Techno-economic Risk Analysis for Onboard Hydrogen Storage by Quantitative Risk Assessment
Ieee account.
- Change Username/Password
- Update Address
Purchase Details
- Payment Options
- Order History
- View Purchased Documents
Profile Information
- Communications Preferences
- Profession and Education
- Technical Interests
- US & Canada: +1 800 678 4333
- Worldwide: +1 732 981 0060
- Contact & Support
- About IEEE Xplore
- Accessibility
- Terms of Use
- Nondiscrimination Policy
- Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies
A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of humanity. © Copyright 2024 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.
Advertisement
Risk Assessment of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles in Tunnels
- Published: 21 September 2019
- Volume 56 , pages 891–912, ( 2020 )
Cite this article
- Brian D. Ehrhart 1 ,
- Dusty M. Brooks 1 ,
- Alice B. Muna 1 &
- Chris B. LaFleur 1
2241 Accesses
11 Citations
60 Altmetric
Explore all metrics
The need to understand the risks and implications of traffic incidents involving hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles in tunnels is increasing in importance with higher numbers of these vehicles being deployed. A risk analysis was performed to capture potential scenarios that could occur in the event of a crash and provide a quantitative calculation for the probability of each scenario occurring, with a qualitative categorization of possible consequences. The risk analysis was structured using an event sequence diagram with probability distributions on each event in the tree and random sampling was used to estimate resulting probability distributions for each end-state scenario. The most likely consequence of a crash is no additional hazard from the hydrogen fuel (98.1–99.9% probability) beyond the existing hazards in a vehicle crash, although some factors need additional data and study to validate. These scenarios include minor crashes with no release or ignition of hydrogen. When the hydrogen does ignite, it is most likely a jet flame from the pressure relief device release due to a hydrocarbon fire (0.03–1.8% probability). This work represents a detailed assessment of the state-of-knowledge of the likelihood associated with various vehicle crash scenarios. This is used in an event sequence framework with uncertainty propagation to estimate uncertainty around the probability of each scenario occurring.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this article
Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Rent this article via DeepDyve
Institutional subscriptions
Similar content being viewed by others
Computational fluid dynamics modelling of a hydrogen fire safety in a scaled tunnel environment
Risk Optimisation of an Automobile Hydrogen System
Minimum Fire Size for Hydrogen Storage Tank Fire Test Protocol and Design Guides for Hydrogen Bus Established via Risk-Based Approach
California Fuel Cell Partnership (2019) How It Works. https://cafcp.org/sites/default/files/HowItWorks-Fuel-Cell-Booklet.pdf . Accessed 10 Apr 2019
Tchouvelev A, Hay D, Bénard P (2006) Quantitative risk comparison of hydrogen and CNG refuelling options. Final technical report to Natural Resources Canada
United Nations (2013) Global technical regulation on hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles. ECE/TRANS/180/Add.13 http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29gen/wp29registry/ECE-TRANS-180a13e.pdf
National Fire Protection Association (2010) NFPA 502, standard for road tunnels, bridges, and other limited access highways
Code of Federal Regulations. Standard No. 304; Compressed natural gas fuel container integrity. 49 CFR 571.304
Zalosh R, Pilette Y, Wang W (1994) Hazard analysis of alternative fueled vehicles in CA/T tunnels, part 1: CNG fueled vehicles. Center for Firesafety Studies, Worcester Polytechnic Institute report prepared for Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff Massachusetts Highway Department
Pasman H (2011) Challenges to improve confidence level of risk assessment of hydrogen technologies. Int J Hydrog Energy 36:2407–2413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.019
Article Google Scholar
Rodionov A, Wilkening H, Moretto P (2011) Risk assessment of hydrogen explosion for private car with hydrogen-driven engine. Int J Hydrog Energy 36 (3):2398–2406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.04.089
Dadashzadeh M, Kashkarov S, Makarov D, Molkov V (2018) Risk assessment methodology for onboard hydrogen storage. Int J Hydrog Energy 43 (12):6462–6475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.01.195
LI Zhiyong, PAN Xiangmin, MA Jianxin (2011) Quantitative risk assessment on 2010 expo hydrogen station. Int J Hydrog Energy 36 (6):4079–4086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.12.068
Middha P, Hansen OR (2009) CFD simulation study to investigate the risk from hydrogen vehicles in tunnels. Int J Hydrog Energy 34 (14):5875–5886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.02.004
Kaplan S, Garrick BJ, Apostolakis G (1981) Advances in quantitative risk assessment—the maturing of a discipline. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 28 (1):944–946. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.1981.4331310
Hall JR, Watts JM (2008) Fire risk analysis. In: Fire protection handbook, 20th edn. National Fire Protection Administration (NFPA): 3-135 to 3-143
California Fuel Cell Partnership (2019) FCEV Sales, FCEB, & Hydrogen Station Data. https://cafcp.org/by_the_number . Accessed 10 Apr 2019
Bassan S (2016) Overview of traffic safety aspects and design in road tunnels. IATSS Res 40 (1):35–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iatssr.2016.02.002
Caliendo C, De Guglielmo ML, Guida M (2013) A crash-prediction model for road tunnels. Accid Anal Prev 55:107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.024
