BEV & FCHEVs have independent but complementary roles in decarbonizing the commercial vehicle sector

Multiple solutions will likely be needed to meet the extremely diverse demands to decarbonize the medium and heavy-duty transportation segment. The widely accepted view among vehicle manufacturers and technology enthusiasts is that battery electric vehicles (BEVs) are good for short range commercial vehicles and fuel cell hybrid vehicles (FCHEVs) can cater to longer-range applications. However, the delineation of the choice of powertrain based on the range is not always clear across classes and applications.

A study conducted by Argonne National Laboratory showed that based on total cost of ownership (TCO), the optimum technology choice between BEV & FCHEV will vary based on the vehicle design criteria, technology cost assumptions, and fuel and energy prices. For many applications, short-range BEVs may reach 50th¬or up to 80th-percentile mileage needs, while for a smaller share of routes FCEVs may be more economically beneficial. Vehicles are designed for ranges ranging from 80 miles to several hundred miles for several types of trucks and buses. TCO was estimated based on vehicle price, fuel/energy expenses for average and high levels of vehicle usage.

Incremental cost of adding a kWh of hydrogen storage ($9/kWh) is far lower than the cost of adding a kWh of usable battery energy ($125/kWh). As a result, longer range FCHEVs are more economically competitive than BEVs with similar range. Assuming the US DOE technology development targets (for batteries, hydrogen storage and fuel cells) are all met for the interim period, BEVs are competitive for short-range designs. Beyond a certain ‘designed range’ FCHEVs then become economically attractive. The data shows that if BEVs are designed to meet the worst-case scenario (i.e., higher percentile range requirements), they may lose their TCO advantage. The study considered 9 major commercial vehicle applications, highlighting the transition between BEVs and FCHEVs based on range. The sensitivity to fuel costs, electricity costs, vehicle usage were also quantified.

Figure 1. BEV and FCEV TCO competitiveness by design range. BEVs have lower TCO for shorter-range designs for all MHD applications. FCEVs have lower TCO for longer-range designs. VIUS 2021 data shows that both types of vehicles are needed to meet the needs of the consumers. Results assume 2030 fuel costs of $4/kg hydrogen and $0.15/kWh electricity

References:

• An Action Plan for Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicle Energy and Emissions Innovation, DOE/EE-2867, December 2024
• Vijayagopal, R. 2024. Identifying Medium & Heavy Duty Applications for Fuel Cell Electric Trucks. U.S. Department of Energy, 2021 Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office Annual Merit Review.