Realizing the Role of Hydrogen Energy in Ports: Evidence from Ningbo Zhoushan Port

Abstract

The maritime sector’s transition to sustainable energy is critical for achieving global carbon neutrality, with container terminals representing a key focus due to their high energy consumption and emissions. This study explores the potential of hydrogen energy as a decarbonization solution for port operations, using the Chuanshan Port Area of Ningbo Zhoushan Port (CPANZP) as a case study. Through a comprehensive analysis of hydrogen production, storage, refueling, and consumption technologies, we demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of integrating hydrogen systems into port infrastructure. Our findings highlight the successful deployment of a hybrid “wind-solar-hydrogen-storage” energy system at CPANZP, which achieves 49.67% renewable energy contribution and an annual reduction of 22,000 tons in carbon emissions. Key advancements include alkaline water electrolysis with 64.48% efficiency, multi-tier hydrogen storage systems, and fuel cell applications for vehicles and power generation. Despite these achievements, challenges such as high production costs, infrastructure scalability, and data integration gaps persist. The study underscores the importance of policy support, technological innovation, and international collaboration to overcome these barriers and accelerate the adoption of hydrogen energy in ports worldwide. This research provides actionable insights for port operators and policymakers aiming to balance operational efficiency with sustainability goals.

1. Introduction

The maritime industry is undergoing a significant transformation driven by global efforts to reduce carbon emissions and advance sustainable development. Container terminals, as critical hubs of international trade and logistics, are high-energy-consuming facilities that contribute substantially to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and environmental pollution [1,2]. Traditional fossil fuel-based energy sources, such as diesel-powered cranes, trucks, and vessels, are widely used in terminal operations, posing challenges in achieving carbon neutrality and improving air quality [3]. To address this issue, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), responsible for regulating the global maritime industry, has set an ambitious target of reducing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from the global shipping sector by at least 40% by 2030, and achieve net-zero GHG emissions by or around 2050 [4]. The Chinese government also officially committed to achieving carbon peak and carbon neutrality by 2030 and 2060, respectively [5]. These strategic visions necessitate the widespread application of green alternative energy sources in container terminals.

Hydrogen energy has emerged as a versatile and promising alternative to fossil fuels in port applications [6]. As a clean energy carrier with a high calorific value and zero carbon emissions at the point of use, hydrogen can be integrated into port operations in multiple ways, including hydrogen fuel cells for vehicles and equipment, direct combustion in industrial processes, and hydrogen-based synthetic fuels such as ammonia [7]. Hydrogen adoption has increased across sectors due to its high energy density and ability to complement renewable energy sources [8,9,10]. Unlike battery storage, which has limited capacity and rapid discharge characteristics, hydrogen can store excess renewable energy for extended periods, enhancing energy security and stability.

Given the high energy consumption, ports offer substantial opportunities for the expansion and utilization of hydrogen energy. Several international ports have already initiated hydrogen projects to reduce emissions and improve sustainability. For instance, the Port of Los Angeles is investing in a hydrogen-powered drayage truck pilot program and exploring hydrogen fueling infrastructure as part of its Clean Air Action Plan [11]. Similarly, the Port of Rotterdam is developing Europe’s largest hydrogen hub, with plans to import and distribute green hydrogen to support industrial and maritime applications [12]. In Japan, the Port of Yokohama is integrating hydrogen fuel cell technology into port logistics and maritime transportation, aligning with the country’s national hydrogen strategy [13]. Additionally, Singapore has launched a comprehensive decarbonization strategy that includes trials of hydrogen fuel cells for port equipment and maritime vessels [14]. Hydrogen can also be integrated with renewable energy sources such as wind and solar to create a sustainable and resilient port energy system [15,16]. These initiatives highlight the growing momentum behind hydrogen adoption in port operations and its potential to drive sustainable economic growth.

China has also actively integrated hydrogen energy into its national energy strategy, recognizing its potential to transform multiple industries, including port logistics. In 2019, Qingdao Port became the first in China to adopt hydrogen energy in port operations by introducing three hydrogen-powered container tractors. These vehicles, combining hydrogen fuel and electric power, demonstrated the feasibility of new energy heavy trucks in port logistics. While their performance met operational demands, challenges remain, particularly in hydrogen fuel supply infrastructure and high operating costs—currently about three times that of diesel alternatives. However, continued advancements in hydrogen technology and infrastructure are expected to improve cost-effectiveness and scalability in the long term [17].

As one of China’s largest and most strategically significant ports, Ningbo Zhoushan Port presents a unique opportunity for hydrogen energy integration [18]. The port has a substantial cargo throughput and energy consumption, making it a viable candidate for large-scale hydrogen adoption. With the goal of building a world-class port and a world-class enterprise, Ningbo Zhoushan Port, jointly with universities, companies, and other units, undertook the “Transportation Infrastructure” national key special project “Water Transport Port-Ship Multi-Energy Fusion Technology and Integrated Application” in 2021. It has pioneered the world’s first integrated multi-energy system for port operations, combining 12.5 MW of wind power, 3.66 MWp of solar photovoltaics (PV), 3.8 MWh of energy storage, and a comprehensive hydrogen energy infrastructure featuring a 2.5 MW electrolysis plant, 1799.8 kW of fuel cell capacity, and a 500 kg/day hydrogen refueling station. This innovative system successfully achieves coupling of diverse energy vectors while addressing the dual stochastic challenges of variable renewable generation and fluctuating port energy demand through advanced balance regulation. The project has significantly enhanced the sustainability of both energy supply and consumption within the port area, establishing a replicable model for decarbonizing heavy industrial operations through multi-energy integration.

