [$].
Figure 14. Potential cost for 700 bar storage system. (James, 2020)
Beside the investments cost of a system there are operational costs as well related to the storage
system. Figure 15 shows the cost breakdown for hydrogen compression, storage, cooling and
dispenser per [kg]. As can be seen compression of hydrogen is the most expensive part. Adding all
together the compression, storage and dispensing costs will be 2,40 [$/kg].
Figure 15. Cost breakdown for hydrogen compression, storage, cooling and dispenser per [kg] (Parks, 2014)

2.6.1 Pipeline storage
Potentially a natural gas network can be used for the storage of hydrogen since the Dutch
government is continuously reducing the winning of natural gas in the north part of the Netherlands.
Currently the storage capacity of the Dutch gas network is about 1,3x109 [m3]. Before switching to
natural gas the networks were operated using towngas, which for the most part consisted of
hydrogen and the fact that pipelines are the cheapest way to move hydrogen over long distances
makes the pipelines more atractive. In addition transport of energy through a gas network is done
with much less losses compared to a power network 0,1 [%] v.s. 8 [%], beside that the capacity of
the gas lines are far higher than that of the power cables coming into the private houses 30 [kW] v.s.
3 [kW] (Wikipedia, Hydrogen economy, 2021).
Gasunie is working on a project called Waterstofbackbone to create a main hydrogen network

(pipeline) in the Netherlands. This network is meant to connect the hydrogen production sites to the
storage, industry and neighbouring countries. (Gasunie, Watersofbackbone, 2021).
Figure 16. Hydrogen pipeline network (Gasunie, Watersofbackbone, 2021)

3 METHODS
This chapter describes the methods and various scenarios used in this project based on the
knowledge gained during literature research and energy management lectures. First the different
scenarios are explained than the visibility analysis for the different scenarios are described, after the
sensitivity analysis of the grids are explained and as last the optimalization method used for the
economic dispatch is described.
3.1 Tooling
For the analysis in this project typical low voltage network structure including a solar park has been
derived from Vision. The size of the solar park will be increased until congestion problems occur.
The data related to the solar park and cables are exported to Excel and then into Matlab for further
investigation and analysis.
3.2 Description of research design

Since the main objective of this project is to maximize the profit of the solar park different scenarios
are developed for storage of produced power and green hydrogen.
Three major scenarios (where the final solution can be a mixture of these scenarios) are considered:
- Usage of hydrogen as an energy storage medium in the energy market

- Usage of hydrogen in a future hydrogen grid for industrial/residential usage
- Usage of hydrogen in a fuel station
Based on economic dispatch will be decided which scenario or combination of scenarios will be
applied.
3.2.1 Options A, B and C

There are several options what the solar farmer can do with the produced H2. Based on the literature
study done before we consider 3 different options here. The options are shown in Figure 17. In the
first option the produced hydrogen is compressed up to 70[MPa], stored in vessel and is meant to
serve as a medium to balance the energy market. This option requires additional fuel cell modules to
convert hydrogen back to electrical power having an efficiency of 60[%]. In the second option the
produced hydrogen is directly fad in to the future hydrogen grid (pipeline), in this case no storage
facility and further compression of hydrogen is considered since the produced hydrogen has an initial
pressure of 35 [bar] which is more than the required 20[bar] pressure. In the last option the produced
hydrogen is compressed up to 70[Mpa] and stored in vessels. In this case it is meant to serve as a
medium to power the future heavy duty vehicles which will run on hydrogen.

Figure 17. Components of the system and considered options.
3.2.2 Feasibility analysis

After the three scenarios described above are developed, a feasibility analysis is carried out in order to
find out whether a scenario is profitable and the investments can be recovered within a visible time
frame. In this case we consider 10 years as a plausible time limit for the investments to be recovered
back. The recovery time of the investments is calculated as follows:
ROI= Annual profit/Σinvestments.

Where:
Σinvestments=investments (solar park + Electorlyzer+H2_storage+Fuel cell)
The investments for the solar park and the electrolyzer have been considered in all three scenarios
whereas investments for the H2 storage and fuel cells are only considered in the scenarios where local
storage is required, H2 is converted back to power and fad in to the grid in order to balance power
demand and supply.
And:

Annual profit=(green hydrogen price – operational costs)*produced hydrogen.
The analysis is based on two different solar park sizes, namely 8 and 16 [MW]. Beside that the size of
the electrolyzer is stepwise increased from 0 to 1 [MW] for the 8 [MW] solar park and from 0 to 10
[MW] for the 16 [MW] park resulting in increasing amount of hydrogen production per year.
3.2 Sensitivity analysis

The base case is a 8MW solar park based on anonymous data in Vision. This solar park suffers from
congestion where excess power as shown in Figure 18 cannot be harvested due to limitations in the
incoming cable of the solar park.
Figure 18 8 MW solar park, excess power
Increasing the size of the solar park from 8MW to 16MW also increases this problem drastically as
show in Figure 19.
Figure 19 16MW solar park, excess power

Based on these parks a sensitivity analysis is performed for varying sizes of electrolyzers based on 2
control strategies:
- Maximizing the energy supplied to the grid and only using excess energy for hydrogen
creation
- Maximizing the creation of hydrogen and only using excess energy to be supplied to the grid
With this sensitivity analysis an optimal size will be determined for the 8 [MW] and the 16 [MW] for
both control strategies for various electrolyzer sizes.
Second for various scenarios the economic dispatch of the system will be calculated based on various
pricing developments based on future predictions regarding the energy market, hydrogen car market
penetration and hydrogen prices based on optimizers.
3.3 Optimalization technique
Based on the imbalance market as mentioned in chapter 2.4 it is to be expected that the price of
electricity can become varying in hourly bases. The power delivered by the solar park and the energy
usage of other users can be predicted based on weather data and historical data.
The control system can access the following systems:
- CV PV; The DC/AC converter of the solar farm

