% 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{Wulf:845986,
      author       = {Wulf, Christina and Kaltschmitt, Martin},
      title        = {{H}ydrogen supply chains for mobility - {E}nvironmental and
                      economic assessment},
      journal      = {Sustainability},
      volume       = {10},
      number       = {6},
      issn         = {2071-1050},
      address      = {Basel},
      publisher    = {MDPI},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2018-03158},
      pages        = {1-26},
      year         = {2018},
      abstract     = {Hydrogen mobility is one option for reducing local
                      emissions, avoiding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and
                      moving away from a mainly oil-based transport system towards
                      a diversification of energy sources. As hydrogen production
                      can be based on a broad variety of technologies already
                      existing or under development, a comprehensive assessment of
                      the different supply chains is necessary regarding not only
                      costs but also diverse environmental impacts. Therefore, in
                      this paper, a broad variety of hydrogen production
                      technologies using different energy sources, renewable and
                      fossil, are exemplarily assessed with the help of a Life
                      Cycle Assessment and a cost assessment for Germany. As
                      environmental impacts, along with the impact category
                      Climate change, five more advanced impact categories are
                      assessed. The results show that from an environmental point
                      of view, PEM and alkaline electrolysis are characterized by
                      the lowest results in five out of six impact categories.
                      Supply chains using fossil fuels, in contrast, have the
                      lowest supply costs; this is true, e.g., for steam methane
                      reforming. Solar powered hydrogen production shows low
                      impacts during hydrogen production but high impacts for
                      transport and distribution to Germany. There is no single
                      supply chain that is the most promising for every aspect
                      assessed here. Either costs have to be lowered further or
                      supply chains with selected environmental impacts have to be
                      modified.},
      cin          = {IEK-STE},
      ddc          = {333.7},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-STE-20101013},
      pnm          = {153 - Assessment of Energy Systems – Addressing Issues of
                      Energy Efficiency and Energy Security (POF3-153)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-153},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000436570100011},
      doi          = {10.3390/su10061699},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/845986},
}