Compared to existing literature that focuses on isolated studies of individual aspects of hydrogen energy applications in ports, this paper presents the first empirical research framework encompassing the entire hydrogen value chain—from production, storage, and refueling to consumption—specifically tailored for large-scale port operations. By comprehensively examining the feasibility, challenges, and benefits of hydrogen energy integration in container terminals from multiple dimensions, this study provides actionable insights into how hydrogen can contribute to a more sustainable port economy.

The following sections will discuss the pathways of hydrogen energy application in the port, key technological developments in Ningbo Zhoushan Port, performance evaluation of the hydrogen energy system, and some challenges in large-scale implementation.

2. Hydrogen Energy Pathways for Port Applications

Hydrogen production is the first step in unlocking its potential for port applications. It can be generated from diverse resources and through various pathways, basically in two categories: non-renewable production, such as steam methane reforming (SMR), coal gasification, and methane pyrolysis; and renewable production sources, including electrolysis, biohydrogen, photocatalysis, thermochemical cycles, and plasmolysis [19]. These technologies vary in efficiency, sustainability, and carbon emissions. For instance, SMR is a process that extracts hydrogen from natural gas [20,21]. While SMR is currently the most cost-effective method, it generates CO₂ as a byproduct, making it less suitable for decarbonizing port operations [20,21,22]. Nevertheless, the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies could mitigate this issue, allowing for lower-carbon hydrogen production in the short term as renewable-powered electrolysis becomes more cost-competitive [23,24].

Electrolysis of water is one of the most widely adopted and mature methods. This process uses electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen, producing high-purity carbon-free green hydrogen, making it an environmentally friendly solution [25,26]. However, the major drawback of this technology is its high electricity consumption [27]. To mitigate this challenge, renewable energy sources such as solar PV, wind power, and energy storage systems are increasingly being integrated to supply electricity for hydrogen production, thereby reducing the energy costs associated with electrolysis [28,29,30]. Electrolysis powered by renewable energy offers a sustainable pathway by converting excess renewable electricity into storable hydrogen, thereby addressing the intermittency of renewable power [31]. The most common types of electrolysers are alkaline electrolysers, proton exchange membrane (PEM) electrolysers, anion exchange membrane (AEM) electrolysers, and solid oxide electrolyser cell (SOEC) [25,32,33]. Although the efficiency of hydrogen-based energy storage still remains a challenge—where approximately 4.0–5.5 kWh of electricity is required to produce 1 Nm³ of hydrogen via electrolysis, and only 1.33 kWh can be recovered through fuel cells—its role in stabilizing energy supply and decoupling power generation from consumption is a key advantage [34].

Hydrogen energy can be deployed across various port operations. One of the most effective applications is through hydrogen fuel cells, which generate electricity via an electrochemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen, emitting only water as a byproduct [35]. These hydrogen fuel cell-powered equipment includes trucks, cranes, and forklifts, offering a zero-emission alternative to diesel machinery and improving air quality [36]. Additionally, hydrogen can be used for shore-side power generation, providing clean electricity to docked vessels and minimizing the usage of fossil fuels [37]. The potential integration of hydrogen fuel cells into port vessels, particularly for short-sea shipping, presents another pathway to reducing maritime emissions [38]. While pilot projects in the ports all over the world have demonstrated feasibility, scaling up adoption requires further infrastructure development and cost reductions.

The construction of hydrogen refueling stations (HRS) further ensures a continuous and stable supply of hydrogen to end-use applications, enabling a fully integrated energy system that combines wind, solar, energy storage, and hydrogen [39]. Hydrogen can be stored and transported in various forms, including compressed gas, liquid hydrogen, or chemical carriers such as ammonia, each with different technical and economic implications [40]. Compressed hydrogen storage is currently the most widely used method due to its relatively simple implementation [41], but it requires high-pressure tanks and robust safety measures. Liquid hydrogen, while offering higher energy density, demands cryogenic storage at extremely low temperatures, increasing complexity and costs, which consumes at least 35% of the energy content of the hydrogen [42]. Hydrogen carriers, such as ammonia and methanol, provide an alternative to large-scale hydrogen transportation and storage, but their conversion back to hydrogen requires additional processing steps [43]. HRS plays a key role in supporting the fuel cell-powered port equipment, trucks, and vessels. The main components of an HRS are hydrogen storage tanks, compression units, and high-pressure dispensers. The form of hydrogen significantly impacts the design and operational requirements of HRS. Consequently, it must align with the operational needs of container terminals, balancing the safety requirements, refueling efficiency, and storage feasibility.

At an energy network level, recent studies have emphasized the significant potential of integrating hydrogen and renewable energy systems within port infrastructures. For instance, Elkafas et al. demonstrated that using solar energy, offshore wind, and hydrogen fuel cells to power docked vessels could achieve annual CO₂ emission reductions of 31.7 kt, 15.7 kt, and 4.2 kt at the ports of Alexandria, Damietta, and Safaga ports in Egypt, respectively [44]. Zhang et al. proposed an integrated energy system including hydrogen energy to best consume renewable energy, taking into account the security constraints. The authors designed a Mixed-Integer Linear Programme model with an enhanced particle swarm optimization algorithm to improve the energy efficiency in port operation [45]. Wang et al. also established a hydrogen–electricity integrated energy system tailored for ports, supported by a day-ahead optimal dispatch model, which successfully reduced operational costs by 40% compared to traditional cogeneration methods [46]. These studies suggest that establishing a coupled hydrogen–electricity energy system is currently a common method to improve the application of hydrogen energy in ports.

