Feasibility study investigating transitioning a portion of Nairobi City road transport to a cleaner sustainable electric and hydrogen powered alternative

Heriot Watt University: ICIT, Orkney Campus

MSc Renewable Energy Development

Renewables Technology II: Integration

October 2016

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Introduction

Executive Summary

Nominated study city

Urban Transport mix selection and understanding

New PEV/HFCV annual energy and generation requirements

PEV/HFCV required Renewable energy projects

Technical brief on required PEV/HFCV Infrastructure and Systems

PEV/HFCV phased introduction project management

Critical assessment of proposed PEV/HFCV scheme

PEV/HFCV project Recommendations

Appendices

           Appendix A: Assumptions
           Appendix B: Project task sheet
           Appendix C: Supporting Material

Works Cited

 

List of Figures

Figure 1 – Nairobi City study area, ca. 695km2 with road maps (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 2 – Nairobi Population distribution, 2009 (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 3 – Nairobi land use map, 2009 (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 4 – Climate for Nairobi City (www.climatemps.com, 2016)

Figure 5 – Urban planning, transport and socio-economics issues (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 6 – In city 24hr weekday traffic volumes/% by vehicle type (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 7 – Hourly variation of total inbound/outbound traffic (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 8 – Road traffic per trip desire lines 2013 (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 9 – Typical Nairobi ‘Matatu’ buses (www.kachwanya.com)

Figure 10 – Nairobi traffic travel times vs. mode (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 11 –‘ Alt 3’  scenario; Nairobi City future urban transport installations (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 12 – Bi-Polar Corridor Development; proposed urban sub-centres (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 13 – ‘Alt 3’ scenario; Traffic modelling simulations using VCR  @2030  (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 14 – Toyota Mirai commercially available HFCV vehicle (www.toyota.com)

Figure 15 – Tesla Model X SUV (www.tesla.com)

Figure 16 – Proterra BE35 Public 35 seater PEV (NERL)

Figure 17 – Hydrogen HFCV Public Bus Van Hool E300L (NREL)

Figure 18 – ICE/PEV (assumed HFCV) vehicle TTW efficiency comparison (Gustafsson, T 2015)

Figure 19 – Comparable Electric and Hydrogen GTW/GTB efficiencies (Ulf Bossel, 2003)

Figure 20 – Auxiliary services power drain; Urban NY Bus scenario; EV buses (A. Lajunen, 2014)

Figure 21 – JKIA Nairobi airport monthly insolation (Wasike, 2015)

Figure 22 – Percentage of diffuse radiation, JKIA Nairobi (Wasike, 2015)

Figure 23 – Suntech’s largest commercial Solar PV (STP325S-24, Suntech)

Figure 24 – Kenyan Rift Geothermal Prospects /220kV Olkaria transmission line (KenGen, 2007)

Figure 25 – Nairobi City County electrical T&D map (Parsons Brinkerhoff, 2013)

Figure 26 – NREL Foothill PEV demonstration bus operating parameters (Prohaska, 2016)

Figure 27 – Honda/Iwatani Saitama City, Japan solar hydrogen refuelling station (Iwatani)

Figure 28 – JCIT traffic survey points 2013  (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Figure 29 – Kenyan Electricity Sector organisation (Brinkerhoff, 2013)

Figure 30 – Nairobi Region distribution network 2012 (Brinkerhoff, 2013)

List of Tables

Table 1 – Nairobi City and Greater region study split (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Table 2 – East African Rift Valley analogous cities to Nairobi (Laurie, 2016)

Table 3 – Key findings from NIUPLAN traffic survey

Table 4 – ‘Alt 3’ scenario; projected increase in trip numbers (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Table 5 – Calculated replacement traffic volumes and energy contingency (Laurie 2016)

Table 6 – ICE and replacement PEV/HFCV selected vehicle characteristics (Laurie 2016)

Table 7 – Energy calculation technology variables (Laurie 2016)

Table 8 – Final GTW/WTW vehicle efficiencies (Laurie 2016)

Table 9 – Daily vehicle power usage calculation (Laurie 2016)

Table 10 – Annual PEV/HFCV power: inc. Contingency & GTB/GTT Efficiencies (Laurie 2016)

Table 11 – Renewable Power Generation sizing calculations (Laurie 2016)

Table 12 – Olkaria (L) other Fields (R) showing Kenyan Geothermal resource (Omenda, 2012)

Table 13 – Hydrogen generation strategy for depots & private car refuelling (Laurie 2016)

Table 14 – PEV/HFCV Nairobi City Integration Schedule (Laurie 2016)

 

Introduction

The specific goal of this feasibility study was to convert a portion of a city’s public and private transport (constrained to 40% of current levels) to run off of a sustainable and environmentally friendly alternative energy source to fossil fuel as an urban transition demonstration. Along with other aligned national initiatives and in addition to greenhouse gas emissions reduction benefits; a reduction in dependence on fossil fuels for transportation by utilizing renewable energy technologies allows various aspects of a nation’s energy security and prosperity to be optimized. Reduced exposure to energy market instabilities, technical system failures and the impact of physical natural and man-made events would allow a more stable, cost effective forward looking energy future to be realized (S.Olz, 2007) .

Establishing and integrating a mix of battery electric (PEV) and hydrogen driven (HFCV) vehicles forms the main technical objective. Electricity and hydrogen transport fuels will be sourced from the latest and most appropriate renewable energy technology installations described and sited as locally as possible to usage. Finally a technical brief will explain electrical infrastructure considerations to link the new renewable generation energies and transport consumer technologies. The report is centered upon a real, international city with urban traffic problems requiring the transition of vehicles to a greener alternative.

A full list of assumptions can be found in the Appendix A. Key assumptions cover; Government, Municipal and Public approvals; Economic evaluations; Finance and Investments; Technical Installation and Operations; and Research studies amongst others.

Executive Summary

Nairobi City, Kenya was selected as the case study city for a range of relevant reasons. Most notable being the country is actively demonstrating the kind of renewable energy and urban planning transition that this study aims to compliment (Nairobi City Council with technical support from the Japan International Cooperation Agency, 2014). It is also an analogous case study city to other neighboring East African Rift Valley cities with similar resource access, growing traffic congestion and pollution problems.

Both implicitly and explicitly, this study for new vehicles attempts to include similar planning considerations to those detailed in the European road-map for electrification of road transportation, criteria includes  (ERTRAC, 2012);

  • Infrastructure planning (costs not included).
  • Quick charging impacts (PEV’s only).
  • Integration with Renewable energy generation.
  • Standardization (with developed country projects).
  • Regulatory aspects (assumed to not be a hurdle to implementation).

Using a 75:25 mix of 40% of the existing road transport volumes; commercially available standardized PEV vehicles, and a smaller selection set of commercially available HFCV respectively were identified. Minimal performance, and in some cases actual improved performance and energy efficiencies were demonstrated versus existing internal combustion engine (ICE) transportation.

