% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Robinius:834294,
      author       = {Robinius, Martin and Raje, Tanmay and Nykamp, Stefan and
                      Rott, Tobias and Müller, Martin and Grube, Thomas and
                      Katzenbach, Burkhard and Küppers, Stefan and Stolten,
                      Detlef},
      title        = {{P}ower-to-{G}as {E}lectrolyzers as an {A}lternative to
                      {N}etwork {E}xpansion - {A}n {E}xample from a {D}istribution
                      {S}ystem {O}perator},
      journal      = {Applied energy},
      volume       = {210},
      issn         = {0306-2619},
      address      = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier Science},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2017-04276},
      pages        = {182 - 197},
      year         = {2018},
      abstract     = {The high share of fluctuating renewable energy sources
                      (FRES) such as wind and photovoltaic (PV) necessitates the
                      need for controllable generation, storage devices or
                      adjustable consumption, due to the surplus arising from
                      installed capacity that exceeds the conventional electrical
                      load. The use of this surplus to produce hydrogen and oxygen
                      via electrolysis is called “Power-to-Gas” (P2G). This
                      study investigates the potential use of electrolyzers in the
                      electrical distribution grid as an alternative to a network
                      expansion with cables. For this purpose, an existing
                      distribution grid was modelled and the possible size of an
                      electrolyzer investigated so as to achieve the same effect
                      as with an electrical cable in terms of, for example, the
                      voltage level. The investment cost of both possibilities was
                      compared and the hydrogen production costs analyzed. The
                      results show that laying a cable is currently a more
                      cost-effective option in comparison to an electrolyzer,
                      costing around $30\%$ of the overall investment required for
                      the electrolyzer. The remaining $70\%$ of the electrolyzer
                      cost needs to be met by other means, for example by selling
                      the hydrogen produced. However, profitability is highly
                      dependent on the surplus in the grid and thus the full load
                      hours of the electrolyzer. Furthermore, the results obtained
                      cannot be generalized, since they are highly influenced by
                      the scenario used.},
      cin          = {IEK-3},
      ddc          = {620},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-3-20101013},
      pnm          = {134 - Electrolysis and Hydrogen (POF3-134)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-134},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000419813100015},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.117},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/834294},
}