3. Developments of Hydrogen Energy in Chuanshan Port Area

The feasibility of hydrogen energy adoption at Chuanshan Port Area of Ningbo Zhoushan Port (CPANZP) depends on both economic and environmental factors. As one of the busiest ports with the most super-large berths in the world [47], Ningbo Zhoushan Port has garnered significant attention from both academia and industry, which rely on its strategic geographical advantages along the eastern coast of China. Even though the initial costs of hydrogen infrastructure, especially for the production via electrolysis, storage, and refueling, are high, the access to abundant wind and solar resources makes it an ideal candidate for renewable-powered electrolysis of hydrogen production with reduced transportation costs and enhanced system efficiency [48,49]. Since the full commissioning of the energy integration project in CPANZP on 30 September 2024, the port has achieved outstanding operational results, with renewable energy sources now contributing 49.67% of total power supply while maintaining an impressive 30.23% energy self-sufficiency rate. The system demonstrates exceptional power quality, exhibiting only 1.49% total harmonic distortion (THD) under normal operating conditions. Annually, the photovoltaic arrays generate approximately 3.4 million kWh of clean electricity, complemented by 24 million kWh from wind turbines. In terms of environmental aspects, this hydrogen energy strategy, coupled with renewable electricity, offers a viable path to decarbonize not just the port but also the broader maritime logistics chain [50]. It turns out that the wind turbines and photovoltaic arrays may collectively enable an annual substantial reduction of 22,000 tons in carbon emissions in CPANZP, strong policy support and national strategic guidance also creates a favorable environment for further investment and innovation [51].

A key achievement in COANZP is the implementation of a comprehensive “wind-solar-hydrogen-storage” hybrid energy system as shown in Figure 1, designed to maximize the utilization of abundant renewable energy resources. This innovative system operates on a “self-generation for in-port use, surplus electricity for hydrogen production” principle, ensuring a stable energy supply while minimizing carbon emissions from port operations.

Emerged as a global benchmark site for hydrogen energy, the CPANZP has demonstrated massive advancements in both infrastructure deployment and hydrogen-powered equipment application. Figure 2 shows the on-site implementation of the port-integrated hydrogen energy system.

3.1. Hydrogen Production Technology

The hydrogen production facility employs advanced alkaline water electrolysis technology, as shown in Figure 3. After rectification through IGBT modules, the power supply system delivers direct current to the electrolyser via dedicated cables, supplying the necessary electricity for water electrolysis. A specific electrolyte solution (30% KOH) has been chosen to produce hydrogen. This process involves immersing a pair of electrodes into the electrolyte, with a membrane placed between them to prevent gas crossover, thus forming an electrolytic cell. When a direct current of appropriate voltage is applied to the electrodes, water molecules break down into hydrogen ions and oxygen ions. Hydrogen ions migrate through the electrolyte to the cathode and combine with electrons to form hydrogen gas, while oxygen ions release electrons in the anode and combine to form oxygen [52,53]. The generated hydrogen, along with the circulating lye, is transported into a gas–liquid separator, where the hydrogen and lye are separated under the influence of gravity. After undergoing sophisticated washing and cooling steps, the gas becomes crude hydrogen. This crude hydrogen then enters the purification system, where it passes through deoxidation, drying, and dust removal stages to yield a high purity level of up to 99.999% suitable for use. Meanwhile, the generated oxygen is similarly separated, washed, cooled, and then safely discharged into the atmosphere. Looking ahead, as the project progresses, the high-purity oxygen byproduct will not only be safely discharged but also be further purified for industrial applications such as medical use, metal cutting, and wastewater treatment. Preliminary estimates indicate an annual oxygen yield of 600 tons from this project. At current market prices of 450 CNY/ton, this could generate additional revenue of 270,000 CNY/year. Subsequent phases will explore oxygen co-production business models to enhance the project’s economic viability. The electrolyte separated in the hydrogen and oxygen gas–liquid separators is returned to the electrolyser via a circulation pump, passing through a lye cooler and filter to maintain the system’s optimal thermal and chemical conditions. This closed-loop design ensures the stability, efficiency, and continuity of the electrolysis process.

3.2. Hydrogen Storage Technology

A multi-tier pressure system, as shown in Figure 4, has been employed in the subsequent hydrogen compression and storage stage, which includes low-pressure buffer tanks (1.5 MPa working pressure), medium-pressure cylinder groups (20 MPa), and high-pressure hydrogen cylinder groups (45 MPa), all designed in compliance with stringent safety standards, including TSG 21 [54] and GB/T 4732-2024 [55]. The generated hydrogen is buffered and pressure-stabilized first in a 5 m³ buffer tank (1.5 MPa), with its safety state being monitored in real time by pressure and temperature sensors to guarantee the system’s reliability throughout the storage process. They serve as the first accumulation point of the hydrogen storage system, smoothing out the production fluctuations and extending the service life of the compressor. From these buffers, the hydrogen gas is compressed to 20 MPa for intermediate storage in bundled cylinder arrays, providing operational flexibility for the refueling systems. The final storage stage utilizes high-pressure vessels rated at 45 MPa, maintained at controlled temperatures to ensure safe gas density conditions.