Renewable and sustainable energy supplied through a combination of prioritized ‘smart grid’ management to shift energy demand patterns, Solar PV panels fitted near new public bus depots and on household roofs, and a stand alone centralized new Geothermal power expansion plant if required is viably demonstrated. Coupling new vehicle introduction to Nairobi’s existing electrical infrastructure improvement plans (Brinckerhoff, 2013) allows the identification and integration of PEV and HFCV vehicles renewable energy resource supply linkages.

Using analogous and relevant global studies on geothermal plant construction, actual PEV and HFCV testing, development and implementation in developed countries, and the Kenyan Authority urban and electrical infrastructure master plan – a flexible PEV/HFCV introduction schedule illustrates a viable, fully integrated new vehicle system plan for Nairobi City by 2025.

Nominated study city

Nairobi is the capital city in Kenya and was selected as the transition demonstration city. Being currently based in the East African Rift valley and having traveled extensively in the region I have first-hand experience of the practical and theoretical issues that such a transition project may encounter.

Key to selecting Nairobi was the recently completed Urban Development Master Plan – “The Project on Integrated Urban Development Master Plan for the city of Nairobi in the Republic of Kenya, FINAL REPORT, 2014“, which replaced the expired 1973 Nairobi Metropolitan Growth Survey. The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) provided the technical support to the Nairobi City Council (NCC) for its completion. This report is referenced to as “NIUPLAN” in this study and was heavily utilized as a source of comprehensive, relevant, well researched and appropriate analytical data for this feasibility study. Importantly the study, although extensive does not include reference to electric or hydrogen powered vehicles as part of future urban transport solution, or directly link renewable energy generation to transportation. Its here this feasibility study positions itself to complement the existing work by integrating with the countries development vision – “Nairobi 2030: An iconic and globally attractive city aimed at regional integration and sustainability”.

Nairobi is the largest city in Kenya, with a city population of 3.2 million located within the Greater Nairobi Metropolitan region comprising 5 million people in total (KNBS, 2009).  Formed in 1899 by colonial authorities, by 1905 the city was designated the capital of Kenya under the British Protectorate and remained so after Independence in 1963. Nairobi City for this study is split into eight divisions and the Greater Metropolitan region (Table 1). Figure 1, 2 and 3 illustrates the modern layout of the city, population distribution and land usage respectively.  The most notable features from each figure include The National Park taking up the entire south quadrant of the city (117km2) and main national highways passing through the city (Mombasa, Nakuru & Thika Roads); the unevenness of population distribution and growth – especially the Northern and Eastern areas higher concentration (Kasarani & Embakasi) and the west to east residential/institution urban sprawl (correlating to main roads) with circumferential open land surrounding the city.

The Westlands division is the most affluent area with three times more private car ownership than the rest of the city. Urban expansion is now well beyond the city limits into the Greater Metropolitan region, this inflow and outflow of additional commuter transport is implicitly captured in traffic statistics in this report. Uncontrolled population and transport growth (rapid urbanization) in the city over the years has led to common urban issues such as traffic congestion (especially in the CBD), slum area expansion, insecurity, poor urban governance and environmental deterioration. Some parts of the city with heavy volume traffic areas are facing severe air quality degradation issues (Omwenga, 2011). With regards to utilities and urban systems. Unreliable electricity is endemic to the Nairobi region, in many cases due to falling tree’s contacting distribution lines as well as vandalism and theft of distribution components. Water is well supplied to the city via local dams and river offtakes and storm water drainage systems are generally well developed. Importantly the city is located on the eastern edge of the East African geologically active Rift Valley. The city lies in a subtropical warm highland climate, with two rainy seasons and little seasonal variation given its close proximity to the equator (Figure 4). Nairobi city lies on undulating hilly topography between elevations of 1460m-1920m.

tab-1

Table 1 – Nairobi City and Greater region study split (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-1

Figure 1 – Nairobi City study area, ca. 695km2 with road maps (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-2

Figure 2 – Nairobi Population distribution, 2009 (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-3

Figure 3 – Nairobi land use map, 2009 (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-4

Figure 4 – Climate for Nairobi City (www.climatemps.com, 2016)

Figure 5 provides summaries of the key urban planning, transport and socio-economic constraints and planning issues that the NIUPLAN scheme is attempting to address. The key points here which transitioning vehicles to battery and hydrogen power could help to address are;

  • Lack of sufficient urban infrastructure (namely power supply).
  • Excessive CBD concentrations.
  • Lack of efficient public transportation.
  • Rapid increase in private vehicles.
  • Youth unemployment.

Notably reducing environmental pollution and improving urban and transport energy efficiencies are not mentioned anywhere within the Master Plan documentation objectives.  These issues position this feasibility study as a key complimentary piece of documentation.

fig-5a

fig-5b

fig-5c

Figure 5 – Urban planning, transport and socio-economics issues (NIUPLAN, 2014)

Finally, Nairobi is in an analogous location to other East African cities experiencing similar urban planning issues, with similar natural resource access.  Nairobi is the most important economic center in the East African region. Given its status and forward looking policies on urban planning and renewable energy integration; Nairobi forms a role model for other East African cities in the Rift Valley region wishing to challenge their own urban planning problems(Table 1).

tab-2

Table 2 – East African Rift Valley analogous cities to Nairobi (Laurie, 2016)

Urban Transport mix selection and understanding

The two study choice ratios for transitioning 40% (by volume) of public and private road transport to a mix of electric battery (PEV)  and hydrogen powered (HFCV)  vehicles by 2025 were;

  • 50:50
  • 75:25

Electric vehicles within this study refer directly to plug-in electric vehicles (PEV) and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCV) only – both represent commercially mature technologies in their sector yielding the greatest environmental benefits. Hybrid EVs/FCVs have less environmental advantages and were not considered. I’ve selected a 75% PEV and 25% FCV vehicle mixture for the following reasons;

  • The short to medium term project target time frame to 2025, versus the relative commercial maturity of the two technologies – PEV’s are more advanced in their research and integration, whilst HFCV’s research lag behind PEV advancement in developed countries. The EU Electrification road-map envisions electric vehicles (EVs) mass production by 2020, and the full potential of EVs to be realized by 2025 (ERTRAC, 2012). In contrast the IEA hydrogen technology road map suggests limited developed country hydrogen systems take-up in the same period (IEA, 2015).
  • Although systems are stressed, the existing electrical grid infrastructure and reinforcement plans for PEV energy delivery are already in place, compared to zero hydrogen infrastructure currently existing.
  • A split between vehicles types removes an over reliance on a single technology and promotes operational synergies whilst widening local expertise.