Nathan O, Siu DLK (1998) Bayesian parameter estimation in probabilistic risk assessment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 62 (1–2):89–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00159-2
Pape D, Cox A (2015) Compressed hydrogen container fueling options for crash testing. DOT HS 812 133. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC
Google Scholar
Batelle Memorial Institute (2015) Crashworthiness research of prototype hydrogen fuel cell vehicles: task order 7 project report. DOT HS 812 112. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report, Washington, DC
Yamazaki K, Tamura Y (2017) Study of a post-fire verification method for the activation status of hydrogen cylinder pressure relief devices. Int J Hydrog Energy 42 (11):7716–7720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.07.197
Suzuki J, Tamura Y, Watanabe S, Takabayashi M, Sato K (2006) Fire safety evaluation of a vehicle equipped with hydrogen fuel cylinders: comparison with gasoline and CNG vehicles. Paper presented at the 2006 SAE World Congress, Detroit, Michigan, 4/3/2006–4/6/2006
Zheng J, Bie H, Xu P, Chen H, Liu P, Li X, Liu Y (2010) Experimental and numerical studies on the bonfire test of high-pressure hydrogen storage vessels. Int J Hydrog Energy 35 (15):8191–8198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.12.092
Weyandt N (2009) Compressed hydrogen cylinder research and testing in accordance with FMVSS 304. DOT HS 811 150, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC
Seike M, Ejiri Y, Kawabata N, Hasegawa M, Tanaka H (2014) Fire experiments of carrier loaded FCV in full-scale model tunnel: estimation of heat release rate and smoke generation rate. Paper presented at the third international conference on fire in vehicles, Berlin, Germany, 10/1/2014–10/2/2014
LaChance J, Houf W, Middleton B, Fluer L (2009) Analyses to support development of risk-informed separation distances for hydrogen codes and standards. SAND2009-0874, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
National Fire Protection Association (2016) NFPA 55, Compressed gases and cryogenic fluids code
Groth KM, LaChance JL, Harris AP (2012) Early-stage quantitative risk assessment to support development of codes and standard requirements for indoor fueling of hydrogen vehicles. SAND2012-10150, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
Book Google Scholar
Download references
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the U. S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Hydrogen, Fuel Cells and Infrastructure Technologies Program. The views expressed in the article do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Energy or the U.S. Government. The authors wish to thank Paul LaFleur of the Federal Highway Safety Administration for his help in identifying vehicle crash data. The authors also wish to thank Joe Rigney of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation for his help in providing tunnel information and feedback on the analysis. Finally, the authors with to thank Will James and Laura Hill of FCTO for their leadership in this analysis, as well as Jay Keller (consultant), Nick Barilo (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory), and Carl Rivkin (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) who provided very useful feedback on the analysis and report. Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525.
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 87185, USA
Brian D. Ehrhart, Dusty M. Brooks, Alice B. Muna & Chris B. LaFleur
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Chris B. LaFleur .
Additional information
Publisher's note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Ehrhart, B.D., Brooks, D.M., Muna, A.B. et al. Risk Assessment of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles in Tunnels. Fire Technol 56 , 891–912 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-019-00910-z
Download citation
Received : 23 August 2018
Accepted : 14 September 2019
Published : 21 September 2019
Issue Date : May 2020
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-019-00910-z
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Fuel cell electric vehicle
- Event sequence diagram
- Find a journal
- Publish with us
- Track your research
Risk assessment methodology for onboard hydrogen storage
Citation Count
[What is a cost-benefit analysis?].
Review of hydrogen safety during storage, transmission, and applications processes, selection of proton exchange membrane fuel cell for transportation, sensing advancement towards safety assessment of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, hydrogen fuel cell road vehicles and their infrastructure: an option towards an environmentally friendly energy transition, probability, random variables and stochastic processes, probability, random variables, and stochastic processes, probit analysis (3rd ed)., cost-benefit analysis, related papers (5), quantitative risk assessment of an urban hydrogen refueling station, blast wave from a high-pressure gas tank rupture in a fire: stand-alone and under-vehicle hydrogen tanks, preliminary hazard identification for qualitative risk assessment on a hybrid gasoline-hydrogen fueling station with an on-site hydrogen production system using organic chemical hydride, safety risk modeling and major accidents analysis of hydrogen and natural gas releases: a comprehensive risk analysis framework, quantified risk assessment on life and property loss from road collision vehicle fires with hydrogen-fueled tank.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
A quantitative risk assessment of onboard hydrogen-powered vehicle storage, exposed to a fire, is performed. The risk is defined twofold as a cost of human life per vehicle fire, and annual fatality rate per vehicle. The increase of fire resistance rating of the storage tank is demonstrated to drastically reduce the risk to acceptable level.