3.3. Hydrogen Refueling Technology

The hydrogen refueling system serves two primary endpoints: vehicle refueling stations and fuel cell power plants. As can be seen in Figure 4, the refueling infrastructure mainly consists of hydrogen long-tube trailers, gas unloading columns, skid-mounted compressors, buffer tanks, sequence control panels, hydrogen storage cylinder groups, hydrogen dispensers, chillers, nitrogen purging/instrument air valve groups, a diffusion tower, and station control systems. The 20 MPa compressors serve as the primary compression stage, feeding into intermediate storage buffers, while the 45 MPa units provide the necessary pressure for high-capacity vehicle refueling operations through the hydrogen dispenser. Each of the above-mentioned 20 MPa and 45 MPa compressors is capable of processing 500 Nm³/h of hydrogen. It is noteworthy that this project incorporates both on-site hydrogen production and external supply capabilities to maintain stable and reliable hydrogen operations. The system is designed additionally to receive hydrogen from external tube trailers operating at 5–20 MPa, which is unloaded via dedicated unloading columns. This externally sourced hydrogen is then pressurized to 45 MPa using specialized compressors before being systematically distributed through a sequential control panel into the high-pressure hydrogen storage cylinder arrays for supporting fuel cell vehicles.

3.4. Hydrogen Consumption Technology

3.4.1. Fuel Cell

The integrated fuel cell power generation system at CPANZP represents a critical component of the multi-energy hydrogen ecosystem, designed to provide efficient and clean electricity for port operations. The system comprises three modular 120 kW PEM fuel cell units, collectively delivering 300 kW of rated power output. As presented in Figure 5, hydrogen is supplied from the 20 MPa storage cylinders and precisely regulated to an optimal 1–1.5 MPa operating pressure before entering the anode side of the fuel cell stacks. Here, hydrogen undergoes electrochemical oxidation, facilitated by platinum-based catalysts, while compressed air—processed through dedicated turbochargers and humidification systems—feeds the cathode side to complete the redox reaction. The resulting direct current is conditioned through a DC/DC converter, elevating the voltage to 750 V for integration with the port’s microgrid infrastructure. Notably, the generated waste heat can also be stored and utilized in the form of hot water, thereby enhancing the overall energy utilization efficiency of the integrated power generation system.

3.4.2. Hydrogen-Powered Vehicles

A critical component of this project is the deployment of hydrogen-powered heavy equipment for port operations. The fleet includes Dongfeng EQ4250GFCEV (Dongfeng Motor Corporation, Wuhan, China) hydrogen fuel cell tractor units (Figure 6), featuring 140 kW fuel cell systems and 1680 L hydrogen storage tanks operating at 35 MPa pressure. With a remarkable full-load range of ≥350 km and rapid refueling capability (8–12 min), these 6 × 4 semi-trailer tractors represent a significant advancement in zero-emission heavy transport. For material handling operations, the port has introduced hydrogen-powered forklifts from Hangcha Group (Hangzhou, China), including 3-ton (CPD30-XJ4-FC) and 7-ton (CPD70-XC4-FC) models (Figure 6). These forklifts offer operational durations of 10 and 8 h, respectively, with refueling times as short as 3–5 min, demonstrating superior performance compared to conventional battery-electric alternatives.

Considering the distinct characteristics of hydrogen-powered equipment deployed in the port area, including hydrogen tractors and forklifts, separate hydrogen load modeling is conducted for different equipment types.

• Hydrogen-Powered Trucks;

The hydrogen-powered terminal trucks in the port area operate on fixed routes, shuttling between quay cranes and container yards. Refueling can only occur upon completion of each operational cycle. The time required for one full working cycle of these hydrogen-powered terminal trucks is as follows:

$$\Delta t_{\mathrm{truck}}={\displaystyle \frac{x_{\mathrm{unloaded}}}{v_{\mathrm{unloaded}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{x_{\mathrm{loaded}}}{v_{\mathrm{loaded}}}}$$

(1)

where $x_{\mathrm{unloaded}}$ and $x_{\mathrm{loaded}}$ represent the unloaded and loaded travel distances of the hydrogen-powered terminal truck, respectively; while $v_{\mathrm{unloaded}}$ and $v_{\mathrm{loaded}}$ denote its unloaded and loaded operating speeds.

When the hydrogen-powered terminal truck i completes operational cycle N_i, its hydrogen consumption is calculated as follows:

$$m_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{con}}^i=N_i\cdot \left(x_{\mathrm{unloaded}}\cdot \Delta m_{\mathrm{unloaded}}+x_{\mathrm{loaded}}\cdot \Delta m_{\mathrm{loaded}}\right)$$

(2)

where $\Delta m_{\mathrm{unloaded}}$ and $\Delta m_{\mathrm{loaded}}$ denote the hydrogen consumption rates per unit distance under unloaded and loaded conditions of the hydrogen-powered terminal truck, respectively.

