Version 1
: Received: 13 November 2023 / Approved: 14 November 2023 / Online: 14 November 2023 (16:54:19 CET)
Version 2
: Received: 15 February 2024 / Approved: 15 February 2024 / Online: 16 February 2024 (01:56:33 CET)
Jarin, J.-B.; Beddok, S.; Haritchabalet, C. Techno-Economic Comparison of Low-Carbon Energy Carriers Based on Electricity for Air Mobility. Energies2024, 17, 1151.
Jarin, J.-B.; Beddok, S.; Haritchabalet, C. Techno-Economic Comparison of Low-Carbon Energy Carriers Based on Electricity for Air Mobility. Energies 2024, 17, 1151.
Jarin, J.-B.; Beddok, S.; Haritchabalet, C. Techno-Economic Comparison of Low-Carbon Energy Carriers Based on Electricity for Air Mobility. Energies2024, 17, 1151.
Jarin, J.-B.; Beddok, S.; Haritchabalet, C. Techno-Economic Comparison of Low-Carbon Energy Carriers Based on Electricity for Air Mobility. Energies 2024, 17, 1151.
Abstract
Decarbonization of air mobility requires the decarbonization of its energy. While biofuels will play an important role, other low carbon energy carriers based on electricity are considered: battery electrification, liquid hydrogen (LH2) or eFuel, a hydrogen-based energy carrier. Each energy carrier has its own conversion steps and losses and its own integration effects with the aircraft. These combinations lead to different energy requirements and must be understood to compare their cost and CO2 emissions. Since they are all electricity-based, this study compares these energy carriers using the well to rotor methodology when applied to a standard Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) air mobility mission. This novel approach allows one to understand that the choice of the energy carrier dictates the propulsive system architecture, leading to integration effects with the aircraft which can significantly change the energy required, from 400 to 2665 kWh for the same mission. These deviations lead significant differences in CO2 emissions and costs. Battery electrification is impacted by the battery manufacturing but has the lowest electricity consumption. It is an optimum solution but only until the battery weight can be lifted. In all scenarios eFuel is more efficient than LH2. We conclude that carrying the most efficient molecule in an aircraft pays the extra energy cost spent on the ground. Finally, we found that for each of these energy carriers, it is the electricity carbon intensity and price which will dictate the cost and CO2 emissions of an air mobility mission.
Keywords
air mobility; efuel; hydrogen; battery electric; CO2
Subject
Engineering, Energy and Fuel Technology
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
