Import options for chemical energy carriers from renewable sources to Germany

Abstract

Import and export of fossil energy carriers are cornerstones of energy systems world-wide. If energy systems are to become climate neutral and sustainable, fossil carriers need to be substituted with carbon neutral alternatives or electrified if possible. We investigate synthetic chemical energy carriers, H2, CH4, MeOH, NH3 and Fischer-Tropsch fuels (FTF), produced using electricity from RES as fossil substitutes. [...] We model the sourcing of feedstock chemicals, synthesis and transport along nine different Energy Supply Chains to Germany (DE) and compare import options for seven locations around the world against each other and with domestically sourced alternatives on the basis of their respective cost per unit of H2 and energy delivered. We find that for each type of chemical energy carrier, there is an import option with lower costs compared to domestic production in DE. No single exporting country or energy carrier has a unique cost advantage, since for each energy carrier and country there are cost-competitive alternatives. This allows exporter and infrastructure decisions to be made based on other criteria than energy and cost. The lowest cost means for importing of energy and H2 are by H2 pipeline from Denmark, Spain and Western Asia and Northern Africa starting at 36 EUR/MWhLHV to 42 EUR/MWh-LHV or 1.0 EUR/kg-H2 to 1.3 EUR/kg-H2 (in 2050, assuming 5 % p.a. capital cost). For complex energy carriers derived from H2 like CH4, NH3, MeOH or FTF, imports from Argentina by ship to DE are lower cost than closer exporters in the European Union or Western Asia and Northern Africa. For meeting H2 demand, direct H2 imports are more attractive than indirect routes using CH4, MeOH or NH3 imports and subsequent decomposition to H2 because of high capital investment costs and energetic losses. We make our model and data available under open licenses for adaptation and reuse.