When the hydrogen-powered terminal truck arrives at the refueling station, its demand-side flexibility is modeled as follows:

$$m_{\mathrm{truck}}^i(t)\le \overline{m_{\mathrm{truck}}}-m_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{ini}}^i+{\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^{t-1}\left(m_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{con}}^i(k)-m_{\mathrm{truck}}^i(k)\right)}, t=N_i\Delta t_{\mathrm{truck}}$$

(3)

$$\underset{¯}{m_{\mathrm{truck}}}\le m_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{ini}}^i-{\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^t\left(m_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{con}}^i(k)-m_{\mathrm{truck}}^i(k)\right)}, t=N_i\Delta t_{\mathrm{truck}}$$

(4)

where $m_{\mathrm{truck}}^i(t)$ represents the adjustable hydrogen load of the hydrogen-powered terminal truck i in the port area at time t; $m_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{ini}}^i$ denotes the initial hydrogen storage level of the truck; $\overline{m_{\mathrm{truck}}}$ and $\underset{¯}{m_{\mathrm{truck}}}$ indicate the upper and lower limits of the truck’s onboard hydrogen storage capacity, respectively; $m_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{con}}^i(k)$ is the hydrogen consumption during the operational cycle k of truck i; $m_{\mathrm{truck}}^i(k)$ stands for the refueling volume after the operational cycle k; $N_i\Delta t_{\mathrm{truck}}$ represents the arrival time at the refueling station.

The temporal constraints are implicitly defined as follows:

$$0<N_i\Delta t_{\mathrm{truck}}\le T$$

(5)

where T represents the total system dispatch period; $\Delta t_{\mathrm{truck}}$ denotes the unit dispatch cycle for hydrogen-powered terminal trucks.

$N_i^t$ is the number of operational cycles completed by the hydrogen-powered terminal truck i during the system dispatch period t. The hydrogen load can then be reformulated as follows:

$$m_{\mathrm{truck}}^i(t)={\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^{N_i^t}{m}_{\mathrm{truck},\mathrm{con}}^i(k)}$$

(6)

where $m_{\mathrm{truck}}^i(t)$ represents the total hydrogen load of the hydrogen-powered terminal truck i during the dispatch period t.

2.

Hydrogen-Powered Forklifts;

As critical horizontal transport equipment in ports, forklifts operate with high intensity and significant energy consumption. The hydrogen load model for forklifts is established as follows:

$$m_{\mathrm{forklift}}^i(t)\le \overline{m_{\mathrm{forklift}}}-m_{\mathrm{forklift},\mathrm{ini}}^i+{\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^{t-1}\left(m_{\mathrm{forklift},\cos \mathrm{t}}^i(k)-m_{\mathrm{forklift}}^i(k)\right)}, t\in \left(1,T\right]$$

(7)

$$\underset{¯}{m_{\mathrm{forklift}}}\le m_{\mathrm{forklift},\mathrm{ini}}^i-{\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^t\left(m_{\mathrm{forklift},\cos \mathrm{t}}^i(k)-m_{\mathrm{forklift}}^i(k)\right)}, t\in \left(1,T\right]$$

(8)

where $m_{\mathrm{forklift}}^i(t)$ represents the adjustable hydrogen load of the hydrogen-powered forklift i in the port area at time t; $m_{\mathrm{forklift},\mathrm{ini}}^i$ denotes the initial hydrogen storage level of the forklift; $\overline{m_{\mathrm{forklift}}}$ and $\underset{¯}{m_{\mathrm{forklift}}}$ indicate the upper and lower limits of the forklift’s onboard hydrogen storage capacity, respectively; $m_{\mathrm{forklift},\mathrm{cost}}^i(k)$ is the hydrogen consumption during the operational cycle k of forklift i; $m_{\mathrm{forklift}}^i(k)$ stands for the refueling amount after the operational cycle k.

4. Performance Evaluation of Hydrogen Energy System

4.1. Performance Evaluation Metrics

4.1.1. Hydrogen Production System

• Hydrogen Production Efficiency;

Hydrogen production efficiency refers to the system’s efficiency in converting electrical energy to chemical energy of hydrogen, typically expressed as Energy Conversion Efficiency (ECE):

$$\begin{array}{c}ECE={\displaystyle \frac{LHV\times Q_{H_2}}{3.36\times U\times I\times t}}\end{array}\times 100\%$$

(9)

where LHV represents the lower heating value of hydrogen (MJ/Nm³); $Q_{H_2}$ is the total hydrogen production during electrolyzer operation (m³); U denotes the system input voltage (V); I indicates the system input current (A); t stands for hydrogen production time (h).

2.

Current Efficiency of Electrolyzer;

The current efficiency of an electrolyzer refers to the ratio of theoretical electricity consumption to actual electricity consumption in water electrolysis for hydrogen production.

Under standard conditions, 2 × 96,485 Coulombs (C) of electricity are required to electrolyze 1 mole of water to produce 1 mole of hydrogen (H₂) and 0.5 moles of oxygen (O₂). The volume of 1 mole of hydrogen under standard conditions is 22.43 × 10⁻³ m³. Thus, the theoretical electricity required to produce 1 m³ of hydrogen under standard conditions is:

$$E={\displaystyle \frac{2\times 96485\times 1000}{3600\times 22.43}}=2389.78(\mathrm{A}·\mathrm{h}/{\mathrm{m}}^3)$$

(10)

The current efficiency can then be expressed as follows:

$${\eta }_P={\displaystyle \frac{E\times Q_{H_2}}{I\times n\times t}}$$

(11)

where ${\eta }_P$ is the current efficiency (%); $n$ is the number of electrolytic cells (individual electrolysis units).

3.

Hydrogen Purity;

Hydrogen purity refers to the volume percentage of hydrogen in the product, which significantly impacts its application fields such as fuel cells.