- CV Electrolyzer; The DC/AC converter of the electrolyzer in conjunction with the electrolyzer
- CV FC; The DC/AC converter of the fuel cell in conjunction with the fuel cell
- CV Hydrogrid; The valve connected to the hydrogen storage.
Usage of hydrogen is a car fuel is not taken into account because this is a demand market. The
control system cannot influence the amount of cars refuelling. A viable option is to consider this is
leaving the energy storage at a minimum level (enough for fuelling the expected amount of cars) and
reduce the amount of hydrogen being fed into the hydrogrid.
The profit of a solar panel for a typical day is dependent on the control system, radiation and energy
price.
24
𝑃𝑣𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 = ∫ 𝐶𝑣𝑃𝑣(𝑡) ∙ 𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒(𝑡) ∙ 𝑃𝑣𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0
The profit of the fuel cell and electrolyzer is dependent on the control system and energy price:
24
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝐶𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 = ∫ 𝐶𝑣𝐹𝑐(𝑡) ∙ 𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0
24
𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 = ∫ −𝐶𝑣𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟(𝑡) ∙ 𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0
The profit of the hydro grid is dependent on the control system and the hydrogen price:

24
𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 = ∫ 𝐶𝑣𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑(𝑡) ∙ 𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0
The amount of hydrogen stored is dependent on the control system of the electrolyzer, fuel cell and
hydrogrid and on the efficiency of the electrolyzer and fuel cell:
𝑡
1
𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑡 = ∫ 𝐶𝑣𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟(𝑡) ∙ 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟 − 𝐶𝑣𝐹𝑐(𝑡) ∙ − 𝐶𝑣𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝐹𝑐
The hydrogen stored in a day therefore is:
24
1
𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑𝑎𝑦 = ∫ 𝐶𝑣𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟(𝑡) ∙ 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟 − 𝐶𝑣𝐹𝑐(𝑡) ∙ − 𝐶𝑣𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑(𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝐹𝑐
One important aspect is the load of the cable, which is dependant on the residential power, power
delivered by the solar park, fuel cell and power used by the electrolyzer:
𝐶𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟(𝑡) = 𝐶𝑣𝑃𝑣(𝑡) ∙ 𝑃𝑣𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛(𝑡) + 𝐶𝑣𝐹𝑐(𝑡) ∙ 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝐹𝑐 − 𝐶𝑣𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟(𝑡) ∙ 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟

− 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
The objective of the control algorithm is to maximize the profit:
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 = 𝑃𝑣𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 + 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝐶𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 + 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦 + 𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑎𝑦
Which are subject to the following inequality constraints:
0 ≤ 𝐶𝑣𝑃𝑣(𝑡) ≤ 1
0 ≤ 𝐶𝑣𝐹𝑐(𝑡) ≤ 1
0 ≤ 𝐶𝑣𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑦𝑧𝑒𝑟(𝑡) ≤ 1
-5.44≤ 𝐶𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 ≤ 5.44
0 ≤ 𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑡 ≤ 20
Also, there is an equality constraint which determines that the hydrogen level at the end of the day
should be equal to the hydrogen level in the begin of the day:
𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑𝑎𝑦 = 0
As there are inequality constraints, optimization using LaGrange is not possible (WIKI, Constrained
optimization, 2021). Therefore linear programming techniques are required, the Simplex algorithm
(WIKI, Simplex algorithm, 2021) is a suitable optimization technique which can be applied.
The linprog module of Matlab is capable of using this Simplex algorithm. A simplified source code for
applying this technique of 4 parts of the day is shown in appendix B. The full source code for applying
this technique for 24 hours is shown in appendix C.

4 RESULTS
This chapter contains results of the analysis described in previous chapter. In chapter 4.1 the power
production of the 8 [MW] solar park its location in the network and the limitation of the cables are
analyzed and the corresponding results are presented. In chapter 4.2 four different scenarios based
on two different control strategies, maximum grid power and maximum hydrogen power are analyzed
and compared to each other. In chapter 4.4 the needed investments for the hydrogen production,
corresponding profit and recovery of investments are analyzed. In chapter 4.5 needed size of the
equipment are analyzed based on return of investments analyzed in the previous chapter. In chapter
4.6 a optimalization analysis is caried out to maximize the profit of the solar park.
4.1 8 MW solar park
Figure 20 is showing the potential solar power for a 8MW solar park for each month
Figure 20 8 MW solar park - potential solar power
The solar park is part of a larger 10kV network where other consumers are connected to. Part of this
network is shown in Figure 21. In this case the existing solar park has been increased to 8MW

Figure 21 10kV network, used for analysis
In this case the incoming cable is the limiting factor and can carry a maximum of 5.44 MW in both
directions. This is shown in Figure 22.
Figure 22 8MW solar park - Potential cable power
4.1.1 Maximal grid power

First strategy is to maximize the grid power and only use excess power from the solar panels.
Depending on the size of the electrolyzer a part of the full excess power can be utilized. For a
sinusoidal solar power profile, the principle how the power has been divided is shown in Figure 23.

Figure 23 Maximum grid power strategy
Depending on the solar power, the division between grid and electrolyzer and eventual excess energy
is made. The division for the case of Figure 23 as a function of the solar power curve with varying
amplitude from 0 to 3 is shown in Figure 24.
Figure 24 Maximum grid power division curve
From Figure 22 can be seen from April until October at approximately 14.00 the cable is overloaded
and therefore the power as delivered by the solar panels has to reduced. The resulting power
delivered to the grid and (for example a) 0.5 MW electrolyzer is shown in Figure 25.

Figure 25 8MW solar park - solar power delivered to grid and electrolyzer
An electrolyzer with a size between 0.1 and 1 MW can be used. A relative small electrolyzer is
cheaper, will be used more extensive but will not use al excess power. A relative large electrolyzer is
more expensive, will be used less extensive but will use more of the excess power. The final decision
is a CAPEX/OPEX discussion. Figure 26 shows the monthly MWh base on various electrolyzer sizes.
Figure 26 8MW solar park electrolyzer MWh
It can be seen that aN electrolyzer larger then 1MW for this strategy does not have any benefits
because the maximum excess power is approximately 1MW.