Figures 5 and 6 present the fatality rate as a function of FRR of onboard storage tank. For hydrogen engulfing fire (Fig. 5), the risk for bare tank with 8 min is about three times higher than the FRR= acceptable level (top of the blue area ). The acceptable level of risk here is 1. 00 ∙10. −5.
Hydrogen safety Quantitative risk assessment Onboard hydrogen storage Blast wave and fireball Fire resistance rating Socio-economics abstract A quantitative risk assessment of onboard hydrogen-powered vehicle storage, exposed to a fire, is performed. The risk is defined twofold as a cost of human life per vehicle fire, and annual fatality ...
Abstract. A quantitative risk assessment of onboard hydrogen-powered vehicle storage, exposed to a fire, is performed. The risk is defined twofold as a cost of human life per vehicle fire, and ...
This study presents a methodology of a quantitative risk assessment for the scenario of an onboard hydrogen storage tank rupture and tunnel fire incident. The application of the methodology is demonstrated on a road tunnel. The consequence analysis is carried out for the rupture of a 70 MPa, 62.4-litre hydrogen storage tank in a fire, that has a thermally activated pressure relief device (TPRD ...
S. Kashkarov M. Dadashzadeh S. Sivaraman V. Molkov. Engineering, Environmental Science. Hydrogen. 2022. This study presents a methodology of a quantitative risk assessment for the scenario of an onboard hydrogen storage tank rupture and tunnel fire incident. The application of the methodology is….
Abstract: This study presents a methodology of a quantitative risk assessment for the scenario of an onboard hydrogen storage tank rupture and tunnel fire incident. The application of the methodology is demonstrated on a road tunnel. The consequence analysis is carried out for the rupture of a 70 MPa, 62.4-litre hydrogen storage tank in a ...
Cybersecurity risk assessment will be initiated in FY 2023 and eventually incorporated into the main stream large-scale hydrogen storage risk assessment. Work performed in FY 2023 will result in a technical report outlining the baseline risk assessment results. The baseline is a hydrogen plant targeted to produce about 300 kg hydrogen per day ...
A quantitative risk assessment of onboard hydrogen-powered vehicle storage, exposed to a fire, is performed. The risk is defined twofold as a cost of human life per vehicle fire, and annual fatality rate per vehicle. The increase of fire resistance rating of the storage tank is demonstrated to drastically reduce the risk to acceptable level.
Catastrophic rupture of onboard hydrogen storage in a fire is a safety concern. Different passive, e.g. fireproofing materials, the thermally activated pressure relief device (TPRD), and active, e.g. initiation ... [17] and it was propped as an efficient method for the high-level risk assessment of hydrogen supply chain. The role of uncertainty ...
There are still safety concerns to use hydrogen as energy storage for commercial applications in a safe, efficient and cost-effective way. This paper is dedicated to discussion on safety improvement of hydrogen storage equipment for onboard applications. It provides a brief review, and then a quantitative risk assessment framework is presented. The procedure to execute the framework is ...
Finally, the risk level and development trend of hydrogen storage tanks in hydrogen filling stations are determined by a combination of the three-category connection coefficient algorithms and the ...
underground hydrogen storage; risk assessment; analytical hierarchy method. 1. Introduction. Hydrogen is a very good energy carrier, a "clean" fuel (its combustion produces only energy and water) and can be an energy store. The use of hydrogen as an energy carrier can play a major role in a carbon neutral economy.
This study used a quantitative risk assessment methodology using both fatalities and costs as harm metrics. ... Molkov V (2018) Risk assessment methodology for onboard hydrogen storage. Int J Hydrog Energy 43 (12):6462-6475. ... Li X, Liu Y (2010) Experimental and numerical studies on the bonfire test of high-pressure hydrogen storage vessels ...
This study presents a methodology of a quantitative risk assessment for the scenario of an onboard hydrogen storage tank rupture and tunnel fire incident. The application of the methodology is … Expand. 6. Highly Influenced [PDF] 5 Excerpts; Save.
A quantitative risk assessment of onboard hydrogen-powered vehicle storage, exposed to a fire, is performed. The risk is defined twofold as a cost of human life per vehicle fire, and annual fatality rate per vehicle. The increase of fire resistance rating of the storage tank is demonstrated to drastically reduce the risk to acceptable level. Hazard distances are calculated by validated ...
Geological hydrogen storage, e.g. in depleted gas fields (DGF), can overcome imbalances between supply and demand in the renewable energy sector and facilitate the transition to a low carbon emissions society. A range of subsurface microorganisms utilise hydrogen, which may have important implications for hydrogen recovery, clogging and corrosion. We gathered temperature and salinity data for ...
Section snippets Risk assessment methods. The procedure of the hazard identification research is depicted in Fig. 1. The HAZOP process is used to analyze hazards caused by the internal characteristic deviation of onboard hydrogen storage and supply system, such as flow and temperature, and the HAZOP analysis can clearly demonstrate the significance of a particular system component.