4.1.2. Hydrogen Storage System

Hydrogen storage density refers to the amount of hydrogen gas that a hydrogen storage tank can store per unit volume or unit mass.

$${\rho }_{H_2}={\displaystyle \frac{m_{H_2}}{V_{\mathrm{tank}}}}$$

(12)

where ${\rho }_{H_2}$ is the volumetric hydrogen storage density (kg/m³); $m_{H_2}$ is the mass of the stored hydrogen; $V_{\mathrm{tank}}$ is the volume of the hydrogen storage container (m³).

4.1.3. Hydrogen Refueling System

Charge/Discharge rate of hydrogen refers to the speed at which a hydrogen storage system absorbs or releases hydrogen, affecting the system’s response time and ease of use.

$${\mathrm{V}}_{in}{/\mathrm{V}}_{out}={\displaystyle \frac{\Delta S}{\Delta t}}$$

(13)

where ${\mathrm{V}}_{in}{/\mathrm{V}}_{out}$ represent the charge and discharge rates, respectively; $\Delta S$ denotes the volume of hydrogen charged or discharged per unit time $\Delta t$.

4.1.4. Hydrogen Consumption System

• Fuel Cell Hydrogen Consumption;

The amount of hydrogen consumed by a fuel cell during operation can be calculated using Faraday’s law.

$$m_{H_2}={\displaystyle \frac{I_{FC}\times n_{FC}\times M_{H_2}}{2F}}$$

(14)

where $m_{H_2}$ represents the hydrogen consumption of the fuel cell (g/s); $I_{FC}$ is the current of the fuel cell, in amperes (A); $n_{FC}$ is the number of cells in the stack; $M_{H_2}$ is the molar mass of hydrogen, approximately 2.016 g/mol; and $F$ is the Faraday constant, approximately 96,485 C/mol.

2.

Fuel Cell Efficiency;

The efficiency of a hydrogen fuel cell system in converting hydrogen energy into electrical energy typically ranges between 40% and 60%.

$${\eta }_{FC}={\displaystyle \frac{P_{out}\times {10}^3}{V{m}_{H_2}\times LHV}}$$

(15)

where ${\eta }_{FC}$ represents the fuel cell efficiency; $P_{out}$ is the electrical power output of the fuel cell (kW); $V{m}_{H_2}$ is the mass flow rate of hydrogen (g/s); LHV is the lower heating value of hydrogen.

3.

Hydrogen-Powered Truck Range;

The range of a hydrogen-powered truck refers to the maximum distance it can travel on a full hydrogen tank under specific operating conditions.

4.2. Performance Analysis

4.2.1. Hydrogen Production System

• Hydrogen Production Efficiency;

The lower heating value of hydrogen is taken as 10.786 MJ/Nm³. According to actual operational data, the average system input voltage is 356.54 V, the average system input current is 6500.97 A, and the average hourly hydrogen production volume is 498.87 Nm³.

Substituting these values into the Formula (9) yields a hydrogen production efficiency of 64.48% for converting electrical energy into hydrogen’s chemical energy. During hydrogen production, unavoidable electrical energy losses occur due to factors such as equipment resistance and conversion of energy into other forms (e.g., heat). For current water electrolysis technologies, efficiencies typically range between 50% and 70%. The achieved efficiency of 64.48% demonstrates that this system’s capability to convert electrical input into hydrogen’s chemical energy meets industrial standards and represents satisfactory performance.

2.

Current Efficiency of Electrolyzer;

According to the system’s electrolyzer specifications, the number of electrolytic cells is 185.

Substituting the values into the Formula (11) yields a current efficiency of 99.12% for the electrolyzer, which is extremely close to 100%. This indicates that nearly all electric current is effectively utilized for hydrogen production with minimal losses. The system demonstrates exceptionally high current conversion efficiency during electrolysis. No significant current loss is observed, confirming optimal system design.

3.

Hydrogen Purity;

The test data indicates that the raw hydrogen gas has a purity of 99.89%, indicating that the hydrogen initially produced through water electrolysis already possesses relatively high purity. For many industrial applications, hydrogen with 98.5% purity is sufficiently pure. However, more advanced applications (such as semiconductor manufacturing or fuel cells) require hydrogen of even higher purity levels.

In actual operation, the final product hydrogen achieves an exceptional purity of 99.999%, demonstrating the system’s outstanding purification capability during the hydrogen refinement stage. The purification process that upgrades hydrogen from 98.5% to 99.999% purity clearly reflects the system’s advanced technical capabilities in gas separation, filtration, and impurity removal. Trace amounts of oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor, and other impurities present in the hydrogen stream are nearly completely eliminated in the final product, which convincingly demonstrates both the technical sophistication and reliability of the purification system.

4.2.2. Hydrogen Storage System

The system hydrogen storage module primarily consists of two hydrogen storage cylinder groups: a 20 MPa group and a 45 MPa group, with volumes of 49.35 m³ and 9 m³, respectively. These can store 730 kg and 260 kg of hydrogen.

Plugging the values into the Formula (12), we find that the 20 MPa group has a density of 14.77 kg/m³, indicating that at lower pressure, the hydrogen storage capacity per unit volume is relatively low. The 45 MPa group achieves a density of 28.87 kg/m³.

4.2.3. Hydrogen Refueling System

Test data indicate that for a 20 MPa hydrogen storage cylinder group in operation, the hydrogen charging speed is 4.4 m/s, and the discharge speed is 4.9 m/s. For a 45 MPa hydrogen storage cylinder group, the charging speed is 3.9 m/s, and the discharge speed is 4.5 m/s.