The power delivered to the grid is not dependent of the size of the electrolyzer, Figure 27 shows the
energy delivered to the grid every month.
Figure 27 8MW solar park, grid energy
4.1.2 Maximum electrolyzer usage

Second strategy is to maximize the usage of the electrolyzer only use power from the solar panels
which cannot be used by the electrolyzer to feed back to the grid. For a sinusoidal solar power profile,
the principle how the power has been divided in shown in Figure 28
Figure 28 Maximum H2 power strategy

Depending on the solar power, the division between grid and electrolyzer and eventual excess energy
is made. The division for the case of Figure 28 as a function of the solar power curve with varying
amplitude from 0 to 3 is shown in Figure 29.
Figure 29 Maximum H2 power division curve
The resulting power delivered to the grid and (for example a) 0.5 MW electrolyzer is shown in Figure
30.
An electrolyzer with a size between 0.1 and 1 MW can be used. A relative small electrolyzer is
cheaper, will be used more extensive but will not use al excess power. A relative large electrolyzer is
more expensive, will be used less extensive but will use more of the excess power. The final decision

is a CAPEX/OPEX discussion. Figure 31 shows the monthly energy production in [MWh] base on
various electrolyzer sizes
Figure 31 8MW solar park electrolyzer MWh
The power delivered to the grid is dependent on the size of the electrolyzer, Figure 32 shows the
4.2 16 MW solar park

Figure 33 is showing the potential solar power for a 16MW solar park for each month.

Figure 33 16 MW solar park - potential solar power
The solar park is part of a larger 10kV network where other consumers are connected to. Part of this
network is shown in Figure 21
Also in this case the incoming cable is the limiting factor and can carry a maximum of 5.44 [MW] in
both directions. This is shown in Figure 34.
Figure 34 16MW solar park - Potential cable power
4.2.1 Maximal grid power

As discussed in chapter 4.1.1; first strategy is to maximize the grid power and only use excess power
from the solar panels.

From Figure 34 can be seen that the whole year at around 14:00 the cable is overloaded and
therefore the power as delivered by the solar panels has to reduce. The resulting power delivered to
the grid and (for example a) 5 [MW] electrolyzer is shown in Figure 35
An electrolyzer with a size between 1 and 10 [MW] can be used. Figure 36 shows the monthly
produced energy in [MWh] base on various electrolyzer sizes.

Figure 36 16MW solar park energy production of the electrolyzers in [MWh]
As can be seen aN electrolyzer larger then 10 [MW] for this strategy does not have any benefits
because the maximum excess power is approximately 10 [MW].
The power delivered to the grid is not dependent of the size of the electrolyzer, Figure 37 shows the

4.2.2 Maximum electrolyzer usage
As discussed in chapter 4.1.2; second strategy is to maximize the usage of the electrolyzer only use
power from the solar panels which cannot be used by the electrolyzer to feed back to the grid.
The resulting power delivered to the grid and (for example a) 5 [MW] electrolyzer is shown in Figure
38
An electrolyzer with a size between 1 and 10 [MW] can be used. Figure 39 shows the monthly energy
generation in [MWh] base on various electrolyzer sizes.
Figure 39 16MW solar park electrolyzer energy generation in [MWh]

The power delivered to the grid is dependent on the size of the electrolyzer, Figure 40 shows the
4.3 Comparison
Based on the previous chapters, 4 scenarios are compared. The scenarios are show in Table 3.
Table 3 Scenarios
Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 Scenario #4

Solar park size 8MW 8MW 16MW 16MW
Control Maximizing grid Maximizing Maximizing grid Maximizing
strategy power hydrogen power power hydrogen power
Electrolyzer 0.1 … 2 MW 0.1 … 2 MW 1 … 20 MW 1 … 20 MW
size
From Figure 41 until Figure 44 the amount of generated energy by the electrolyzer and the amount of
energy stored in the grid is shown for the scenarios of Table 3. From the figures it is obvious that at a
certain level, increasing the size of the electrolyzer will not results in a higher energy value.

Figure 41 Scenario #1, 8MW solar park, maximizing grid power
Figure 42 Scenario #2, 8MW solar park, maximizing H2 power

Figure 43 Scenario #3, 16MW solar park, maximizing grid power
Figure 44 Scenario #4, 16MW solar park, maximizing hydrogen power
4.4 Results of feasibility analysis

Figure 45 and Figure 46 show the investments needed for a 8 and 16 [MW] solar park respectively to
produce a certain amount of hydrogen on yearly basis. As can be seen the investments needed for the
energy market balance option (A), which is described in section 3.2.1, is increasing faster with the
increase of hydrogen production compared to options where hydrogen is transported through the gas
pipelines and stored in the existing gas storage vessels (option B), and the option where hydrogen is
stored locally and distributed to the fuel stations for the FCEVs. The latest mentioned one still needs a
bit higher investments since a local storage facility is needed. In option (A) beside electrolyzers, fuel
cell systems are required to convert hydrogen back to electricity.

Investments 8 [MW] park H2 Production
3000000
2500000
2000000
Euros
1500000
1000000
500000
0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000
H2 [kg/year]
Investments Option C Investments Option A Investments Option B
Figure 45. Needed investments for the production and storage of H2 based on 8 [MW] solar park
Investments 16 [MW] park H2 Production

30000000
25000000
20000000
Euros
15000000
10000000
5000000
0
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 500000
H2 [kg/year]
Investments Option C Investments Option A Investments Option B
Figure 46. Needed investments for the production and storage of H2 based on 16 [MW] solar park
Figure 47 and Figure 48 show the profit from hydrogen production based on the three options and
two different solar park capacities namely 8 and 16 [MW]. As can be seen from the graphs the profit
increment of the pipeline storage is much bigger compared to the option where hydrogen is stored
locally in order to power the FCEVs and the one meant for energy market balance (option A). The
latest one results in smallest profit since there are 40% losses due to conversion from gas to
electricity. Whereas option (C) has some losses due to compression of produced hydrogen to
700[bar], cooling, storing and dispensing.

Profit 8 [MW] park H2 Production
300000
250000
200000
Euros
150000
100000
50000
0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000
H2 [kg/year]
Profit Option C Profit Option A Profit Option B
Figure 47. Yearly profit of a 8 [MW] solar park from H2 production
Profit 16 [MW] park H2 Production

2500000
2000000
1500000
Euros
1000000
500000
0
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 500000
H2 [kg/year]
Profit Option C Profit Option A Profit Option B
Figure 48. Yearly profit of a 16 [MW] solar park from H2 production
Figure 49 and Figure 50 show the recovery of investments based on yearly hydrogen production for
the three options and two different park sizes. As can be seen in option A where the produced
hydrogen is meant to balance the energy market the return of investments is 31 years for the 8 [MW]
solar park and 39 years for the 16 [MW] park. Whereas in option C the investments are recovered 4
times faster than in option A and in option B it is 7 times faster.