To understand public and private vehicle numbers, as well as traffic patterns for recharging distribution strategies, I utilized the city’s current and projected transport mix assessment studies in the NIUPLAN project. Statistics collection methods included;

  • Screen line 24hr traffic volume/composition surveys (Appendix C for locations) in heavily urbanized areas within Nairobi City boundaries (Figure 6).
  • Daily traffic volume hourly variations (Figure 7).
  • Routing’s investigations using Vehicle Capacity Ratios (VCR – traffic concentrations to road capacities,Figure 8).
  • Growth comparisons between 2004 and 2013 (Similar nine year time frame to this study)

These statistics were utilized directly to understand the current vehicle energy requirements and infrastructure strategy implementation.The key findings are displayed in Table 3, with supporting graphs, maps and images in Figures 6-10.

tab-3

Table 3 – Key findings from NIUPLAN traffic survey

fig-6a

fig-6b

Figure 6 – Inner city 24hr weekday traffic volumes/% by vehicle type (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-7

Figure 7 – Hourly variation of total inbound/outbound traffic (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-8

Figure 8 – Road traffic per trip desire lines 2013 (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-9

Figure 9 – Typical Nairobi ‘Matatu’ buses (www.kachwanya.com)

fig-10

Figure 10 – Nairobi traffic travel times vs. mode (NIUPLAN, 2014)

To understand how this reports PEV/HFCV strategy would fit into the NIUPLAN reports future urban transport strategy, I’ve integrated the ‘Alternative 3’ NIUPLAN strategy displayed in Figure 11 & 12.

The strategy focuses upon the alleviation of traffic congestion by implementing a behavioural shift to public transport and the creation of priority corridors (Mass Rapid Transport System – MRTS);

  • Six new bus rapid transit (BRT) priority corridors defined to disperse traffic demand.
  • A Light Rapid Transit (LRT) rail service circling the (CBD).
  • Improvements to existing commuter railway routes.
  • Creation of nine out of CBD transport sub-centers along key routes.

Future traffic volumes (Table 4) and traffic patterns using ‘Vehicle Capacity Ratios’ (Figure 13) used traffic modelling simulation modelling to create.

fig-11

Figure 11 –‘ Alt 3’  scenario; Nairobi City future urban transport installations (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-12

Figure 12 – Bi-Polar Corridor Development; proposed urban sub-centres (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-13

Figure 13 – ‘Alt 3’ scenario; Traffic modelling density simulations using VCR  @2030  (NIUPLAN, 2014)

tab-4

Table 4 – ‘Alt 3’ scenario; projected increase in trip numbers (NIUPLAN, 2014)

New PEV/HFCV annual energy and generation requirements

An energy demand ‘baseline’ was determined for PEV and HFCV’s replacing the current volume of internal combustion engine (ICE) powered vehicles in Nairobi City for the most popular public and private travel modes.

The Government vision is to replace the more numerous, smaller, harder to regulate Matutu buses with less numerous, larger, more regulated buses.  The energy demand calculation assumes 40% of ICE powered Public Matutu transport only volumes (projected to 2016);

  • Will be replaced with commercial PEV large, 35 seater buses (75%)
  • Will be replaced with commercial HFCV large, 35 seater buses (25%)
  • With existing Large ICE public buses will remain.

In  addition, 40% of the existing ICE powered Private car transport volume (projected to 2016);

  • Will be replaced with commercial PEV private cars (75%)
  • Will be replaced with commercial HFCV private cars (25%)
  • Its noted that SUV’s most popular car in Kenya (www.bestsellingcarsblog.com/category/kenya/)
  • Each ICE car is to be replaced by a similar performance PEV/HFCV car.
  • That private motorbikes not included.

Forecast 2025 trip volumes were used to determine an ultimate future energy contingency demand using the NIUPLAN Alternative 3 scenario trip table (Table 4).

Table 5 below displays the calculated PEV/HFCV vehicle replacement volumes; the key calculation parameters were;

  • 4094 Matutu’s replaced with 819 large buses (614 PEV and 205 HFCV);
    • 20% more seats available and not including standing room’
    • 6 hours downtime assumed per vehicle
    • Individual matatu’s assumed to crossed same 24hr survey line based upon average 60 minute inner city journey times.
  • 31,397 private cars (23548 PEV and 7849 HFCV).
  • It was assumed each car passed 24hr survey traffic node 4 times (to/from work and shops).
  • By 2025 the vehicle numbers and energy demands for alternatively powered PEV/HFCV’s may have grown by a further 23% for public buses and 42% for private cars.

tab-5

Table 5 – Calculated replacement traffic volumes and energy contingency (Laurie 2016)

The estimation of the projects annual energy requirement is dependent upon a lot of different variables –  a conservative approach has been taken throughout. A ‘Grid to Wheel’ (GTW) required energy calculation has been separated out into ‘Grid to Tank’ (GTT) and ‘Tank/Battery to Wheel’ (TTW/BTW) energy consumption (Tobias Gustafsson, 2015). The five step method adopted to quantify new energy demand was as follows;

Step 1: For each vehicle type – PEV, HFCV, Petrol Matutu, and Diesel SUV; Identify appropriate real world examples and list relevant characteristics including  (Table 6);

  • Gross Tank energy calculated using the Lower Heating Value for each fuel.
  • Vehicles Energy Consumption (Manufacturer tested/Actual);
    • Public ICE Matutu (Toyota Hiace) and Private ICE car (Toyota Hilux) used ‘Urban’ fuel consumption driving cycle data to reflect Nairobi City travel.
    • Private HFCV (Toyota Mirai, Figure 14) and PEV (Tesla Model X SUV, Figure 15) private cars also used ‘urban’ driving cycle data.
    • Public PEV Buses (Proterra BE35, Figure 16) from research in the USA (Prohaska, 2016) and Public HFCV Buses (Van Hool A300L, Figure 17) also from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) research (Leslie Eudy, 2016) utilised vehicle demonstration average statistics.
  • Tank/Battery to Wheel vehicle efficiencies utilized a conceptual approach (Figure 18), and where possible tuned to real test data. Not all fuel stored in tanks/batteries is converted to useful energy. For ICE’s the majority of energy is lost in combustion, with some lost in the transmission. For PEVs and similarly constructed HFCV’s, the efficiency is higher than ICE’s because of system simplifications. The transmission system is simplified to one gear since the motors (engine) full torque is available over the full range of speeds. A power converter (converts DC to AC) links the battery and motor, with the motor being used as a generator to capture regenerative braking energy (Battery charging losses are covered under GTB efficiencies).
  • Single tank/charge vehicle ranges were calculated using – Gross tank energy, Consumption efficiency, and TTW/BTW efficiencies.