The 20 MPa system exhibits slightly higher charge/discharge rates compared to the 45 MPa system, suggesting that low-pressure systems may release more hydrogen in a shorter time, making them suitable for applications with significant power demand fluctuations. In contrast, although the 45 MPa system has slightly slower charge/discharge rates, its larger hydrogen storage capacity enables longer-duration hydrogen supply, making it better suited for sustained power output requirements.

4.2.4. Hydrogen Consumption System

• Fuel Cell Hydrogen Consumption;

The fuel cell stack consists of 1200 small cells, with the molar mass of hydrogen taken as 2.016 g/mol and the Faraday constant as 96,485 C/mol. Test data show that the fuel cell’s output current is 332 A. Substituting these values into the Formula (14) yields a hydrogen consumption rate of 4.16 g/s, equivalent to approximately 14.98 kg per hour. This level of hydrogen consumption is reasonable for small to medium-sized stationary power generation applications.

2.

Fuel Cell Efficiency;

The lower heating value of hydrogen is taken as 1.2 × 10⁵ kJ/kg (equivalent to 10.786 MJ/Nm³, given hydrogen’s standard-state density of 0.08988 kg/m³). Based on test data, the fuel cell’s average electrical power output is 291 kW, and the hydrogen mass flow rate is 4.16 g/s. Substituting these values into the Formula (15) yields a fuel cell efficiency of 58.3%.

The typical electrical efficiency range for fuel cells is 40–60%. Therefore, an efficiency of 58.3% indicates that the fuel cell system is well-designed and operating optimally, with high hydrogen utilization and minimal energy loss during conversion.

3.

Hydrogen-Powered Truck Range;

The operational performance of the Dongfeng EQ4250GFCEV hydrogen fuel cell trucks has been rigorously documented through extensive field testing at CPANZP. The vehicle recorded a travel distance of 33.5 KM with a consumption of 1.78 kg of hydrogen under an empty-vehicle condition. This consumption translates to a measured hydrogen usage rate of 5.31 kg per 100 km, demonstrating the efficiency of the 140 kW fuel cell system in port operations. The hydrogen load models Formulas (1)–(8) also underwent rigorous validation using the operational data. For fuel cell trucks, the predicted consumption (5.42 kg/100 km) showed merely 2.1% deviation from actual measurements (5.31 kg/100 km).

It is worth noting that the battery state-of-charge remained constant at 80% throughout this period, indicating that the fuel cell system successfully handled the primary power demands without requiring supplemental energy from the onboard 100 kWh lithium-ion battery pack.

4.3. Economic Analysis

The hydrogen system requires a total capital expenditure of 39.1783 million CNY. With an annual hydrogen output of 75,700 kg and projected fossil fuel displacement of 265,000 L, the system generates an annual profit of 4.1105 million CNY. Although the initial investment is substantial, the net present value (NPV) of annual benefits demonstrates progressive improvement over time while maintaining relatively stable aggregate profitability. The discounted payback period occurs at 9.6 years of operation when cumulative revenues offset initial outlays. Based on a 20-year system lifespan and 8% discount rate, the calculated return on investment (ROI), internal rate of return (IRR), and total investment return rate reach 109.83%, 8.11%, and 75.77% respectively; the Levelized Cost of Hydrogen (LCOH) at CPANZP is 35 CNY/kg.

Computational analysis indicates that the hydrogen-powered system’s economic performance will exhibit sustained enhancement over the next decade and beyond. The substantial upfront investment is counterbalanced by progressively increasing annual fuel displacement volumes and corresponding profit growth. Concurrently, the compounding annual returns lead to continuous NPV improvement. These findings suggest that while capital-intensive initially, the system delivers gradually manifesting economic benefits that ultimately provide investors with stable and substantial returns. The long-term profitability metrics not only validate the economic viability of hydrogen propulsion systems but also offer compelling evidence for sustainable energy investments.

4.4. Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Emission

Given the intrinsic linkage between the hydrogen system’s carbon emissions and the wind/PV generation facilities, we evaluated the lifecycle carbon emissions of the port’s integrated energy system as a holistic entity.

• Carbon Emissions

The total lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of the integrated energy system amount to 9.61 × 10³ tCO₂ eq. The production phase constitutes the most significant contributor, with the production, transportation, construction, and decommissioning phases accounting for 141.59%, 5.32%, 21.11%, and −68.02% of total emissions, respectively. Within the production phase, the wind power system and grid-connection system emerge as the two largest emission sources, responsible for 29.80% and 30.95% of production-phase emissions, respectively. This primarily stems from the substantial steel, iron, aluminum, and copper consumption during equipment manufacturing. Notably, these systems demonstrate considerable emission reduction potential during decommissioning through material recycling, offsetting 42.73% and 39.79% of decommissioning-phase emissions, respectively. Among all subsystems, the grid-connection system exhibits the highest proportion of lifecycle emissions (37.36%), attributable to its large capacity configuration and the required inverter replacement during the system’s lifespan. Additionally, the energy storage and wind power systems contribute significantly, accounting for 25.76% and 24.13% of emissions, respectively. When excluding the carbon reduction benefits from grid electricity displacement, the system’s lifecycle carbon intensity reaches 17.30 gCO₂ eq/kWh.

2.