Returen of investments 8 [MW] park H2 Production
35
30
25
20
years
15
10
0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000
H2 [kg/year]
Return of investments Option A Return of investments Option B

Return of investments Option C
Figure 49. Recovery of the investments based on yearly H2 production of a 8 [MW] solar park
Return of investments 16 [MW] park H2 Production

45
40
35
30
25
years
20
15
10
5
0
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 500000
H2 [kg/year]
Return of investments Option C Return of investments Option A

Return of investments Option B
Figure 50. Recovery of the investments based on yearly H2 production of a 16 [MW] solar park
4.5 Size of the equipment

Figure 49 and Figure 50 are showing no large difference in return of investment for option B and
option C for various electrolyzer sizes. As the goal is to maximize the profit for all strategies, therefore
a relative large system is preferred. Therefore a 16 [MW] solar park is chosen. Based on Figure 43
where the amount of created hydrogen peaks at 10 [MW] for the strategy of maximizing grid power a
10 [MW] configuration is chosen. The storage capacity is determined at (neglecting losses of the
electrolyzer and fuel cell) 0.5C. This means that an ideal electrolyzer can run 2 hours at full power to

fill the storage and an ideal fuel cell can run 2 hours at full power to drain the storage. These 2 hours
should be sufficient to participate in the imbalance market as described in chapter 2.4.
Therefore, the following dimensions have been chosen:
- 16 [MW] solar park

- 10 [MW] electrolyzer
- 10 [MW] fuel cell
- 20 [MWh] storage capacity
With these dimensions the equipment is suitable for the following purposes:
- Solar park
- Hydrogen creation from solar park
- Hydrogen creation from grid
- Usage as battery energy storage system
4.6 Energy management

The system developed (and shown in Figure 17) and sized based on chapter 4.5 can perform the
following strategies:
- Feeding energy from the solar panels directly to the grid

- Feeding energy from the grid to the electrolyzers, creating hydrogen
- Feeding energy from the fuel cells to the grid, using hydrogen
- Feeding hydrogen to the hydrogrid, using hydrogen
- Feeding hydrogen to cars, using hydrogen
The strategy is subject to:
- Size of the energy storage

- Size of the electrolyzers
- Size of the fuel cells
- Size of the solar park
- Size of the incoming cable
- Energy usage of the other users of the incoming cable
Goal of the energy management system is to maximize the profit of the system based on this
strategies and the actual (and quite dynamic) price information. Three scenarios regarding this pricing
and congestion are used to verify the strategy.
As feeding hydrogen is demand driven and all other strategies are price driven, only the first four
strategies are taken into account.

4.7 Optimization scenarios
The optimization technique as described in chapter 3.3 is apllied on the data as determined in chapter
4.3. for various scenarios in electricity prices and hydrogen prices. The scenario’s are shown in Table
4.
Table 4 Optimization scenarios
Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 Scenario #4 Scenario #5

Time of year July July July July July
Solar park size 16 16 16 16 16
Electrolyzer 10 MW 10 MW 10 MW 10 MW 10 MW
size
Fuel cell size 10 MW 10 MW 10 MW 10 MW 10 MW
Storage size 20 MWh 20 MWh 20 MWh 20 MWh 20 MWh
Electricity price 0.09 0.05 Varying (1) Extreme 0.07
EURO/kWh EURO/kWh Average varying (2) EURO/kWh
0.07 Average
EURO/kWh 0.07
EURO/kWh
Hydrogen price 4.65 EURO/kg 4.65 EURO/kg 4.65 EURO/kg 4.65 EURO/kg 0.465
EURO/kg
Without optimization the solar park (for all scenarios of Table 4) can create 10 MWh of energy of the
potential 15 MWh (see also appendix D).
For the varying energy price it is assumed that the price is market driven (demand vs supply) and
based only on the solar radiation, during high radiation the electricity price will be low while during
low radiation the price will be high. The chosen price is shown in Figure 51. The extreme scenario is
shown in Figure 52.

Figure 51 Example of varying energy price in July
Figure 52 Example of extreme varying energy price in July
4.7.1 Scenario #1
In this scenario it is the profit of feeding to the grid is higher than creating hydrogen. Table 5 shows
the profit and energy flow for scenario #1
Table 5 Scenario #1, profit and energy flow
Energy flows
Energy PV: 150356 (kWh/day)
Energy Fuel cell: 0 (kWh/day)

Energy Electrolyzer: -50625 (kWh/day)
Energy Hydrogrid: 3.037500e+04 (kWh/day)
Profit
Profit PV: 1.353204e+04 (euro/day)
Profit Fuel cell: 0 (euro/day)
Cost Electrolyzer: -4.556250e+03 (euro/day)
Profit Hydrogrid: 4.203683e+03 (euro/day)
_____________
Profit total: 1.317947e+04 (euro/day)
Figure 53 Scenario #1 behaviour
As can be seen from Figure 53 only hydrogen is generated when congestion occurs and due to the
lack of profitability, the generated hydrogen is fed in to the hydrogen grid.
4.7.2 Scenario #2
In this scenario it is the profit of feeding to the grid is lower than creating hydrogen. Table 6 shows
the profit and energy flow for scenario #2.
Energy flows
Profit

_____________
In this, even without solar power, hydrogen is generated at a rate that the cable is at the congestion
limit. When solar power is available the electrolyzer can run at a higher rating.
4.7.3 Scenario #3
In this scenario the profit of feeding to the grid in comparison to creating hydrogen is dependent on
the time of the day. Table 7 shows the profit and energy flow for scenario #3.
Energy flows
Profit
_____________

The result is comparable to scenario 2. Only the profit is (due to low energy prices at high solar
power) slightly lower.
4.7.4 Scenario #4
In this scenario the profit of feeding to the grid in comparison to creating hydrogen is dependent on
the time of the day and extremely varying. Table 8 shows the profit and energy flow for scenario #4.
Energy flows
Energy Fuel cell: 1.200000e+04 (kWh/day)
Energy Hydrogrid: 40000 (kWh/day)
Profit
Profit PV: -1.046415e+05 (euro/day)
Profit Fuel cell: 1.587560e+04 (euro/day)
Cost Electrolyzer: 1.415333e+05 (euro/day)
_____________

