Hydrogen energy storage can be used to achieve goals of national energy security, renewable energy integration, and grid resilience. Adapting underground natural gas storage facility (UNGSF) infrastructure for underground hydrogen storage (UHS) is one method of storing large quantities of hydrogen that has already largely been proven to work for natural gas. There are currently some underground salt caverns in the United States that are being used for hydrogen storage by commercial entities, but it is still a fairly new concept in that it has not been widely deployed nor has it been done with other geologic formations like depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs. Assessments of UHS systems can help identify and evaluate risks to people both working within the facility and residing nearby. This report provides example risk assessment methodologies and analyses for generic wellhead and processing facility configurations, specifically in the context of the risks of unintentional hydrogen releases into the air. Assessment of the hydrogen containment in the subsurface is also critically important for a safety assessment for a UHS facility, but those geomechanical assessments are not included in this report.
Quantitative risk assessment (QRA) is highly dependent on data, leading to more robust models as new and updated data is acquired. The Hydrogen Plus Other Alternative Fuels Risk Assessment (HyRAM+) QRA capabilities include calculations of individual risk from leaks in a gaseous hydrogen facility due to the potential effects of jet fires and explosions. Leak frequencies are acquired through statistical analysis of published data from a variety of sources and industries. The filter leak frequencies in previous versions of the HyRAM+ software are substantially greater than the leak frequencies of other components, leading to QRA results for gaseous hydrogen in which filters consistently dominate the overall risk. Data that were previously used to derive the filter leak frequencies were reevaluated for applicability and additional data points were added to update the filter leak frequencies. The new frequencies are more comparable to leak frequencies for other components.
Hydrogen continues to show promise as a viable contributor to achieving energy storage goals such as energy security and decarbonization in the United States. However, many new and expanded hydrogen use applications will require identifying methods of larger-scale storage than the solutions that currently exist for smaller storage applications. One possibility is to store large quantities of gaseous hydrogen below ground level. Underground storage of other fuels such as natural gas is already currently utilized, so much of the infrastructure and basic technologies can be used as a basis for underground hydrogen storage (UHS). A few commercial UHS facilities currently exist in the United States, including salt caverns owned and operated by Air Liquide, Linde, and Conoco Philips, but UHS is still a relatively new concept that has not been widely deployed. It is necessary to understand the safety risks and hazards associated with UHS before its use can be expanded and accepted more broadly. Many of these risks are addressed through regulations, codes, and standards (RCS) issued by governing bodies and organizations with expertise in certain hazards. This report is a review of RCS documents relevant to UHS, with a particular lens on potential technical gaps in existing guidance. These gaps may be specific to the physical properties of hydrogen or due to the different technologies relevant for hydrogen vs. natural gas storage. This is meant to be a high-level review to identify relevant documents and potential gaps. Formally addressing the individual gaps identified here within the codes and standards themselves would involve a more intensive analysis and differ based on the code or standard revision processes of the various publishing organizations. Therefore, presenting specific recommendations for revising the verbiage of the documents for UHS applications is left for future work and other publications.
The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, natural gas, and autogas systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying leak sizes and rates, predicting physical effects, characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impacts on people. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards, and to provide developed models in a publicly-accessible toolkit usable by all stakeholders. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 5.1. The most significant changes for HyRAM+ version 5.1 from HyRAM+ version 5.0 are updated default leak frequency values for propane, new default component counts for different fuel types, and an improved fuel specification view in the graphical user interface.
Hydrogen Plus Other Alternative Fuels Risk Assessment Models (HyRAM+) is a software toolkit that provides a basis for quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for alternative fuels infrastructure and transportation systems. HyRAM+ integrates validated, analytical models of alternative fuel behavior, statistics, and a standardized quantitative risk assessment approach to generate useful, repeatable results for the safety analysis of various alternative fuel systems. This document demonstrates how to use HyRAM+ to analyze an example system, providing tutorials of HyRAM+ features with respect to system safety analysis and risk assessment.
Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is used in heating, cooking, and as a vehicle fuel (called autogas). A safety risk assessment may be needed to assess potential hazard scenarios and inform the regulations, codes, and standards that apply to LPG facilities, such as autogas refueling facilities. The frequency of unintended releases in an LPG system is an important aspect of a system quantitative risk assessment. This report documents estimation of leakage frequencies for individual components of LPG systems. These frequencies are described using uncertainty distributions obtained with Bayesian statistical methods, generic data, and LPG data which were publicly available. There was a lack of LPG data in the literature, so frequencies for most components were developed with generic data and should be used cautiously; without additional information about component leak frequencies in LPG systems, it is not known whether these generic frequencies may be conservative or non-conservative.