From the Step 1  research the notable points from Table 6 included;

  • Increase in Battery to Wheel (70%) and Tank to Wheel (45%) efficiency for PEV and HFCV vehicles respectively compared to a typical 29% TTW for ICE vehicles.
  • Apart from Public PEV buses, other PEV/HFCV vehicles have a far greater range than ICE vehicles requiring fewer refueling stops. Now able to recharge/refuel in comparable times.
  • Public bus systems are designed for greater fuel economy and lower performance than private cars.

fig-14

Figure 14 – Toyota Mirai commercially available HFCV vehicle (www.toyota.com)

fig-15

Figure 15 – Tesla Model X SUV (www.tesla.com)

fig-16

Figure 16 – Proterra BE35 Public 35 seater PEV (NERL)

fig-17

Figure 17 – Hydrogen HFCV Public Bus Van Hool E300L (NREL)

fig-18

Figure 18 – ICE/PEV (assumed HFCV) vehicle TTW efficiency comparison (Gustafsson, T 2015)

tab-6

Table 6 – ICE and replacement PEV/HFCV selected vehicle characteristics (Laurie 2016)

Step 2: Identify technology criteria for energy calculations that may impact assumed energy requirements (Table 7). For example, one study listed six different factors affecting the performance of vehicles with electric energy storage systems (Carlson, 2010). Two key factors have the most potential to increase vehicle energy consumption beyond that calculated in Table 6 and require contingency energy accounting;

  1. PEV/HFCV auxiliary services power needs – namely air conditioning (Equatorial location). Unlike ICE’s, notably PEVs fuel consumption do not show as wide a variation depending upon driving speed/attitudes (Tobias Gustafsson, 2015).
  2. An underestimation of present/future vehicle volumes.

tab-7

Table 7 – Energy calculation technology variables (Laurie 2016)

Step 3: Grid to Tank/Battery (GTT/GTB) generation efficiencies and the associated losses in transmission and distributing electrical energy to the point of car entry or hydrogen generation influenced the final infrastructure strategy . It is well understood that the grid to tank efficiency of hydrogen fuel production and storage is poorer than electrical vehicle GTB efficiencies (Bossel, 2003). Figure 19 and Table 8 illustrate and compare these losses. A general Well to Wheel (WTW) efficiency was used for ICE vehicles using a diesel equivalent (Bossel, 2003). Finally, GTW efficiencies for PEV and HFCV vehicles were finalized in Table 8 incorporating vehicle specific performance characteristics. The notable research points from Table 8 were;

  • GTW efficiencies for PEV’s are high (62%) compared to HFCV’s lower GTW efficiencies (28%); this reflects the simpler generation to vehicle pathway for PEV’s and more mature technological innovation. An intermediate step of hydrogen generation via Electrolysis for HFCV’s is required.
  • HFCV’s key advantage over PEV’s for Public buses is their range, requiring refuelling once per day compared to PEVs 5.5 times.
  • The recent emergence of commercial HFCV’s shows them to be performance competitive with PEV vehicles on the market. Both new technologies have an obvious improvement in minimal greenhouse gas emissions over ICE’s as well as better TTW/BTW efficiencies.

fig-19

Figure 19 – Comparable Electric and Hydrogen GTW/GTB efficiencies (Ulf Bossel, 2003)

tab-8

Table 8 – Final GTW/WTW vehicle efficiencies (Laurie 2016)

Step 4: Calculate the equivalent daily electrical power demand for all vehicles. Importantly, TTW/BTW inefficiencies are implicitly included in fuel consumption numbers. Existing ICE vehicle energy demands act as ‘a comparable sense check’ to future replacement PEV/HFCV calculated energy demands (Table 9). Calculation assumptions were drawn from the NIUPLAN data stated in previous chapters, as well some general assumptions on simplified travel habits;

  • All parameters apply for peak travel times between 4am – 10pm (Figure 7).
  • Public buses operate 18 hours per day, with 6 hours of downtime.
  • Private cars make 4 trips per day (to/from work and to/from shops, school etc.…).
  • All vehicles travel at the same speed and travel times because of the ‘inflow’ and ‘outflow’ patterns from the Nairobi central CBD along the same core travel arteries (Figure 8) at similar times (Figure 7).
  • Notably from daily calculated figures on a comparable basis between ICE vehicles and equivalent PEV/HFCV vehicles is – the latter consume only 38% of the energy required to run equivalent seating volumes of ICE vehicles per day.

tab-9

Table 9 – Daily vehicle power usage calculation (Laurie 2016)

Step 5: Finally, daily vehicle power usages were calculated for the different vehicle groups, then converted to annual figures assuming 365 days continual operation (Table 10).  Grid to Tank/Battery power losses were included in the final calculation. Since the final infrastructure strategy will be for all vehicles to have on-site renewable electrical generation to minimize electrical grid power usage, transmission losses in reality should be greatly reduced. However, for this calculation; PEV vehicles conservatively assumed transmission and distribution losses were included. On-site hydrogen generation, compression storage and refueling is more efficient and practical solution than hydrogen pipeline liquefaction transportation. HCFV vehicles are therefore restricted to hydrogen generation from renewable non-grid resources on-site.

A Contingent Power resource fraction to ensure project longevity and maintain 40% of PEV/HFCV vehicle proportions up to 2025 was incorporated to overcome the two key uncertainties already highlighted (Table 7);

  • Auxiliary power usage in urban driving cycles such as AC. Figure 20 simulations of New York City driving cycle’s shows up to 30% of vehicles power is used for other functions other than driving impacting the vehicle range (Lajunen, 2015). Real world bus travel demonstrations indicate accessory loads contribute to range capabilities as more than 50% of the time is spent at standstill where lighting and HVAC loads are still required (Prohaska, 2016).
  • Traffic volumes for Public and Private vehicles were estimated using the NIUPLAN projection to potentially increase by 23% and 42% respectively between 2016 and 2025 (Table 5).

fig-20

Figure 20 – Auxiliary services power drain; Urban NY Bus scenario; EV buses (A. Lajunen, 2014)

tab-10

Table 10 – Annual PEV/HFCV power: inc. Contingency & GTB/GTT Efficiencies (Laurie 2016)

PEV/HFCV required Renewable energy projects

The choice of renewable energy projects too meet the new vehicles energy requirements was heavily influenced by Nairobi’s geographical location (Figure 1), climate (Figure 4), existing infrastructure (NIUPLAN) and this reports infrastructure strategy to supply project power.

The existing Nairobi City infrastructure strategy is covered in more detail in the next section, this studies associated aim is to minimize any additional new infrastructure and generation installations costs by following a priority action listing;

  1. Smart Grid and Demand Response/Demand Side Management to shift and educate PEV/HFCV users to charge vehicles during off-peak times utilizing the existing power generation and network.
  2. Embed on-site Solar PV and grid supported self-power generation at nine sub centers road junctions (Figure 12) around Nairobi to house new, out of central Nairobi large bus Public depots. Sub center depots will link Greater Metropolitan travel in and out of Nairobi with inner city travel; provide embedded bus power generation/refueling, hydrogen generation/storage and mechanical vehicles services.
  3. Increase/improve embedded renewable Solar PV power penetration into people’s homes and city parking locations for electrical recharging of PEV vehicles.
  4. Embed fifty priority routing located, primarily grid powered hydrogen self-generating refueling stations for Private HFCV users with solar PV panels to supplement daytime generation.
  5. Post pilot studies, decide upon a new and centralized out of city baseload generation plant.