In this case, due to negative energy prices during high solar power, the solar park only generates
energy for prevention of congestion at the cable. The usage of the electrolyzer at these times is at a
maximum rate (having a profit by consuming at negative energy prices). When the storage energy is
full, excess energy is fed at the hydrogen grid and at the time of day when energy prices are high, the
fuel cell is used.
In this case the system used the fluctuations in the energy system the maximize the profit.
4.7.5 Scenario #5
In this scenario it is the profit of feeding to the grid is and using the fuel cell is higher than creating
hydrogen. Table 9 shows the profit and energy flow for scenario #5
Energy flows
Energy Fuel cell: 1.200000e+04 (kWh/day)
Profit
Profit Fuel cell: 8.400000e+02 (euro/day)
_____________

As can be seen from Figure 57 the system will act as an energy storage system, storing energy during
high solar power by the electrolyzer and delivering energy during low solar power by the fuel cell. The
hydrogrid is only used when the storage tank is full.
4.7.6 Summary
The profit of the system is summarized in Table 10.
Table 10 Profit for various scenarios
Scenario Profit Electricity price Hydrogen price Profit without

(in comparison (in comparison hydrogen
to 0.07 to 4.65 euro/kg)
euro/kWh)
#1 13179 +28% (0.09 0% 9000
(euro/day) euro/kWh) (euro/day)
#2 12241 -29% (0.05 0% 5000

(euro/day) euro/kWh) (euro/day)
#3 10624 -57% … +42% 0% 4530
(euro/day) (0.03 … 0.10 (euro/day)
euro/kWh)
#4 58303 -4060% … 0% NA
(euro/day) +1800%
(-2 … 1.3
euro/kWh)
#5 7964 0% -90% 7000
(euro/day) (euro/day)

For the (realistic) scenarios 1..3 it shows that the optimalisation algorithm is capable of stabilizing the
profit at different electricity prices. Participation on the imbalance market at highly varying energy
prices can increase the profit drastically (scenario #3 and scenario #4). Using the system as energy
storage (scenario #5) will reduce the profit, but still the profit is higher in comparison to a system
without hydrogen.

5 DISCUSSION
The shown optimalisation technique only works when solar radiation and pricing information can be
predicted during a day. It is debatable whether this can be done and research showing correlations
between pricing and predictable circumstances (weather data, consumer load) is required.
However optimalisation can also be used to compare the result of a certain control strategy to the
most optimal solution, therefore creating an independent benchmark.
Future developments in the field of the hydrogen backbone, investment in the distribution gird,
increasing penetration of solar and wind parks, development on battery storage and the (lack of)
energy storage will determine in long terms the viability of hydrogen based energy storage.
Currently these aspects are quite difficult to predict which makes the calculation of an exact return of
investment price impossible. Only return of investment based on the current market situation can be
performed.

6 CONCLUSIONS (AND RECOMMENDATIONS)
The congestion of the local grids and energy losses due to disconnection of the solar park from the
grid resulting in losses for the park operators can be solved simultaneously by installing a hydrogen
production and storage facility next to the solar park. Produced hydrogen can be compressed and
stored in the local facility of the park or can be supplied to the users by means of hydrogen grid.
Locally stored hydrogen can be used as a fuel for the FCEFs or as a fuel to balance the energy market
by converting hydrogen back to electricity when demand is higher than supply. One should be
noticed, conversion of hydrogen back to electricity has 40[%] losses due to efficiency of the system.
Nevertheless if hydrogen is produced during the time the electricity price is negative or close to zero
it is profitable to convert it back to electricity in the time periods demand is high and so the price.
The investments for a 16 [MW] solar park installation can be recovered within seven years if an
operator wants to use only hydrogen grid storage, or within 14 year if he wants to store hydrogen
locally or 39 years if he use it only to balance the energy market.
By considering the hydrogen production and storage as a core business of the solar park, the
hydrogen production and storage facilities will be used optimal and contribute in increase of
profitability of the park rather than using only excess power, in order only to solve congestion
problems of the electrical grids, to produce hydrogen.
The profit of the solar park can be optimized by using a mixture of local, grid storage and gas to
power conversion of hydrogen based on fluctuation of the energy price in the market by using an
energy management system which has a goal to maximize the profit of the solar park.
We recommend the solar park operator to develop and use a control system which monitors the
price fluctuations in the energy market and based on that makes decision on production, local or grid
storage of hydrogen or even converting already stored hydrogen back to electricity. By using such a
smart system, the solar park operator can maximize his profit.

REFERENCES
Agency, U. S. (2010). Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Retrieved from Global greenhouse gas emissions
data: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data
Chrometzka, T. (2020, April 15). H2 View exclusive. Retrieved from Enapter:
https://www.enapter.com/media-coverage/h2-view-exclusive-calculating-the-cost-of-green-
hydrogen
Commission, E. (2019, 10 15). PGIS. Retrieved from EC Europa:
https://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/#PVP
community, E. (2018). TENNET, Unlocking grid flexibility - Energy Community. Retrieved from Energy-
community.org.
Deboutte, G. (2021, 04 22). engie exits storage business. Retrieved from PV-magazine.com:
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/04/22/engie-exits-storage-business/
Duurzaammbo. (2021, March 21). waterstofauto. Retrieved from Duurzammbo.nl:
https://www.duurzaammbo.nl/index.php/b3-2-planet/57-kennisbank/planet/4354-waterstof-2
Enapter. (2020, April 7). AEM Technology. Retrieved from Enapter Handbooko:
https://handbook.enapter.com/knowledge_base/aem_technology.html
Encyclopedia, T. F. (2021, March 14). Paris Agreement. Retrieved from wikipedia.org:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement
energy, O. o. (2021, 4 10). Hydrogen storage. Retrieved from energy.gov:
https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-
storage#:~:text=Hydrogen%20can%20be%20stored%20physically,pressure%20is%20%E2
%88%92252.8%C2%B0C.
Enexis. (2021). Congestiemanagement: onderzoek en uitkomst. Retrieved from
https://www.enexis.nl/zakelijk/duurzaam/beperkte-capaciteit/gebieden-met-
schaarste/vooraankondiging
Enexis. (2021). Gebieden met schaarste voor teruglevering op het energienet. Retrieved from
https://www.enexis.nl/zakelijk/duurzaam/beperkte-capaciteit/gebieden-met-schaarste
Gasunie. (2021, april 17). Watersofbackbone. Retrieved from Gasunie:
https://www.gasunie.nl/expertise/waterstof/waterstofbackbone
Gasunie. (2021, jan 25). Watersofbackbone. Retrieved from gasunie:
https://www.gasunie.nl/expertise/waterstof/waterstofbackbone
Infonu. (n.d.). Verandering van de daglengtes in een grafiek. Retrieved from
https://wetenschap.infonu.nl/natuurverschijnselen/185278-verandering-van-de-daglengtes-in-
een-grafiek.html
James, B. D. (2020, May 31). Hydrogen Storage costs analysis. Retrieved from hydrogen energy:
https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/review20/st100_houchins_2020_o.pdf
Klaassen, E. (2015). ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF DISTRIBUTED ENERGY RESOURCES ON LV GRIDS
USING PRACTICAL MEASUREMENTS. 23rd International Conference on Electricity Distribution,
(p. 1289).
Opálková, M. (2018). A database of 10 min average measurements of solar radiation and
meteorological variables in Ostrava, Czech Republic. Earth Syst. Sci. Data,, 837-846.
Parks, G. (2014, May). Hydrogen Station Compression, Storage and Dispensing. Golden, USA.
Simbolotti, G. (2014, February). Hydrogen Production and Distribution.
Tennet. (2018). Productinformation aFRR (Regulating power).
TenneT. (2021, april 17). Nederlandse regulering. Retrieved from tennet.eu:
https://www.tennet.eu/nl/e-insights/regulering/nederlandse-regulering/