We investigate the potential of liquid hydrogen storage (LH2) on-board Class-8 heavy duty trucks to resolve many of the range, weight, volume, refueling time and cost issues associated with 350 or 700-bar compressed H2 storage in Type-3 or Type-4 composite tanks. We present and discuss conceptual storage system configurations capable of supplying H2 to fuel cells at 5-bar with or without on-board LH2 pumps. Structural aspects of storing LH2 in double walled, vacuum insulated, and low-pressure Type-1 tanks are investigated. Structural materials and insulation methods are discussed for service at cryogenic temperatures and mitigation of heat leak to prevent LH2 boil-off. Failure modes of the liner and shell are identified and analyzed using the regulatory codes and detailed finite element (FE) methods. The conceptual systems are subjected to a failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) and a safety, codes, and standards (SCS) review to rank failures and identify safety gaps. The results indicate that the conceptual systems can reach 19.6% useable gravimetric capacity, 40.9 g-H2/L useable volumetric capacity and $174–183/kg-H2 cost (2016 USD) when manufactured 100,000 systems annually.
The previous separation distances in the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Hydrogen Technologies Code (NFPA 2, 2020 Edition) for bulk liquid hydrogen systems lack a well-documented basis and can be onerous. This report describes the technical justifications for revisions of the bulk liquid hydrogen storage setback distances in NFPA 2, 2023 Edition. Distances are calculated based on a leak area that is 5% of the nominal pipe flow area. Models from the open source HyRAM+ toolkit are used to justify the leak size as well as calculate consequence-based separation distances from that leak size. Validation and verification of the numerical models is provided, as well as justification for the harm criteria used for the determination of the setback distances for each exposure type. This report also reviews mitigations that could result in setback distance reduction. The resulting updates to the liquid hydrogen separation distances are well-documented, retrievable, repeatable, revisable, independently verified, and use experimental results to verify the models.
The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, natural gas, and autogas systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying leak sizes and rates, predicting physical effects, characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impacts on people. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards, and to provide developed models in a publicly-accessible toolkit usable by all stakeholders. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 5.0. The most significant change for HyRAM+ version 5.0 from HyRAM+ version 4.1 is the ability to model blends of different fuels. HyRAM+ was previously only suitable for use with hydrogen, methane, or propane, with users having the ability to use methane as a proxy for natural gas and propane as a proxy for autogas/liquefied petroleum gas. In version 5.0, real natural gas or autogas compositions can be modeled as the fuel, or even blends of natural gas with hydrogen. These blends can be used in the standalone physics models, but not yet in the quantitative risk assessment mode of HyRAM+.
The frequency of unintended releases in a compressed natural gas system is an important aspect of the system quantitative risk assessment. The frequencies for possible release scenarios, along with engineering models, are utilized to quantify the risks for compressed natural gas facilities. This report documents component leakage frequencies representative of compressed natural gas components that were estimated as a function of the normalized leak size. A Bayesian statistical method was used which results in leak frequency distributions for each component which represent variation and uncertainty in the leak frequency. The analysis shows that there is high uncertainty in the estimated leak frequencies due to sparsity in compressed natural gas data. These leak frequencies may still be useful in compressed natural gas system risk assessments, as long as this high uncertainty is acknowledged and considered appropriately.
Liquid hydrogen (LH2) used as a fuel onboard a heavy-duty vehicle can result in increased storage capacity and faster refueling relative to compressed gas. However, there are concerns about hydrogen losses from boil-off, potential safety issues, gaps in codes and standards for cryogenic hydrogen fuel, and technical challenges with LH2 systems for widespread transportation applications. A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), a safety codes and standards review, and a design review of the onboard liquid hydrogen system for a heavy-duty vehicle identified some of these potential safety issues and gaps in the codes and standards. The FMEA identified some medium and low risk failure points of the conceptual design, and the design review identified how carefully pressure relief needs to be considered for LH2 systems. In addition, a conceptual design for a LH2 refueling station was developed. Rough capital costs for the refueling station design were $\$1 million$ and the layout occupied approximately 13,000 ft2. These results can be used to inform future designs and analyses for LH2 heavy-duty vehicles.
Hydrogen is an important resource for many different industries throughout the world, including refining, manufacturing, and as a direct energy source. Hydrogen production, through methods such as steam methane reforming, has been developed over several decades. There is a large global demand for hydrogen from these industries and safe production and distribution are paramount for hydrogen systems. Codes and standards have been developed to reduce the risk associated with hydrogen accidents to the public. These codes and standards are similar to those in other industries in which there is inherent risk to the public, such as gasoline and natural gas production and distribution. Although there will always be a risk to the public in these types of fuels, the codes and standards are developed to reduce the likelihood of an accident occurring and reduce the severity of impact, should one occur. This report reviews the current state of hydrogen in the United States and outlines the codes and standards that ensure safe operation of hydrogen systems. The total hydrogen demand and use in different industries is identified. Additionally, the current landscape of hydrogen production and fueling stations in the United States is outlined. The safety of hydrogen systems is discussed through an overview of the purpose, methods, and content included in codes and standards. As outlined in this safety overview, the risk to the public in operation of hydrogen generation facilities and fueling stations is reduced through implementation of appropriate measures. Codes, such as NFPA 2, ensure that the risk associated with a hydrogen system is no greater than the risk presented by gasoline refueling stations.