It’s recognized that the strategy, on paper may ‘over supply’ power generation. However this initial approach, if phased correctly (see later Project Management section) builds decision points and flexibility into understanding the new vehicle project power demands versus Smart Grid/Demand Side response management. In addition the strategy offers power interruptions mitigation and future project longevity securities.

To briefly explore priority 1; ‘Smart Grids’ Demand Management (SGDM) refers to a Utility companies electricity delivery systems employing computer based remote control and automation via two way digital communication systems with the customer to control the flow of electricity more efficiently. This involves significant modernization in the electrical grid communication systems, with the key component being a centralized control center coordinating multiple device delivery patterns. It’s assumed a SGDM technical evaluation will accompany the Phase one period of this studies integration (see later section), but any successful implementation considered a bonus with regards to the energy demand forecasts. Similarly with’Demand Response’ Management (DRM) and ‘Demand Side’ Management (DSM), which have more to do with educating users rather than introducing new technologies. DRM encourages end users to adjust short term power reductions in response to the grid operator triggers. DSM encourages end user efficiencies , such as retrofitting energy saving lighting. With both DSM and DRM in this studies context, demand management refers to educating or incentivizing future public PEV/HFCV bus companies and private PEV car owners to adjust electrical charging or hydrogen generation to coincide with off-peak electrical demand periods.

Table 11 illustrates the generation strategy per vehicle, with the priorities listed along with basic system descriptions and their estimated power rating sizings needed to meet the previous sections calculated final energy demands per vehicle type.

tab-11

Table 11 – Renewable Power Generation sizing calculations (Laurie 2016)

With regards to the solar resource for priorities 2, 3 and 4 above; Nairobi’s Equatorial location presents a world class opportunity to harness solar radiation. Daylight spans from 4am to 9.30pm, averages a consistent 12 hours with 57% of daylight hours being sunny, the rest cloudy, hazy or of low intensity (climatemps, 2016). Daily insolation across Nairobi is demonstrated to range between 4.5-6.5 kWh/m2/d (Figure 21) across the year, with a number of studies agreeing an average of 5.5kWh/m2/d (Wasike, 2015). The April to August drop in insolation levels corresponds to the colder and cloudier ‘long rain’ season, with the percentage of diffuse radiation increasing to 40-54% (Figure 22) and sky clearness index reaching its minimum. Assuming a standard Solar PV cell extraction efficiency of 17.4%, the mean solar energy extraction for Nairobi varies across the year between 0.73-1.19kWh/m2/d (Wasike, 2015) and averages 0.96kWh/m2/d.

Taking a typical commercial (Suntech) solar PV panel technology performance (Figure 23), and the solar intensity average 0.96 kWh/m2/d – PV power generation of approximately 325 W per PV cell is achievable. Table 11 data demonstrates simplistically that for each 10 MW public bus depot power requirement ((PEV+HFCV)/12hrs daylight), a minimum 0.6 km2 of land is required to site a small solar photo voltaic farm. The out of center location of depot sub-centers (Figure 12) and open space availability (Figure 3) should ensure mini-Solar PV farms are a realistic technology capable of supplying during daylight hours most of the depots power demand.

Similarly, Table 11 also demonstrates that 20 m2 of roof space for 10 solar PV panels will fully charge each PEV private car (one car per household assumed) at people’s home during daylight hours. This type of charging is termed ‘slow charging’ and requires the least amount of rated capacity; circa 3 kW (BRE, 2016) . Home Solar PV solutions are already widespread in Nairobi ((IREK), 2015). Alternatively charging would take place via grid electricity during ‘off-peak’ hours overnight.

The concept of commercial Urban Solar car parks would offer more convenience to urban PEV users. Each urban car park would be unique in character making Solar PV capacities estimations in this study problematic. However, It’s highly unlikely that Solar PV alone would be able meet the preferred ‘fast-charging’ (7-22kW) in 3-4 hrs or rapid charging (43-50kW) in 30 minutes (80% charge) methods without a grid connection (BRE, 2016). Regardless, ‘slow charging’ PEV electrical top-up opportunities does present a commercial opportunity for car park owners who ensure optimization by using on-site Solar PV energy usage, focus on surface rather than multi-storey car parks and avoiding PV panel shading from nearby buildings (BRE, 2016). This reaffirms the concept of Solar PV mini-farms being located at out of city for bus depot charging where larger land space areas are available for panel siting.

The lack of hydrogen refueling station technical data given the concepts early commercial status does not permit a reliable estimation of required energy for each unit. Hence at this stage grid supplied electricity will be the recommended primary hydrogen generation source with an unknown number of supplementary solar PV cells to improve unit ‘self-consumption’ during daylight hours.

fig-21

Figure 21 – JKIA Nairobi airport monthly insolation (Wasike, 2015)

fig-22

Figure 22 – Percentage of diffuse radiation, JKIA Nairobi (Wasike, 2015)

fig-23

Figure 23 – Suntech’s largest commercial Solar PV (STP325S-24, Suntech)

With regards to the centralized large power plant noted in priority 5; given Nairobi’s geographical situation and current geothermal power expertise, a single  out of city centralized Geothermal expansion power plant would provide a highly dispatchable, base load power supply coupled to the embedded Solar Photo voltaic generation.

The Great East African Rift System is a major tectonic structure averaging 40-80 km wide. Energy from the Earth’s interior escapes to the surface by conductive heat transfer and the convective heat movement though hot water up-welling.

Kenya is Africa’s leader in geothermal electrical production with 607 MW installed capacity, and an additional 1091 MW planned; Kenya already exports excess power to Rwanda and Uganda (Matek, 2016). Kenya has a geothermal potential of 10,000 MW (Omenda, 2012). Ethiopia, Eritrea, Uganda and Tanzania also have Geothermal installations planned, some as part of their COP21 Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (IBDCs) pledges. Figure 23 maps the collapsed volcanic center prospects in Kenya; it highlights the existing Olkaria power plant site, 120 km NW of Nairobi in the Naivasha sub-basin, linked via a new 220 kV and an older 132 kV high voltage transmission line.

Table 12 identifies the nearest, existing developed Geothermal plants at Olkaria. Individual units I, II & III are 35-55MW each in size in 2012. The newest units at Olkaria IV  (140MW) and Olkaria Units 4 & 5 (70MW each) under construction or recently commissioned now mean Geothermal makes up 48% of Kenya’s total electricity production (Rojas, 2015). Either the Olkaria expansion or nearby Nairobi prospects like Longonot or Suswa (Table 12) would provide centralized baseload power to the PEV/HFCV transition project.