Vuksic, M. (2014, Jun). ResearchGate. Retrieved from Researchgate.net:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Advantages-and-disadvantages-of-alkaline-and-PEM-
electrolysis_tbl1_263470190
WIKI. (2021). Constrained optimization. Retrieved from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constrained_optimization
WIKI. (2021). Simplex algorithm. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplex_algorithm
Wikipedia. (2021, May 9). Hydrogen economy. Retrieved from wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_economy
Wikipedia. (2021, April 18). Polymer electrolyte membrane electrolysis. Retrieved from wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_electrolyte_membrane_electrolysis#Advantages_of_PE
M_electrolysis

APPENDIX A NOMENCLATURE
Symbols
AC Alternate current
CO2 Carbon dioxide
DC Direct current
E Energy [Wh]
I Current [A]
H2 Hydrogen
m mass [kg]
P Power [W]
P Pressure [Pa/bar]
PV Photo voltaic
POC Point of connection
ROI Return of investments
T Temperature [K]
U Voltage [V]
Acronyms
FCEV Fuel cell electric vehicle

Nm3 Normal cube meter
CAPEX Capital expenditures
OPEX Operational expenditures

APPENDIX B 4 DAY PART SOURCE CODE
Matlab
clear;
format compact
T=1:1:4; %1=Night,2=Morning,3=Afternoon,4=evening
Grid_energy_price=[0 2 4 6]
Hydrogrid_price=[5 5 5 5]
Solar_power=[0 3 8 3]
Residential_power=[1 2 3 4]
Electrolyzer_power_min=0;
Electrolyzer_power_max=1;
Electrolyzer_eff=0.5;
Fuelcell_power_min=0;
Fuelcell_power_max=1;
Fuelcell_eff=0.5;
H2_storage_energy_min=0;
H2_storage_energy_max=10;
Hydrogrid_power_min=0;
Hydrogrid_power_max=10;
Cable_power_max=5;
%x11=PV energy night

%x12=PV energy morning
%x13=PV energy afternoon
%x14=PV energy evening
%x21=Fuel cell energy night
%x22=Fuel cell energy morning
%x23=Fuel cell energy afternoon
%x24=Fuel cell energy evening
%x31=Electrolyzer energy night
%x32=Electrolyzer energy morning
%x33=Electrolyzer energy afternoon
%x34=Electrolyzer energy evening
%x41=Hydrogrid energy night
%x42=Hydrogrid energy morning
%x43=Hydrogrid energy afternoon
%x44=Hydrogrid energy evening

%f=-x11*Grid_energy_price(1)*Solar_power(1)-
x12*Grid_energy_price(2)*Solar_power(2)
% -x13*Grid_energy_price(3)*Solar_power(3)-
x14*Grid_energy_price(4)*Solar_power(4)
% -x21*Grid_energy_price(1)-x22*Grid_energy_price(2)
% -x23*Grid_energy_price(3)-x24*Grid_energy_price(4)
% +x31*Grid_energy_price(1)+x32*Grid_energy_price(2)
% +x33*Grid_energy_price(3)+x34*Grid_energy_price(4)
% -x41*Hydrogrid_price(1)-x42*Hydrogrid_price(2)
% -x43*Hydrogrid_price(3)-x44*Hydrogrid_price(4)
f = [-Grid_energy_price(1)*Solar_power(1) -
Grid_energy_price(2)*Solar_power(2) -Grid_energy_price(3)*Solar_power(3)
-Grid_energy_price(4)*Solar_power(4) -Grid_energy_price(1) -
Grid_energy_price(2) -Grid_energy_price(3) -Grid_energy_price(4)
Grid_energy_price(1) Grid_energy_price(2) Grid_energy_price(3)
Grid_energy_price(4) -Hydrogrid_price(1) -Hydrogrid_price(2) -
Hydrogrid_price(3) -Hydrogrid_price(4)];
%A=x11*Solar_power(1)+x21-x31 B=Cable_power_max-Residential_power(1)
%A=-x11*Solar_power(1)-x21+x31 B=Cable_power_max+Residential_power(1)
%A=x11 B=1
%A=-x11 B=0
%A=x12 B=1
%A=-x12 B=0
%A=x13 B=1
%A=-x13 B=0
%A=x14 B=1
%A=-x14 B=0
%A=x21 B=Fuelcell_power_max
%A=-x21 B=-Fuelcell_power_min
%A=x31 B=Electrolyzer_power_max
%A=-x31 B=-Electrolyzer_power_min