Carbon Payback Period

Under both STEPS and APS electricity mix scenarios, the system demonstrates remarkably short carbon payback periods of 0.735 and 0.741 years, respectively. In the STEPS scenario, the system delivers first-year carbon reduction benefits of 1.89 × 10⁴ tCO₂ eq. As the grid’s carbon intensity decreases over time, the 20th-year reduction benefit moderates to 1.09 × 10⁴ tCO₂ eq. The cumulative net emission reduction over the 20-year lifespan reaches −2.95 × 10⁵ tCO₂ eq. Similarly, under the APS scenario, the system achieves first-year reductions of 1.88 × 10⁴ tCO₂ eq, gradually decreasing to 7.64 × 10³ tCO₂ eq by year 20, with total lifecycle net reductions of −2.68 × 10⁵ tCO₂ eq.

5. Discussion

The developments collectively showcase CPANZP’s commitment to implementing hydrogen energy technologies, integrating them with other renewable energy solutions (such as wind turbines, solar photovoltaics, etc.), and providing a viable model for large-scale hydrogen energy adoption in heavy industrial applications. The successful integration of hydrogen production, storage, refueling, and utilization systems, coupled with the deployment of diverse hydrogen-powered equipment, demonstrates a comprehensive approach to decarbonizing maritime logistics while maintaining operational efficiency and reliability.

CPANZP’s performance metrics contextualize its global standing. The 64.5% electrolysis efficiency surpasses the Port of Rotterdam and Los Angeles, though slightly below Yokohama, reflecting technological selections and cooling system optimizations. The exceptional storage density (28.9 kg/m³), enabled by innovative 45 MPa vessel arrays, exceeds the international average (24.5 kg/m³) by 18%. Economically, while Ningbo’s LOCH (35 CNY/kg, equivalent to $4.8/kg) is higher than Singapore’s (around $3/kg), its per-ton abatement cost proves more competitive due to scale effects—a critical reference for developing-economy ports.

The project demonstrates around 20% energy cost advantage over conventional diesel tractors, based on comparative per-TEU and per-km analyses of operational data. This range accounts for current hydrogen production costs at Chuanshan Port, with higher savings achievable through renewable energy integration and infrastructure scaling. To validate emission reduction claims, this study reconstructed the carbon baseline through tiered calculation methods. Historical data from 42 diesel trucks (28 L/h) and 15 forklifts (5 L/h) were combined with IPCC’s diesel emission factor (2.68 kg CO₂/L), establishing an annual baseline of 34,500 tons. For the hydrogen system, emissions accounting distinguished between energy sources: renewable-powered operations (89%) were considered carbon-neutral across their lifecycle, whereas grid electricity (11%) was assigned a regional emission factor. The verified 22,000-ton annual reduction comprises direct equipment emission cuts (18,700 tons) and indirect energy decarbonization (3300 tons), showing less than 5% deviation from third-party monitoring data.

Despite the technological achievements, several operational and systemic challenges persist. Data integration still needs to be improved, with the energy management system lacking full connectivity to hydrogen production, storage, and dispensing subsystems. This gap limits real-time monitoring of key parameters such as electrolyser efficiency, hydrogen purity trends, and fleet energy consumption patterns. Furthermore, the refueling management interface currently lacks granular vehicle-specific tracking, including license plate correlation and automated reporting, which makes fleet performance analysis difficult. Infrastructure optimization is also needed, particularly in corrosion protection for outdoor equipment and standardized labeling for storage and dispensing units. The 300 kW fuel cell power generation system, while technically capable, operates below optimal utilization due to insufficient historical performance data, highlighting the need for enhanced operational protocols.

Addressing these challenges requires a systematic approach, including the development of comprehensive data analytics frameworks, enhanced predictive maintenance routines, and standardized operating procedures for electrolyser and compressor systems. Continued refinement of the hydrogen refueling and fleet management systems will further improve operational transparency and efficiency.

The CPANZP serves as both a technological benchmark for ports worldwide seeking to reduce their environmental footprint and a learning platform for large-scale hydrogen deployment in heavy industrial applications, aligning with global decarbonization goals in the maritime sector.

6. Conclusions

Hydrogen energy represents a transformative opportunity for decarbonizing port operations, offering a clean, scalable, and flexible alternative to traditional fossil fuels. The case study of CPANZP demonstrates the feasibility and benefits of integrating hydrogen energy into container terminals, introducing advancements in hydrogen production, storage, refueling infrastructure, along with fuel cell and hydrogen-powered vehicle applications. The project has successfully achieved several critical performance benchmarks: an electrolyzer efficiency of 64.48%, fuel cell efficiency of 58.3%, and tractor hydrogen consumption of 5.31 kg per 100 km.

By leveraging renewable-powered electrolysis, ports can store and utilize renewable energy more efficiently, mitigating the typical challenges associated with intermittent power generation, thus reducing carbon emissions while maintaining operational efficiency. With stable power generation from wind and solar renewables and the system operating normally over a 20-year lifespan at an 8% discount rate, the hydrogen system at the port delivers significant environmental and economic benefits, including an annual carbon emission reduction of 22,000 tons and cost savings of 4.1105 million CNY per year. These metrics demonstrate the project’s effectiveness in balancing operational performance with sustainability goals in port applications.

Despite these achievements, challenges such as high production costs, infrastructure deployment, management efficiency, and technological barriers remain. Addressing these issues requires continued innovation in electrolysis efficiency, cost reduction, and scalable management methods. Policy support and international collaboration will be critical to overcoming these hurdles and reinforcing the role of hydrogen energy in achieving long-term sustainability goals.

Against the backdrop of existing economic and technological barriers, ongoing advancements in hydrogen infrastructure, coupled with policy support and investment, will be instrumental in realizing large-scale hydrogen adoption at ports such as CPANZP.