The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, methane, and propane systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying accident scenarios, predicting physical effects, characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impacts on people. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards, and to provide developed models in a publicly-accessible toolkit usable by all stakeholders. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 4.1. The two most significant changes for HyRAM+ version 4.1 from HyRAM+ version 4.0 are direct incorporation of unconfined overpressure into the QRA calculations and modification of the models for cryogenic liquid flow through an orifice. In QRA mode, the user no longer needs to input peak overpressure and impulse values that were calculated separately; rather, the unconfined overpressure is estimated for the given system inputs, leak size, and occupant location. The orifice flow model now solves for the maximum mass flux through the orifice at constant entropy while conserving energy, which does not require a direct speed of sound calculation. This does not affect the mass flow for all-gaseous releases; the method results in the same speed of sound for choked flow. However, this method does result in a higher (and more realistic) mass flow rate for a given leak size for liquid releases than was previously calculated.
There are several different calculation approaches and tools that can be used to evaluate the risk of hydrogen energy applications. A comparative study of Air Liquide’s ALDEA (Air Liquide Dispersion and Explosion Assessment) tools suite and Sandia’s HyRAM (Hydrogen Risk Assessment Models) toolkit has been conducted. The purpose of this study was to understand and evaluate the differences between the two calculation approaches, and identify areas for model improvements. There were several scenarios examined in this effort regarding hydrogen release dynamics. These scenarios include free jet release cases at varying pressures, vessel blowdown, and hydrogen build-up scenarios with and without ventilation. For each scenario, the input and output of the HyRAM calculations are documented, along with a comparison to the ALDEA results. Generally, the results from the two different tools were reasonably aligned. However, there were fundamental differences in evaluation methodology and functional limitations in HyRAM that caused discrepancies in some calculations.
The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, methane, and propane infrastructure and transportation systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art science and engineering models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ includes generic probabilities for equipment failures, probabilistic models for the impact of heat flux on humans and structures, and experimentally validated first-order models of release and flame physics. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying accident scenarios, predicting physical effects, and characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impact on people and structures. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards. HyRAM+ is a research software in active development and thus the models and data may change. This report will be updated at appropriate developmental intervals. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 4.0. The most significant change for HyRAM+ version 4.0 from HyRAM version 3.1 is the incorporation of other alternative fuels, namely methane (as a proxy for natural gas) and propane into the toolkit. This change necessitated significant changes to the installable graphical user interface as well as changes to the back-end Python models. A second major change is the inclusion of physics models for the overpressure associated with the delayed ignition of an unconfined jet/plume of flammable gas.
The feasibility and component cost of hydrogen rail refueling infrastructure is examined. Example reference stations can inform future studies on components and systems specifically for hydrogen rail refueling facilities. All of the 5 designs considered assumed the bulk storage of liquid hydrogen on-site, from which either gaseous or liquid hydrogen would be dispensed. The first design was estimated to refuel 10 multiple unit trains per day, each train containing 260 kg of gaseous hydrogen at 350 bar on-board. The second base design targeted the refueling of 50 passenger locomotives, each with 400 kg of gaseous hydrogen on-board at 350 bar. Variations from this basic design were made to consider the effect of two different filling times, two different hydrogen compression methods, and two different station design approaches. For each design variation, components were sized, approximate costs were estimated for major components, and physical layouts were created. For both gaseous hydrogen-dispensing base designs, the design of direct-fill using a cryopump design was the lowest cost due to the high cost of the cascade storage system and gas compressor. The last three base designs all assumed that liquid hydrogen was dispensed into tender cars for freight locomotives that required 7,500 kg of liquid hydrogen, and the three different designs assumed that 5, 50, or 200 tender cars were refueled every day. The total component costs are very different for each design, because each design has a very different dispensing capacity. The total component cost for these three designs are driven by the cost of the liquid hydrogen tank; additionally, delivering that much liquid hydrogen to the refueling facility may not be practical. Many of the designs needed the use of multiple evaporators, compressors, and cryopumps operating in parallel to meet required flow rates. In the future, the components identified here can be improved and scaled-up to better fit the needs of heavy-duty refueling facilities. This study provides basic feasibility and first-order design guidance for hydrogen refueling facilities serving emerging rail applications.