%A=x41 B=Hydrogrid_power_max
%A=-x41 B=-Hydrogrid_power_min
A=[Solar_power(1) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-Solar_power(1) 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 Solar_power(2) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 -Solar_power(2) 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 Solar_power(3) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 -Solar_power(3) 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 Solar_power(4) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 -Solar_power(4) 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1
0 0 0 0 -1/Fuelcell_eff 0 0 0
Electrolyzer_eff 0 0 0 -1 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 1/Fuelcell_eff 0 0 0
-Electrolyzer_eff 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff 0 0
Electrolyzer_eff Electrolyzer_eff 0 0 -1 -1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1/Fuelcell_eff 1/Fuelcell_eff 0 0
-Electrolyzer_eff -Electrolyzer_eff 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff 0
Electrolyzer_eff Electrolyzer_eff Electrolyzer_eff 0 -1 -1 -1 0
0 0 0 0 1/Fuelcell_eff 1/Fuelcell_eff 1/Fuelcell_eff 0
-Electrolyzer_eff -Electrolyzer_eff -Electrolyzer_eff 0 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff -
1/Fuelcell_eff Electrolyzer_eff Electrolyzer_eff Electrolyzer_eff
Electrolyzer_eff -1 -1 -1 -1
0 0 0 0 1/Fuelcell_eff 1/Fuelcell_eff 1/Fuelcell_eff 1/Fuelcell_eff

-Electrolyzer_eff -Electrolyzer_eff -Electrolyzer_eff -Electrolyzer_eff 1
1 1 1
0 0 0 0 -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff -
Electrolyzer_eff -1 -1 -1 -1
]
b=[Cable_power_max-Residential_power(1)
Cable_power_max+Residential_power(1) Cable_power_max-Residential_power(2)
Cable_power_max+Residential_power(4) 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Fuelcell_power_max
Fuelcell_power_min Fuelcell_power_max Fuelcell_power_min
Fuelcell_power_max Fuelcell_power_min Fuelcell_power_max
Fuelcell_power_min Electrolyzer_power_max Electrolyzer_power_min
Electrolyzer_power_max Electrolyzer_power_min Electrolyzer_power_max
Electrolyzer_power_min Electrolyzer_power_max Electrolyzer_power_min
Hydrogrid_power_max Hydrogrid_power_min Hydrogrid_power_max
Hydrogrid_power_min Hydrogrid_power_max Hydrogrid_power_min
Hydrogrid_power_max Hydrogrid_power_min H2_storage_energy_max
H2_storage_energy_min H2_storage_energy_max H2_storage_energy_min
H2_storage_energy_max H2_storage_energy_min H2_storage_energy_max
H2_storage_energy_min
]
%Aeq=-x21/Fuelcell_eff-x22/Fuelcell_eff-x23/Fuelcell_eff-
x24/Fuelcell_eff+x31*Electrolyzer_eff+x32*Electrolyzer_eff+x33*Electrolyz
er_eff+x34*Electrolyzer_eff-x41-x42-x43-x44
%beq=0
Aeq=[0 0 0 0 -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff -1/Fuelcell_eff -

Electrolyzer_eff -1 -1 -1 -1]
beq=0

x = linprog(f,A,b,Aeq,beq)
Optimal solution found.
x =
0
1.0000
0.3750
0.6667
0
0
0
0
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
1.0000
0
0
0
2.0000

APPENDIX C FULL SOURCE CODE
Matlab
clear;
format compact
Energy_density_hydrogen=33.6; %kWh/kg
Specific_weight_hydrogen_gas_700bar=1/42; %m3/kg
T=1:1:24;
scenario=4
%Grid_energy_price=[0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05
-0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07];
Hydrogrid_price=(4.65/Energy_density_hydrogen)*ones(1,24); %euro/kWh
Solar_power=1000*[0 0 0 0 0 0 0.138 1.016 4.093 7.9 11.65 14.89 16 16 16

16 15.981 13.041 9.453 5.602 2.078 0.514 0 0]; %kW
Residential_power=3300*ones(1,24); %kW
if scenario==1
Grid_energy_price=0.09*ones(1,24); %euro/kWh
elseif scenario ==2
Grid_energy_price=0.05*ones(1,24); %euro/kWh
elseif scenario ==3
Solar_sum=sum(Solar_power)/24
Grid_energy_price=(7-(Solar_power-Solar_sum)/2500)/100
else
Solar_sum=sum(Solar_power)/24
Grid_energy_price=(7-(Solar_power-Solar_sum)/50)/100
end
Electrolyzer_power_min=0;
Electrolyzer_power_max=10000; %kW
Electrolyzer_eff=0.6;
Fuelcell_power_min=0;
Fuelcell_power_max=10000; %kW
Fuelcell_eff=0.6;
H2_storage_energy_min=0;
H2_storage_energy_max=20000;%(1.57/Specific_weight_hydrogen_gas_700bar)*E
nergy_density_hydrogen; %kWh
Hydrogrid_power_min=0; %kW
Hydrogrid_power_max=10000; %kW
Cable_power_max=5410; %kW
f=zeros(1,96);
for i=1:24
f(i)=-Grid_energy_price(i)*Solar_power(i);
f(i+24)=-Grid_energy_price(i);

f(i+48)=Grid_energy_price(i);
f(i+72)=-Hydrogrid_price(i);
end
%A=zeros(240,96);
%b=zeros(1,240);
A=zeros(288,96);
b=zeros(1,288);
for i=1:24
column1=i;
column2=i;
row1=2*i-1;
row2=2*i;
A(row1,column1)=Solar_power(i);
A(row2,column2)=-Solar_power(i);
A(row1,column1+24)=1;
A(row2,column2+24)=-1;
A(row1,column1+48)=-1;
A(row2,column2+48)=1;
b(row1)=Cable_power_max+Residential_power(i);
b(row2)=Cable_power_max-Residential_power(i);
end
for i=1:24
column1=i;
column2=i;
row1=2*i-1;
row2=2*i;
A(row1+48,column1)=1;
A(row2+48,column2)=-1;
A(row1+96,column1+24)=1;
A(row2+96,column2+24)=-1;
A(row2+144,column2+48)=-1;
A(row2+192,column2+72)=-1;
b(row1+48)=1;
b(row2+48)=0;
b(row1+96)=Fuelcell_power_max;
b(row2+96)=Fuelcell_power_min;
b(row1+144)=Electrolyzer_power_max;
b(row2+144)=Electrolyzer_power_min;
b(row1+192)=Hydrogrid_power_max;
b(row2+192)=Hydrogrid_power_min;
end
for i=1:24
row1=2*i-1;
row2=2*i;
for j=1:i
A(row1+240,j)=0;
A(row1+240,24+j)=-1/Fuelcell_eff;
A(row1+240,48+j)=Electrolyzer_eff;
A(row1+240,72+j)=-1;
A(row2+240,j)=0;

