The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Future cost and performance of water electrolysis: An expert elicitation study
Open accessAbstract
The need for energy storage to balance intermittent and inflexible electricity supply with demand is driving interest in conversion of renewable electricity via electrolysis into a storable gas. But, high capital cost and uncertainty regarding future cost and performance improvements are barriers to investment in water electrolysis. Expert elicitations can support decision-making when data are sparse and their future development uncertain. Therefore, this study presents expert views on future capital cost, lifetime and efficiency for three electrolysis technologies: alkaline (AEC), proton exchange membrane (PEMEC) and solid oxide electrolysis cell (SOEC). Experts estimate that increased R&D funding can reduce capital costs by 0–24%, while production scale-up alone has an impact of 17–30%. System lifetimes may converge at around 60,000–90,000 h and efficiency improvements will be negligible. In addition to innovations on the cell-level, experts highlight improved production methods to automate manufacturing and produce higher quality components. Research into SOECs with lower electrode polarisation resistance or zero-gap AECs could undermine the projected dominance of PEMEC systems. This study thereby reduces barriers to investment in water electrolysis and shows how expert elicitations can help guide near-term investment, policy and research efforts to support the development of electrolysis for low-carbon energy systems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hydrogen or batteries for grid storage? A net energy analysis
Pellow, M. A., Emmott, C. J. M., Barnhart, C. J., & Benson, S. M. (2015) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c4ee04041d · Cited by 450
Cited by
The role of hydrogen and fuel cells in the global energy system
Staffell, I., Scamman, D., Velazquez Abad, A., Balcombe, P., Dodds, P. E., Ekins, P., Shah, N., & Ward, K. R. (2019) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c8ee01157e · Cited by 4,187
Self-citationNet-zero emissions energy systems
Davis, S. J., Lewis, N. S., Shaner, M., Aggarwal, S., Arent, D., Azevedo, I. L., Benson, S. M., Bradley, T., Brouwer, J., Chiang, Y.-M., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aas9793 · Cited by 2,391
Chatenet, M., Pollet, B. G., Dekel, D. R., Dionigi, F., Deseure, J., Millet, P., Braatz, R. D., Bazant, M. Z., Eikerling, M., Staffell, I., et al. (2022) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/d0cs01079k · Cited by 2,025
Self-citationA roadmap to the ammonia economy
MacFarlane, D. R., Cherepanov, P. V., Choi, J., Suryanto, B. H. R., Hodgetts, R. Y., Bakker, J. M., Ferrero Vallana, F. M., & Simonov, A. N. (2020) · Joule · doi:10.1016/j.joule.2020.04.004 · Cited by 1,926
An overview of water electrolysis technologies for green hydrogen production
Shiva Kumar, S., & Lim, H. (2022) · Energy Reports · doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2022.10.127 · Cited by 1,526
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmidt, O., Gambhir, A., Staffell, I., Hawkes, A., Nelson, J., & Few, S.
- Venue
- International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-12
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 52
- Pages
- 30470-30492
- ISSN
- 0360-3199 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2769215390
- Cited by
- 2,067
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 64.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Future cost and performance of water electrolysis: An expert elicitation study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.10.045
- The paper
- Schmidt, O., Gambhir, A., Staffell, I., Hawkes, A., Nelson, J., & Few, S. (2017). Future cost and performance of water electrolysis: An expert elicitation study. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.10.045
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