Taking the calculated vehicle power requirement totals from Table 11, and generation prospects from Table 12; to supply the power for ALL new PEV/HFCV vehicles would require a single Geothermal plant unit running 24 hours per day to have a minimum 103MW capacity. If sited at Olkaria, Suswa or Longonot; additional electrical infrastructure costs will be minimized.

fig-24

Figure 24 – Kenyan Rift Geothermal Prospects /220kV Olkaria transmission line (KenGen, 2007)

tab-12

Table 12 – Olkaria (L) other Fields (R) showing Kenyan Geothermal resource (Omenda, 2012)

Technical brief on required PEV/HFCV Infrastructure and Systems

To deliver the transition projects increased electrical energy needs, its was necessary to understand the main characteristics of today’s grid and it’s usage. In a 2009-2011 census for the Nairobi City County only (Brinckerhoff, 2013);

  • 72% of homes in Nairobi City were linked to the electrical distribution grid.
  • 33% of electricity sales were to large commercial or industrial sales.
  • Took 57% of the entire countries electricity demand equal to 3328GWh (2011).
  • Had a peak demand of 404MW (2011).
  • Predicted peak demand growth in 2025 to be 2543MW.
  • High transformer/feeder loads exist between 88%-100% of thermal rating.

The same report identified that the Nairobi region was supplied from a transmission network via several 220V/66kV and 132/66kV bulk supply points (BSP; transmission substations). Emanating from each substation are 66kV (main distribution voltage, Figure 29 in Appendix C) overhead feeder lines supplying smaller 66kV/11kV primary substations (Figure 25), in turn supplying via overhead lines 11kV/430V distribution substations (with larger customers feeding off 66kV/11kV lines). Underground 11kV and 66kV underground lines are used in the CBD.

Short-Medium term committed plans include additional transformers, critical primary substations having alternate sources, 3 new 220V/66kV BSPs within Nairobi transmission ring, 4 new 132/33kV substations and 18 new 66/11kV primary substations (with further 7 proposed) and numerous reactive power projects. (Brinckerhoff, 2013). Longer term plans are mainly aimed at improving rural electrification.

fig-25

Figure 25 – Nairobi City County electrical T&D map (Parsons Brinkerhoff, 2013)

It’s clear from the report that Nairobi will be better served with more reliable grid electricity in the coming decade coinciding with PEV/HFCV vehicle introduction. This favors ‘Off Peak’ electrical grid charging of PEVs and Hydrogen generation with storage options as the primary ‘Smart Grid’ recharging option. Power demand patterns could be smoothed out from baseload Geothermal power plants making them more efficient to run in turn. Distributed Solar PV at private households and bus depots during the daytime will help to reduce blackout and distribution overloads inherent in the system ((IREK), 2015).

The construction of public transport depots sub-centers is aimed at linking Greater Metropolitan and Nairobi public users along congested route entry and exit points (Figure 8 & 12). Nairobi City modal travel time maximums are in the range of 30-90 minutes (Figure 10), at an average 20km/h (Table 3). Since walking is the primary ingress/egress to buses, locating sub centers in residential districts improves public bus access and usage.

Both public bus systems will operate one year Pilot programs (see later section) prior to full roll out. The initial operation strategy for public bus services would be that lower range (ca. <65km) PEV buses, starting from a near fully charged overnight status,  would each shuttle back and forth between either depot sub-centers or the CBD during peak hours. Ideally maintaining a ‘state of charge (SOC)’ between 30%-80% similar to the NREL Foothill PEV lithium-ion battery demonstration buses (Prohaska, 2016). ‘Top-Up’ charges for 5-10 minutes daily from Solar PV electricity would maintain an operational charge until the bus can be near fully charged again at night using grid electricity.

fig-26

Figure 26 – NREL Foothill PEV demonstration bus operating parameters (Prohaska, 2016)

Public FCHV run more efficiently and would only require a single recharge each day (<6 minutes at 350bar from Table 6).  All of the Hydrogen required for all HCFV vehicles per day (911kg) could be generated from the solar mini farms during daylight hours and compression stored onsite @350bar using seven HySTAT 60 electrolyzers at each depot (Table 13). The closest currently operating hydrogen refueling station to this set-up is in Hafencity, Hamburg; with two Hydrogenic Electrolyzers contributing to 50% of the stations 750kg daily refueling capacity (FuelCells2000, 2016). HFCV buses would be prioritized to the longest commuter routes and off peak travel to release PEV buses for longer ‘slow charge’ battery recovery time periods. For both HFCV solutions, Nairobi has a reliable water mains supply network; each HySTAT 60 electrolyzer would require 1.5-2 liters per Nm3 of H2 of tap water. In addition each site would have hydrogen storage capacity for a 1 – 2 days hydrogen usage per total vehicle daily allocation (e.g. per bus depot ca. 920-1840kg).

tab-13

Table 13 – Hydrogen generation strategy for depots & private car refueling (Laurie 2016)

PEV private cars potentially would require the least amount of new infrastructure of all new vehicles. Given the urban driving data (Table 3), these vehicles for a daily four trip regime would only require charging every 9 days. Whilst this is considered optimistic, it’s entirely realistic for private households to ‘top-up’ their car charge overnight or during the day via their own Solar PV panels via ‘slow charging’, or ‘fast/rapid’ charging stations located at urban solar car parks. Lithium-ion packs in PEV’s are generally known to operate optimally in the 30-90% charge range, with a full charge every three months (M, 2014), hence ‘top-up’ rather than full charging is recommended.

For both depots and households; a battery system power storage solution could be employed to smooth power demand-supply patterns and improve solar ‘self-consumption’.  Commercial lithium-ion systems are available for households that could offer a partial charging option e.g. Tesla 6.4kWh PowerWall (Tesla, 2016), albeit at the moment being very expensive. Whereas a cheaper, larger Lead-Acid battery system requiring a good charging and discharging routine to maintain battery life would be best suited to bus depots (BRE2, 2016).

Finally, HFCV private cars. Unlike equivalent buses with on-site hydrogen refueling, it’s uneconomic to generate hydrogen at each household and impractical to create liquid hydrogen transport pipelines to deliver hydrogen to everyone’s homes in Nairobi. Individually, strategically located stand-alone hydrogen generation, compression, storage and refueling stations similar to the Saitama City, Japan Iwatani/Honda’s solar powered smart hydrogen stations (Figure 27) would be viable in the future (HONDA, 2014). Each station would be grid connected to supply hydrogen generation electricity. A similar bus depot HySTAT 60 electrolyser was used to demonstrate that a single unit sited at 50 stations across Nairobi’s key HFCV user routes would be sufficient to supply enough per day energy to 7849 HCFV cars@700bar (Table 13) using a combination of grid and solar PV power. Compressed hydrogen storage for 1-2 days per vehicle allocation at each of the 50 stations evenly spread would be approximately enough for 25 cars per day x 5kg tanks, so 125-250Kg.

Bus depot sub-center locations and HCFV cars refueling stations locations and pilot programs tally closely to the current and future ‘Alternative 3’ high traffic congestion data and modelling (Figures 8, 11-13). Pilot studies will select key routes to focus upon, with the ‘Hydrogen highways’ concept an applicable model for HFCV vehicles (CEPA, 2016).

fig-27

Figure 27 – Honda/Iwatani Saitama City, Japan solar hydrogen refueling station (Iwatani)

PEV/HFCV phased introduction project management

The NIUPLAN ‘Alternate 3’ urban transport plan, KPLC electrical infrastructure improvement plans and theoretical PEV/HFCV introduction with new renewable generation facilities plans were coupled together to create a feasibility study schedule (Table 14). PEV vehicles were prioritized over HFCV vehicles given their more advanced commercial technology and application status. The key points from the phased integration scheduling include;

Phase 1: All PEVs project initiations to begin;

  • After a 3 year assessment, integration and approvals study period.
  • At same time as the new MRTS introduction.
  • After Nairobi electrical infrastructure reinforcement/expansion work completion.
  • With Public PEV buses to ALL begin running within a 2 year period; 1 year depot and solar PV farm construction period follows a 1 year prioritized single Depot Pilot corridor project. (Expansion space will be built-in for later HFCV take up).
  • With Private PEV car sales to begin immediately after a 3 year study period. Off-Peak home charging education/advertising campaign undertaken. Private home solar PV installation in Nairobi improved penetration. Poor quality/unreliable systems replacement standards required ((IREK), 2015). Registered professional bodies’ technicians, fast charging, bidirectional flow and private battery storage systems installations to be synchronized with PEV car sale initiation in country.

Phase 2: All HFCV operation initiation to begin;

  • After large scale Developed country technology take-up is in place by 2020 – Japan is planning to have 100,000 vehicles on the road and >100 refueling stations with significant production economies of scale on HFCV vehicles and components fully realized (IEA, 2015).
  • After a 5 year assessment, integration and approvals study period.
  • After the successful integration of PEV vehicles.
  • With Public and Private HFCV to ALL begin running within a 2 year period; 1 year single bus depot hydrogen generation/storage systems and solar PV farm expansion with single Pilot corridor selection, and private car Hydrogen refueling stations Pilot corridor project focused on the affluent Westlands area take up first.

Phase 3: Geothermal plant construction decision after;

  • Both PEV and HFCV Pilot projects are completed and an understanding of the required balance between ‘Smart Grid’ demand management, Solar PV mini-farm depots and final power demand deficits (if any)  known.
  • Geothermal to electrical expansion plant construction – 2 years. On average 2-3 years is typical to construct (Matek, 2016).
  • Finished when MRTS expansion project is due to begin.

tab-14

Table 14 – PEV/HFCV Nairobi City Integration Schedule (Laurie 2016)

Critical assessment of proposed PEV/HFCV scheme

By applying the theoretical task question to a real world example in this report, a number of critical points have become apparent during my research and approach.

In Nairobi’s case, arguably given the potential abundance of Geothermal and Solar PV renewable energy to economically generate electricity – including untested hydrogen vehicles in the transport mix could be considered an unnecessary complication. Nairobi’s air quality and traffic problems instead could be helped by PEV vehicles alone. It’s hoped the project management schedule presented allows hydrogen take-up decisions to be made in the future depending upon its success in other countries.

It’s recognized that replacing Matutu’s on the road is less than straightforward in Nairobi since the vehicles offer very cheap, convenient travel and employment to large numbers of people. Social initiatives will need to run in parallel to new transport policies to ensure successful new vehicle adoption and decreased traffic congestion. For example, subsidized public transport and free Matutu driver re-training initiatives.

With 61% of traffic volume being private cars in 2013 (Table 3), the conversion of affluent commuters to a convenient, clean, safe and regular MRTS is paramount to reduce congestion. Replacing 100% of private cars with commercial PEV alternatives would activate significant environmental improvements. The forecast uncertainty of future trip numbers and collection of actual vehicle number volumes are subject to a wide range of uncertainties in their estimation – its hoped the conservative approach and contingency estimation addition in energy needs covers the upper end of this uncertainty range.

This feasibility study focused purely on private cars and public mass transport. Other forms of electric transport such as delivery trucks (NREL, 2016), school buses and motor bikes (Chung, 2016) are commercially available for expanding the electric vehicle concept using similar methods to this feasibility report.

The electricity sector organisation is made up of many branches (See Appendices C – Figure 29), with Kenyan Power & Lighting Company responsible for transmission and distribution. Access to reliable electricity usage patterns and trends for Nairobi is difficult, even non-existent. This makes the demand side management strategy and under used night time spare capacity an educated assumption until a proper analysis is available.

Finally given the current 4.1% per annum population increase in Nairobi City; traffic congestion with its associated detriments (even with the NIUPLAN and PEV/HFCV uptake solutions) will continue to be a massive social and technical challenge to Nairobi’s and Kenya’s 2030 clean city ambitions (WWW.VISION2030.go.ke/flagship-projects/, 2016).

PEV/HFCV project Recommendations

This feasibility study has demonstrated the practicality of replacing 40% of existing combustion road transport in Nairobi City with a 75:25 mix of PEV and HFCV vehicles by 2025. Supporting sustainable and renewable energy generation systems, best suited to the locale have been identified and demonstrated as viable. Smart Grid energy demand smoothing to offset vehicle charging and hydrogen generation demands to off peak times where electrical generation surplus already exist has been highlighted to reduce new infrastructure costs.

This report complements well the existing Nairobi City urban and electrical network infrastructure strengthening plans, as well as the burgeoning renewable energy sector and Kenyan 2030 visions for a cleaner, less congested Nairobi City. These reasons are why Nairobi can provide  an exemplar green transition project for other East African Rift Valley cities.

Further, more detailed work is required to fully integrate and research further all of the studies findings – this would be my initial recommendation within the following three year period prior to the first pilot execution.

Setting the module task question aside, it would be more efficient to only introduce PEV vehicles in reality to simplify systems uptake and remove additional infrastructure costs. In addition, limiting vehicle uptake to only 40% of existing vehicles, especially for congestion reducing large public buses could be considered under ambitious. Commercial opportunities exist for the uptake of electric motorbikes, school buses and public/private utility vehicles – all with similar environmental and economic benefits given Nairobi’s abundant renewable energy resource access.

Appendices

Appendix A: Assumptions

The general assumptions used in this study were;

  • ·Environmental optimum vehicles and systems have been selected to replace existing fossil fuel generated and utilized energy. These do not include hybrid fossil fuel/electric vehicles, biofuels or hybrid power stations.
  • Government, Municipal and Public approval to this reports technical suggestions would be aligned. The common goal to improve the city’s transport situation, reduce environmental emissions and improve the nation’s energy security are taken as a given. It’s also assumed national and local urban planning decision making laws are in place. The Kenyan electricity sector organisation is shown in Figure 28.
  • Economic evaluations are beyond the scope of this report. Instead, a common sense approach has been taken assuming renewable generation and transport technologies currently in operation and/or undergoing Pilot study research being commercially available both internationally and nationally only as open for consideration.
  • Financing and Investment (nationally/internationally) are assumed to be obtainable.
  • Technical Installation and Operations of new systems are assumed to be part of the wider scope and not a barrier to the selected technologies theoretical utilization i.e. new Geothermal plants, Solar PV (Farm/Rooftop) installations and electric/hydrogen re-charging Infrastructure. The scale of installations and infrastructure match the most cost effective solutions for both PEV and HFCV introduction.
  • Research studies have been taken from around the world and are considered adaptable to other locales if resources are suited. The general trend of developed countries researching and implementing new technologies prior to developing countries realizing their own renewables potentials is a well-trodden pathway. The direct import economically of these technologies and lessons learned is considered a given.
  • Physical/Social Geography characteristics are assumed to be constant, i.e. geothermally prospective geology, solar resource and increasing patterns of social urbanization in Nairobi.
  • Kenyan Studies heavy utilized and referenced in this study are assumed to be trustworthy, competent and aligned with national objectives. Every effort has been made to cross reference reports, identify the most recent reports and pull from a global information pool.
  • Vehicle Usage, both private and public trip trends and patterns is assumed to remain unchanged when transitioning between PEV/HFCV vehicles and ICE combustion vehicles. Driver behavior is assumed to not change.
  • New Vehicles & Systems introduced here are all assumed to be competitive from a reliability perspective with existing combustion engine equivalents. Normally all new systems go through design, demonstration and lessons learned improvement loops before being installed commercially, thus ensuring reliably measures meet expected goals.

Appendix B: Project task sheet

Your consultancy company has secured a contract for a technical feasibility study to investigate the requirements to transition a proportion of a nominated city’s road transport vehicles to battery and hydrogen technologies. The aim is to create a sustainable demonstration city to stimulate the penetration of these technologies in the remainder of the country. The specific goals of the demonstration project are:

  • To convert 40% of vehicles in both the private and public road transport sectors by 2025 – establishing either a 50:50 or 75:25 mix of electric and hydrogen vehicles (by number);
  • To provide the energy required by the transition project through the construction of new renewable energy projects such as wind, solar farms, or other appropriate technologies
  • To provide a technical brief on the new and upgraded infrastructures which are required to enable the transition.

Your role is to present a technical brief is to nominate a suitable city, advise on which transport mix option (above) you are recommending and estimate both the existing annual energy requirements of the vehicles which will be replaced and the new generating capacity required.

Advise on the renewable energy projects required, provide a technical brief on the equipment and infrastructures required and on how the phased introduction of the project infrastructures should be managed. Finally provide an overall critical assessment of the proposed scheme.

Appendix C: Supporting Material

fig-28

Figure 28 – JCIT traffic survey points 2013  (NIUPLAN, 2014)

fig-29

Figure 29 – Kenyan Electricity Sector organisation (Brinkerhoff, 2013)

fig-30

Figure 30 – Nairobi Region distribution network 2012 (Brinkerhoff, 2013)

Works Cited

(IREK), I. a. (2015). A desk assessment on the overviews of current solar and wind energy projects Kenya.

Bossel, U. (2003). Efficiency of Hydrogen Fuel Cell, Diesel SOFC Hybrid and Battery Electric Vehicles. European Fuel Cell Forum.

BRE. (2016). Solar Car Parks. National Solar Center.

BRE2. (2016). Batteries and Solar Power. National Solar Center.

Brinckerhoff, P. (2013). Kenya Distribution Master Plan.

Carlson, R. (2010). Factors affecting fuel consumption of PHEVs. 25th world battery, hybrid and fuel cell vehicle symposium.

CEPA. (2016, JULY 2015). https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/hydrogen/hydrogen_cah2net.htm. Retrieved from https://www.arb.ca.gov.

Chung, D. (2016, September 13th). http://www.motorcycle.com/categories/electric. Retrieved from http://www.motorcycle.com.

climatemps. (2016). http://www.nairobi.climatemps.com/sunlight.php. Retrieved from http://www.nairobi.climatemps.com/.

ERTRAC. (2012). European Roadmap electricfication of road transport (2nd edition).

FuelCells2000. (2016). International Hydrogen Fueling Stations. Retrieved from http://hfcarchive.org/fuelcells/.

HONDA. (2014). http://world.honda.com/FuelCell/HydrogenStation/. Retrieved from http://world.honda.com.

IEA. (2015). Technology Roadmap; Hydrogen and Fuel Cells.

KNBS. (2009). Population and Housing Census.

Lajunen, A. (2015). Energy consumption and cost benefit analysis of hybrid and electric city buses. Elsevier.

Leslie Eudy, M. P. (2016). Oakland Zero emission Bay Area Fuel Cell bus demonstration results: 5th report. NREL.

M, R. (2014, October 18). http://www.teslarati.com/top-5-tips-to-maintaining-ev-battery/. Retrieved from http://WWW.TESLARATI.COM.

Matek, B. (2016). Annual US & Global Geothermal Power production report .

Nairobi City Council (NCC) with technical support from Japan International Cooperation Agency, N. K. (2014). The Project on Integrated Urban Development Master Plan for the city of Nairobi in the Republic of Kenya; FINAL REPORT. Nairobi.

Ngirachu, J. (2010). New rules to rein in wild sector. Daily Nation newspaper.

NREL. (2016). Medium duty Plug in Electric Delivery truck fleet evaluation.

Omenda, P. (2012). Geothermal Development Kenya : A Country Update.

Omwenga, M. (2011). Integrated Transport System for Liveable City Environment; A case study of Nairobi, Kenya. ISOCARP Congress 2011.

Prohaska, R. (2016). Foothill transit battery electric bus demonstrations results. NREL.

Rojas, F. (2015, February 19). http://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/kengen-to-kickstart-development-of-140-mw-olkaria-v-project-this-year/. Retrieved from http://www.thinkgeoenergy.com.

S.Olz, R. S. (2007, April). Contribution of Renewables to Energy Security. International Energy Agency (IEA).

Tesla. (2016). http://www.tesla.com/powerwall. Retrieved from https://www.tesla.com.

Tobias Gustafsson, A. J. (2015). Comparison between BEV and ICE vehicles by electrofuels. Gothenburg: Chalmers University of Technology.

Wasike, N. (2015). Assessment of solar radiation potential of Thika-Nairobi area,panel sizing and cost. Jomo Kenyatta University.

WWW.VISION2030.go.ke/flagship-projects/. (2016). Retrieved from WWW.VISION2030.go.ke/.

2 thoughts on “Feasibility study investigating transitioning a portion of Nairobi City road transport to a cleaner sustainable electric and hydrogen powered alternative

  1. Dear Mr.Laurie,
    I did not find other ways to contact you that leaving a comment on this really interesting study. I work in Opibus in Nairobi and I am conducting a project of electrical conversion for matatus. I would be very glad to exchange with you about your work. Would it be possible to have your contact ?

    Best Regards,

    Clara Nicco

    Like

    1. Hi Clara,
      Thanks for getting in contact about my article. More than happy for you to use any insights it may bring. The work was completed over 2 years ago now so I’m a little rusty on the detail but info can answer questions feel free to ask. Use my email – marklaurie2@hotmail.com regards Mark Laurie

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s