A(row2+240,24+j)=1/Fuelcell_eff;
A(row2+240,48+j)=-Electrolyzer_eff;
A(row2+240,72+j)=1;
end
b(row1+240)=H2_storage_energy_max;
b(row2+240)=H2_storage_energy_min;
end
Aeq=zeros(1,96);
beq=0;
for i=1:24
Aeq(i)=0;
Aeq(24+i)=-1/Fuelcell_eff;
Aeq(48+i)=Electrolyzer_eff;
Aeq(72+i)=-1;
end
x = linprog(f,A,b,Aeq,beq);
PV_energy=x(1:24)';
FuelCell_energy=x(25:48)';
Electrolyzer_energy=x(49:72)';
Hydrogrid_energy=x(73:96)';
Profit_PV=sum(PV_energy.*Grid_energy_price.*Solar_power);
Profit_FuelCell=sum(FuelCell_energy.*Grid_energy_price);
Cost_Electrolyzer=sum(Electrolyzer_energy.*Grid_energy_price);
Profit_Hydrogrid=sum(Hydrogrid_energy.*Hydrogrid_price);
Profit_day=Profit_PV+Profit_FuelCell+Profit_Hydrogrid-Cost_Electrolyzer;
Cable_power_day=PV_energy.*Solar_power+FuelCell_energy-
Electrolyzer_energy-Residential_power;
H2_storage_energy=zeros(1,24);
H2_storage_energy(1)=0;
for i=1:23
H2_storage_energy(i+1)=H2_storage_energy(i)+Electrolyzer_energy(i)*Electr
olyzer_eff-FuelCell_energy(i)/Fuelcell_eff-Hydrogrid_energy(i);
end
figure(1)
subplot(4,1,1)
plot(T,[Solar_power/1000;Residential_power/1000]);
title('16MW solar park - Simplex optimizer')
xlabel('Time')
ylabel('MW')
legend({'PV.SolarPower','Residential power'})
subplot(4,1,2)
plot(T,[PV_energy.*Solar_power;FuelCell_energy;-
Electrolyzer_energy;Hydrogrid_energy]/1000 );
title('Control variables')
xlabel('Time')
ylabel('MW')
legend({'PV.SolarPower','Fuelcell','Electrolyzer','Hydrogrid'})
subplot(4,1,3)

plot(T,Cable_power_day/1000)
title('Cable power')
xlabel('Time')
ylabel('MW')
subplot(4,1,4)
plot(T,H2_storage_energy/1000)
title('H2 storage energy')
xlabel('Time')
ylabel('MWh')
fprintf("Energy flows \n")

fprintf("Energy PV: %i
(kWh/day)\n",sum(PV_energy.*Solar_power))
fprintf("Energy Fuel cell: %i (kWh/day)\n",sum(FuelCell_energy))
fprintf("Energy Electrolyzer: %i (kWh/day)\n",-sum(Electrolyzer_energy))
fprintf("Energy Hydrogrid: %i (kWh/day)\n",sum(Hydrogrid_energy))
fprintf("\n")
fprintf("Profit \n")
fprintf("Profit PV: %i (euro/day)\n",Profit_PV)
fprintf("Profit Fuel cell: %i (euro/day)\n",Profit_FuelCell)
fprintf("Cost Electrolyzer: %i (euro/day)\n",-Cost_Electrolyzer)
fprintf("Profit Hydrogrid: %i (euro/day)\n",Profit_Hydrogrid)
fprintf(" _____________\n")
fprintf("Profit total: %i (euro/day)\n",Profit_day)

APPENDIX D REFERENCE SOLAR PARK USAGE SOURCE CODE
Matlab
clear;
format compact
Solar_power=1000*[0 0 0 0 0 0 0.138 1.016 4.093 7.9 11.65 14.89 16 16 16

16 15.981 13.041 9.453 5.602 2.078 0.514 0 0]; %kW
Residential_power=3300*ones(1,24); %kW
Grid_energy_price=0.07
Total_power=Solar_power-Residential_power;
for i=1:24
if Total_power(i)>5440
Solar_power_corrected(i)=Solar_power(i)-(Total_power(i)-5440);
else
Solar_power_corrected(i)=Solar_power(i);
end
end
kWh=sum(Solar_power_corrected)
kWh=sum(Solar_power)

H2 - The Energy - Storage - For - Tomorrow - Minor Project Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

H2 - The Energy - Storage - For - Tomorrow - Minor Project Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

H2 - The Energy - Storage - For - Tomorrow - Minor Project Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Minor Project

H2 the energy storage for tomorrow & the

Arnhem, version 2020

template minor project report i

Name/number of the group:

Name of students: Humayon Nauzadi & Stefan Bruins

HAN Supervisor: Ballard Asare-Bediako

Date: < June, 2021 >

ii template minor project report

template minor project report iii

iv template minor project report

template minor project report v

1.2 Problem definition

template minor project report 1

Figure 2. Typical harvest from a solar farm on a daily basis

1.3 Project Objectives

2 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

1.5 Outline of the minor project report

template minor project report 3

2.1 Regional grids

4 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

Congestion due to solar parks can be caused by two effects:

Figure 4 Example single line diagram

template minor project report 5

2.2 Production profile of a solar park

6 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

Figure 7 Average length of day, sunrise and sunset (Infonu, n.d.)

Figure 8. Electricity price beakdown. (TenneT, 2021)

2.3 Load profile

template minor project report 7

2.4 Imbalance market

Figure 10 Imbalance prices in Belgium at 24/05/2021

8 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

template minor project report 9

10 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

2.6 Hydrogen storage

template minor project report 11

12 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

Gasunie is working on a project called Waterstofbackbone to create a main hydrogen network

Figure 16. Hydrogen pipeline network (Gasunie, Watersofbackbone, 2021)

template minor project report 13

3.2 Description of research design

- Usage of hydrogen as an energy storage medium in the energy market

3.2.1 Options A, B and C

14 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

3.2.2 Feasibility analysis

ROI= Annual profit/Σinvestments.

template minor project report 15

3.2 Sensitivity analysis

Figure 18 8 MW solar park, excess power

Figure 19 16MW solar park, excess power

16 H2 the energy storage for tomorrow

3.3 Optimalization technique

The control system can access the following systems:

- CV PV; The DC/AC converter of the solar farm

template minor project report 17

The hydrogen stored in a day therefore is: