Ny h2 dev_plan_041012

HYDROGEN AND FUEL CELL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FINAL – APRIL 10, 2012
1
NEW YORK
Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Development Plan – “Roadmap” Collaborative
Participants
New Energy New York /
Energy & Environmental Technology Application Center (E2TAC)
Pradeep Halder – Program Director
Emily Behnke – Program Assistant Director
Project Management and Plan Development
Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster:
Joel M. Rinebold – Program Director
Paul Aresta – Project Manager
Alexander C. Barton – Energy Specialist
Adam J. Brzozowski – Energy Specialist
Thomas Wolak – Energy Intern
Nathan Bruce – GIS Mapping Intern
Agencies
United States Department of Energy
United States Small Business Administration
NYC skyline – “Midtown Manhattan Skyline”, RFC Graphics, 2010, September, 2011,
http://www.pbase.com/rfcd100/image/121260213/large
Time square – “Time Square at Dusk”, Randy Kosek, 2010, September, 2011,
http://www.360cities.net/map#lat=40.75916&lng=-73.98505&name=times-square-at-dusk&zoom=20
Coca-Cola fuel cell – “Coca-Cola Refreshments in Elmsford, NY”, UTC Power, September 2011,
http://www.utcpower.com/files/FL0120_Stationary_Fuel_Cells.pdf
GM – “Chevrolet Equinox Fuel Cell Vehicles Picture”, General Motors Corporation, September, 2011,
http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/equinox-fuel-cell/photos/chevrolet_equinox-fuel-cell_group_ns_31710.html
Forklift refueling –“H2 Fueling”, Plug Power, September, 2011,
http://www.plugpower.com/Solutions/Technology/FeaturesBenefits.aspx
Forklifts – “Fuel Cell Forklifts”, Plug Power, September, 2011, http://www.plugpower.com/AboutUs.aspx

2
NEW YORK
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There is the potential to generate approximately 3.89 million megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity
annually from hydrogen and fuel cell technologies at potential host sites in the State of New York,
through the development of 494 – 659 megawatts (MW) of fuel cell generation capacity. The state and
federal government have incentives to facilitate the development and use of renewable energy. The
decision on whether or not to deploy hydrogen or fuel cell technology at a given location depends largely
on the economic value, compared to other conventional or alternative/renewable technologies.
Consequently, while many sites may be technically viable for the application of fuel cell technology, this
plan provides focus for fuel cell applications that are both technically and economically viable.
Favorable locations for the development of renewable energy generation through fuel cell technology
include energy intensive commercial buildings (education, food sales, food services, inpatient healthcare,
lodging, and public order and safety), energy intensive industries, wastewater treatment plants, landfills,
wireless telecommunications sites, federal/state-owned buildings, and airport facilities with a substantial
amount of air traffic.
Currently, New York has more than 180 companies that are part of the growing hydrogen and fuel cell
industry supply chain in the Northeast region. Based on a recent study, these companies making up the
New York hydrogen and fuel cell industry are estimated to have realized approximately $292 million in
revenue and investment, contributed over $18 million in state and local tax revenue, and generated
over $166 million in gross state product from their participation in this regional energy cluster in 2010.
Eight of these companies are original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of hydrogen and/or fuel
cell systems, and were responsible for supplying 808 direct jobs and $119 million in direct revenue
and investment in 2010.
Hydrogen and fuel cell projects are becoming increasingly popular throughout the Northeast region.
These technologies are viable solutions that can meet the demand for renewable energy in New York. In
addition, the deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell technology would reduce the dependence on oil,
improve environmental performance, and increase the number of jobs within the state. This plan provides
links to relevant information to help assess, plan, and initiate hydrogen or fuel cell projects to help meet
the energy, economic, and environmental goals of the State.
Developing policies and incentives that support hydrogen and fuel cell technology will increase
deployment at sites that would benefit from on-site generation. Increased demand for hydrogen and fuel
cell technology will increase production and create jobs throughout the supply. As deployment increases,
manufacturing costs will decline and hydrogen and fuel cell technology will be in a position to then
compete in a global market without incentives. These policies and incentives can be coordinated
regionally to maintain the regional economic cluster as a global exporter for long-term growth and
economic development.

3
NEW YORK
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................5
DRIVERS............................................................................................................................................6
ECONOMIC IMPACT ...........................................................................................................................8
POTENTIAL STATIONARY TARGETS ...................................................................................................9
Education ............................................................................................................................................11
Food Sales...........................................................................................................................................12
Food Service .......................................................................................................................................12
Inpatient Healthcare............................................................................................................................13
Lodging...............................................................................................................................................14
Public Order and Safety......................................................................................................................14
Energy Intensive Industries.....................................................................................................................15
Government Owned Buildings................................................................................................................16
Wireless Telecommunication Sites.........................................................................................................16
Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) ................................................................................................17
Airports...................................................................................................................................................18
Military ...................................................................................................................................................19
POTENTIAL TRANSPORTATION TARGETS .........................................................................................21
Alternative Fueling Stations................................................................................................................22
Bus Transit..........................................................................................................................................23
Material Handling...............................................................................................................................23
Ground Support Equipment ................................................................................................................24
Ports ....................................................................................................................................................24
CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................25
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................................27

4
NEW YORK
Index of Tables
Table 1 - New York Economic Data 2011....................................................................................................8
Table 2 - Education Data Breakdown.........................................................................................................12
Table 3 - Food Sales Data Breakdown........................................................................................................12
Table 4 - Food Services Data Breakdown ..................................................................................................13
Table 5 -Inpatient Healthcare Data Breakdown..........................................................................................13
Table 6 - Lodging Data Breakdown............................................................................................................14
Table 7 - Public Order and Safety Data Breakdown...................................................................................15
Table 8 - 2002 Data for the Energy Intensive Industry by Sector ..............................................................16
Table 9 - Energy Intensive Industry Data Breakdown................................................................................16
Table 10 - Government Owned Building Data Breakdown........................................................................16
Table 11 - Wireless Telecommunications Data Breakdown.......................................................................17
Table 12 - Wireless Telecommunication Date Breakdown ........................................................................17
Table 13 -Landfill Data Breakdown ...........................................................................................................18
Table 14 – New York Top Airports' Enplanement Count...........................................................................19
Table 15 - Airport Data Breakdown ...........................................................................................................19
Table 16 - Military Data Breakdown ..........................................................................................................20
Table 17 - Average Energy Efficiency of Conventional and Fuel Cell Vehicles (mpge)...........................21
Table 18- Ports Data Breakdown................................................................................................................24
Table 19 –Summary of Potential Fuel Cell Applications ...........................................................................25
Index of Figures
Figure 1 - Energy Consumption by Sector....................................................................................................9
Figure 2 - Electric Power Generation by Primary Energy Source................................................................9
Figure 3 - New York Electrical Consumption per Sector...........................................................................11
Figure 4 - U.S. Lodging, Energy Consumption ..........................................................................................14

5
NEW YORK
INTRODUCTION
A Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Industry Development Plan was created for each state in the Northeast region
(New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maine, and New
Jersey), with support from the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE), to increase awareness
and facilitate the deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell technology. The intent of this guidance document
is to make available information regarding the economic value and deployment opportunities for
hydrogen and fuel cell technology.1
A fuel cell is a device that uses hydrogen (or a hydrogen-rich fuel such as natural gas) and oxygen to
create an electric current. The amount of power produced by a fuel cell depends on several factors,
including fuel cell type, stack size, operating temperature, and the pressure at which the gases are
supplied to the cell. Fuel cells are classified primarily by the type of electrolyte they employ, which
determines the type of chemical reactions that take place in the cell, the temperature range in which the
cell operates, the fuel required, and other factors. These characteristics, in turn, affect the applications for
which these cells are most suitable. There are several types of fuel cells currently in use or under
development, each with its own advantages, limitations, and potential applications. These technologies
and applications are identified in Appendix VII.
Fuel cells have the potential to replace the internal combustion engine (ICE) in vehicles and provide
power for stationary and portable power applications. Fuel cells are in commercial service as distributed
power plants in stationary applications throughout the world, providing thermal energy and electricity to
power homes and businesses. Fuel cells are also used in transportation applications, such as automobiles,
trucks, buses, and other equipment. Fuel cells for portable applications, which are currently in
development, can provide power for laptop computers and cell phones.
Fuel cells are cleaner and more efficient than traditional combustion-based engines and power plants;
therefore, less energy is needed to provide the same amount of power. Typically, stationary fuel cell
power plants are fueled with natural gas or other hydrogen rich fuel. Natural gas is widely available
throughout the northeast, is relatively inexpensive, and is primarily a domestic energy supply.
Consequently, natural gas shows the greatest potential to serve as a transitional fuel for the near future
hydrogen economy. 2
Stationary fuel cells use a fuel reformer to convert the natural gas to near pure
hydrogen for the fuel cell stack. Because hydrogen can be produced using a wide variety of resources
found here in the U.S., including natural gas, biomass material, and through electrolysis using electricity
produced from indigenous sources, energy produced from a fuel cell can be considered renewable and
will reduce dependence on imported fuel. 3,4
When pure hydrogen is used to power a fuel cell, the only
by-products are water and heat—no pollutants or greenhouse gases (GHG) are produced.
1
Key stakeholders are identified in Appendix III
2
EIA,”Commercial Sector Energy Price Estimates, 2009”,
http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/hf.jsp?incfile=sep_sum/html/sum_pr_com.html, August 2011
3
Electrolysis is the process of using an electric current to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen.
4
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/education/, August 2011

6
NEW YORK
DRIVERS
The Northeast hydrogen and fuel cell industry, while still emerging, currently has an economic impact of
over $1 Billion of total revenue and investment. New York has eight original equipment manufacturers
(OEM) of hydrogen/fuel cell systems, giving the state a significant direct economic impact, in addition to
benefiting from secondary impacts of indirect and induced employment and revenue.5
Furthermore, New
York has a definitive and attractive economic development opportunity to greatly increase its economic
participation in the hydrogen and fuel cell industry within the Northeast region and worldwide. An
economic “SWOT” assessment for New York is provided in Appendix VIII.
Industries in the Northeast, including those in New York, are facing increased pressure to reduce costs,
fuel consumption, and emissions that may be contributing to climate change. Currently, New York’s
businesses pay $0.146 per kWh for electricity on average; this is the fourth highest cost of electricity in
the U.S.6
New York’s has major load centers, the high cost of electricity, concerns over regional air
quality, available federal tax incentives, and legislative mandates in New York and neighboring states
have resulted in renewed interest in the development of efficient renewable energy. Incentives designed
to assist individuals and organizations in energy conservation and the development of renewable energy
are currently offered within the state. Appendix IV contains outlines of New York’s incentives and
renewable energy programs. Some specific factors that are driving the market for hydrogen and fuel cell
technology in New York include the following:
The New York Public Service Commission (PSC) adopted a Renewable Portfolio Standard
(RPS) in September 2004 and issued implementation rules in April 2005. As originally designed,
New York's RPS had a renewables target of 25 percent of state electricity consumption by 2013,
but was expanded in January 2010 to 30 percent by 2015 by order of the PSC. Of this 30 percent,
approximately 20.7 percent of the target will be derived from existing renewable energy facilities
and one percent (1 percent) of the target is expected to be met through voluntary green power
sales in 2015. – promotes stationary power and transportation applications.7
New York is one of the states in the ten-state region that is part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas
Initiative (RGGI), the nation’s first mandatory market-based program to reduce emissions of
carbon dioxide (CO2). RGGI's goals are to stabilize and cap emissions at 188 million tons
annually from 2009-2014 and to reduce CO2-emissions by 2.5 percent per year from 2015-2018.8
– promotes stationary power and transportation applications.
New York Governor George Pataki signed Executive Order No. 111 to promote “Green and
Clean” State Buildings and Vehicles on June 10, 2001. The Renewable- Power Procurement
component (which recognizes fuel cells and fuel cells using renewable fuels) of this order
5
There are now nine total OEMs in New York, however data within this plan reflects the eight OEMs originally used within the
model. Nine OEMs will increase the impact of the cluster and will be used when the model is run for the next year.
6
EIA, Average Retail Price of Electricity to Ultimate Customers by End-Use Sector, by State,
http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html
7
DSIRE, “Renewable Portfolio Standards,”
http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=NY03R&re=1&ee=1, September, 2011
8
Seacoastonline.come, “RGGI: Quietly setting a standard”,
http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090920/NEWS/909200341/-1/NEWSMAP, September 20, 2009

7
NEW YORK
commits the state government to purchase a portion of its electric power from renewable energy
resources – promotes stationary power applications.9
Net Metering is available on a first-come, first-served basis to customers of the state's major
investor-owned utilities, subject to technology, system size and aggregate capacity limitations –
promotes stationary power applications.10
The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) administers
the Clean Fueled Bus Program, which provides funds to New York state and local transit
agencies, municipalities, and schools for up to 100 percent of the incremental cost of purchasing
new alternative fuel buses and associated infrastructure – promotes transportation applications.11
Through NYSERDA, financial incentives are available to support the installation and operation
of continuous duty fuel cell systems in New York State, with up to $1 million available for fuel
cell systems rated larger than 25 kW and $50,000 available for fuel cell systems rated at 25 kW or
less. Funding is on a first-come, first-served basis until December 31, 2015, or until all funding
has been fully committed.12
– promotes stationary power applications.
NYSERDA administers the New York State Clean Cities Challenge, which awards funds to New
York Clean Cities Coalition members that acquire alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) or install AFV
fueling or charging infrastructure. Funds are awarded on a competitive basis and may be used to
cost-share up to 75 percent of the proposed project, including the incremental cost of purchasing
AFVs, fueling and charging equipment installation costs, and the incremental costs associated
with bulk alternative fuel purchases – promotes transportation applications.13
NYSERDA manages the New York State Clean Cities Sharing Network (Network), which
provides technical, policy, and program information about AFVs, including information about tax
incentives, fueling stations, case studies, and contact information for the Clean Cities program
and other industry leaders. The Network also organizes and sponsors technical workshops –
promotes transportation applications.14
9
DSIRE, “New York – Renewable Procurement Policy”,
10
DSIRE, “New York – Net Metering,”
11
EERE, “Alternative Fuel Bus and Infrastructure Funding”, http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/law/NY/5318, September,
2011
12
NYSERDA, “RPS Customer-sited tier fuel cell program”, http://www.nyserda.org/funding/2157pon.asp, November, 2011
13
EERE, “Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) and Fueling Infrastructure Funding ”,
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/law/NY/5321, September 10, 2011
14
EERE, “Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Technical Assistance ”, http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/laws/law/NY/5322,
September, 2011

8
NEW YORK
ECONOMIC IMPACT
The hydrogen and fuel cell industry has direct, indirect, and induced impacts on local and regional
economies. 15
A new hydrogen and/or fuel cell project directly affects the area’s economy through the
purchase of goods and services, generation of land use revenue, taxes or payments in lieu of taxes, and
employment. Secondary effects include both indirect and induced economic effects resulting from the
circulation of the initial spending through the local economy, economic diversification, changes in
property values, and the use of indigenous resources.
New York is home to approximately 180 companies that are part of the growing hydrogen and fuel cell
industry supply chain in the Northeast region. Appendices V and VI list the hydrogen and fuel cell
supply chain companies and OEMs in New York. Realizing over $292 million in revenue and investment
from their participation in this regional cluster in 2010, these companies include manufacturing, parts
distributing, supplying of industrial gas, engineering based research and development (R&D), coating
applications, managing of venture capital funds, etc. 16
Furthermore, the hydrogen and fuel cell industry is
estimated to have contributed over $18 million in state and local tax revenue, and over $166 million in
gross state product. Table 1 shows New York’s impact in the Northeast region’s hydrogen and fuel cell
industry as of April 2011.
Table 1 - New York Economic Data 2011
New York Economic Data
Supply Chain Members 182
Direct Rev ($M) 119.13
Direct Jobs 808
Direct Labor Income ($M) 65.4
Indirect Rev ($M) 78.34
Indirect Jobs 330
Indirect Labor Income ($M) 27.2
Induced Revenue ($M) 93.07
Induced Jobs 583
Induced Labor Income ($M) 32.6
Total Revenue ($M) 290.53
Total Jobs 1,721
Total Labor Income ($M) 125.23
In addition, there are over 118,000 people employed across 3,500 companies within the Northeast
registered as part of the motor vehicle industry. Approximately 54,280 of these individuals and 1,470 of
these companies are located in New York. If newer/emerging hydrogen and fuel cell technology were to
gain momentum within the transportation sector, the estimated employment rate for the hydrogen and fuel
cell industry could grow significantly in the region.17
15
Indirect impacts are the estimated output (i.e., revenue), employment and labor income in other business (i.e., not-OEMs) that
are associated with the purchases made by hydrogen and fuel cell OEMs, as well as other companies in the sector’s supply chain.
Induced impacts are the estimated output, employment and labor income in other businesses (i.e., non-OEMs) that are associated
with the purchases by workers related to the hydrogen and fuel cell industry.
16
Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster Supply Chain Database Search, http://neesc.org/resources/?type=1,
September, 2011
17
NAICS Codes: Motor Vehicle – 33611, Motor Vehicle Parts – 3363

9
NEW YORK
POTENTIAL STATIONARY TARGETS
In 2009, New York consumed the equivalent of 1,118.8 million megawatt-hours of energy amongst the
transportation, residential, industrial, and commercial sectors.18
Electricity consumption in New York
was approximately 140 million MWh, and is forecasted to grow at a rate of 0.83 percent annually over the
next decade. 19;20
Figure 1 illustrates the percent of total energy consumed by each sector in New York.
A more detailed breakout of energy use is provided in Appendix II.
This demand relies on both in-state resources and imports of power over the region’s transmission system
to serve electricity to customers. Net electrical demand in New York was approximately 16,000 MW in
2009 and is projected to increase by approximately 800 MW by 2015. The state’s overall electric demand
is forecasted to grow at a rate of 0.83 percent annually over the next decade. Demand for new electric
capacity as well as a replacement of older less efficient base-load generation facilities is expected. 21
As
shown in Figure 2, natural gas was the second most used energy source for electricity consumed in New
York for 2009.22
18
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), “State Energy Data System”,
“http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/hf.jsp?incfile=sep_sum/html/rank_use.html”, August 2011
19
EIA, “Electric Power Annual 2009 – State Data Tables”, www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sprdshts.html, January, 2011
20
ISO New York, “2011 ICAP – RLGF Summary”,
http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/committees/bic_icapwg_lftf/meeting_materials/2010-12-09/2011_ICAP_-
_RLGF_Summary_V3.pdf, December 9, 2010
21
ISO New York, “Power Trends 2011”,
http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/newsroom/power_trends/Power_Trends_2011.pdf, January, 2011
22
EIA, “New York Electricity Profile 2010”, http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/new_york.html, October, 2011
Figure 1 - Energy Consumption by
Sector
Figure 2 - Electric Power Generation
by Primary Energy Source
Residential
29%
Commercial
32%
Industrial
10%
Transportatio
n
29%
Coal
9.9%
Petroleum
1.5%
Natural Gas
35.6%
Nuclear
30.5%
Hydroelectric
18.5%
Other
Renewables
3.5%
Other
0.6%

10
NEW YORK
Fuel cell systems have many advantages over other conventional technologies, including:
High fuel-to-electricity efficiency (> 40 percent) utilizing hydrocarbon fuels;
Overall system efficiency of 85 to 93 percent;
Reduction of noise pollution;
Reduction of air pollution;
Often do not require new transmission;
Siting is not controversial; and
If near point of use, waste heat can be captured and used. Combined heat and power (CHP)
systems are more efficient and can reduce facility energy costs over applications that use separate
heat and central station power systems.23
Fuel cells can be deployed as a CHP technology that provides both power and thermal energy, and can
nearly double energy efficiency at a customer site, typically from 35 to 50 percent. The value of CHP
includes reduced transmission and distribution costs, reduced fuel use and associated emissions.24
Based
on the targets identified within this plan, there is the potential to develop at least approximately 494 MWs
of stationary fuel cell generation capacity in New York, which would provide the following benefits,
annually:
Production of approximately 3.89 million MWh of electricity
Production of approximately 10.49 million MMBTUs of thermal energy
Reduction of CO2 emissions of approximately 1.40 million (electric generation only)25
For the purpose of this plan, potential applications have been explored with a focus on fuel cells that have
a capacity between 300 kW to 400 kW. However, smaller fuel cells are potentially viable for specific
applications. Facilities that have electrical and thermal requirements that closely match the output of the
fuel cells potentially provide the best opportunity for the application of a fuel cell. Facilities that may be
good candidates for the application of a fuel cell include commercial buildings with potentially high
electricity consumption, selected government buildings, public works facilities, and energy intensive
industries.
Commercial building types with high electricity consumption have been identified as potential locations
for on-site generation and CHP application based on data from the Energy Information Administration’s
(EIA) Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). These selected building types
making up the CBECS subcategory within the commercial industry include:
Education
Food Sales
Food Services
Inpatient Healthcare
Lodging
Public Order & Safety26
23
FuelCell2000, “Fuel Cell Basics”, www.fuelcells.org/basics/apps.html, July, 2011
24
“Distributed Generation Market Potential: 2004 Update Connecticut and Southwest Connecticut”, ISE, Joel M. Rinebold,
ECSU, March 15, 2004
25
Replacement of conventional fossil fuel generating capacity with methane fuel cells could reduce carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions by between approximately 100 and 600 lb/MWh: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), eGRID2010 Version
1.1 Year 2007 GHG Annual Output Emission Rates, Annual non-baseload output emission rates (NPCC New England); FuelCell
Energy, DFC 300 Product sheet, http://www.fuelcellenergy.com/files/FCE%20300%20Product%20Sheet-lo-rez%20FINAL.pdf;
UTC Power, PureCell Model 400 System Performance Characteristics, http://www.utcpower.com/products/purecell400

11
NEW YORK
The commercial building types identified above represent top principal building activity classifications
that reported the highest value for electricity consumption on a per building basis and have a potentially
high load factor for the application of CHP. Appendix II further defines New York’s estimated electrical
consumption per each sector. As illustrated in Figure 3, these selected building types within the
commercial sector are estimated to account for approximately 18 percent of New York’s total electrical
consumption. Graphical representations of potential targets identified are depicted in Appendix I.
Figure 3 – New York Electrical Consumption per Sector
Education
There are approximately 1,990 non-public schools and 5,001 public schools (327 of which are considered
high schools with 100 or more students enrolled) in New York.27,28
High schools operate for a longer
period of time daily due to extracurricular after school activities, such as clubs and athletics.
Furthermore, five of these schools have swimming pools, which may make these sites especially
attractive because it would increase the utilization of both the electrical and thermal output offered by a
fuel cell. There are also 279 colleges and universities in New York. Colleges and universities have
facilities for students, faculty, administration, and maintenance crews that typically include dormitories,
cafeterias, gyms, libraries, and athletic departments – some with swimming pools. Of these 606 locations
(327 high schools and 279 colleges), 541 are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I
– Figure 1: Education).
Educational establishments in New York have already shown interest in fuel cell technology. Examples
of existing or planned fuel cell applications in the state include high schools in Liverpool and East
Rochester, and colleges such as Rochester Institute of Technology and the State University of New York
College of Environmental Science and Forestry.
26
As defined by CBECS, Public Order & Safety facilities are buildings used for the preservation of law and order or public
safety. Although these sites are usually described as government facilities they are referred to as commercial buildings because
their similarities in energy usage with the other building sites making up the CBECS data.
27
EIA, Description of CBECS Building Types, www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/building_types.html
28
Public schools are classified as magnets, charters, alternative schools and special facilities

12
NEW YORK
Table 2 - Education Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
6,991
(38)
541
(25)
250
(36)
75.0
(36)
591,300
(36)
1,592,568
(36)
150,782
(35)
Food Sales
There are over 25,000 businesses in New York known to be engaged in the retail sale of food. Food sales
establishments are potentially good candidates for fuel cells based on their electrical demand and thermal
requirements for heating and refrigeration. Approximately 485 of these sites are considered larger food
sales businesses with approximately 60 or more employees at their site.29
Of these 485 businesses, 415
are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 2: Food Sales).30
The application
of a large fuel cell (>300) at a small convenience store may not be economically viable based on the
electric demand and operational requirements; however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be appropriate.
Popular grocery chains such as Price Chopper, Supervalu, Wholefoods, and Stop and Shop have shown
interest in powering their stores with fuel cells in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York.31
Price
Chopper, located in Glenville, New York, is a location where a fuel cell power plant has been installed.
In addition, grocery distribution centers, such as Wal-Mart’s distribution center in Sharon Springs, New
York, or Rite Aid’s distribution center, in Liverpool, New York, are prime targets for the application of
hydrogen and fuel cell technology for both stationary power and material handling equipment.
Table 3 - Food Sales Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
25,000
(49)
415
(35)
415
(35)
124.5
(35)
981,558
(35)
2,643,663
(35)
250,297
(39)
Food Service
There are over 30,000 businesses in New York that can be classified as food service establishments
because they are used for the preparation and sale of food and beverages for consumption.32
Approximately 170 of these sites are considered larger restaurant businesses with approximately 130 or
more employees at their site and are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure
3: Food Services).33
The application of a large fuel cell (>300 kW) at smaller restaurants with less than
130 workers may not be economically viable based on the electric demand and operational requirements;
however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be appropriate to meet hot water and space heating
29
On average, food sale facilities consume 43,000 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel cell technology
(>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations show food sales
facilities employing more than 61 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the application of a larger fuel cell.
30
31
Clean Energy States Alliance (CESA), “Fuel Cells for Supermarkets – Cleaner Energy with Fuel Cell Combined Heat and
Power Systems”, Benny Smith, www.cleanenergystates.org/assets/Uploads/BlakeFuelCellsSupermarketsFB.pdf
32
33
On average, food service facilities consume 20,300 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel cell
technology (>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations show
food service facilities employing more than 130 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the application of a larger fuel
cell.

13
NEW YORK
requirements. A significant portion (18 percent) of the energy consumed in a commercial food service
operation can be attributed to the domestic hot water heating load.34
In other parts of the U.S., popular
chains, such as McDonalds, are beginning to show an interest in the smaller sized fuel cell units for the
provision of electricity and thermal energy, including domestic water heating.35
Table 4 - Food Services Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
30,000
(46)
170
(44)
170
(44)
51
(44)
402,084
(44)
1,082,946
(44)
102,531
(44)
Inpatient Healthcare
There are over 1,600 inpatient healthcare facilities in New York; 250 of which are classified as
hospitals.36
Of these 250 locations, 165 are located in communities serviced by natural gas and contain
100 or more beds onsite (Appendix I – Figure 4: Inpatient Healthcare). Hospitals represent an excellent
opportunity for the application of fuel cells because they require a high availability factor of electricity for
lifesaving medical devices and operate 24/7 with a relatively flat load curve. Furthermore, medical
equipment, patient rooms, sterilized/operating rooms, data centers, and kitchen areas within these
facilities are often required to be in operational conditions at all times which maximizes the use of
electricity and thermal energy from the fuel cell. Nationally, hospital energy costs have increased 56
percent from $3.89 per square foot in 2003 to $6.07 per square foot for 2010, partially due to the
increased cost of energy.37
Examples of healthcare facilities with planned or operational fuel cells include St. Francis, Stamford, and
Waterbury Hospitals in Connecticut, and North Central Bronx Hospital in New York.
Table 5 -Inpatient Healthcare Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
1,609
(40)
165
(39)
165
(39)
49.5
(39)
390,258
(39)
1,051,095
(39)
99,516
(43)
34
“Case Studies in Restaurant Water Heating”, Fisher, Donald, http://eec.ucdavis.edu/ACEEE/2008/data/papers/9_243.pdf, 2008
35
Sustainable business Oregon, “ClearEdge sustains brisk growth”,
http://www.sustainablebusinessoregon.com/articles/2010/01/clearedge_sustains_brisk_growth.html, May 8, 2011
36
37
BetterBricks, “http://www.betterbricks.com/graphics/assets/documents/BB_Article_EthicalandBusinessCase.pdf”, Page 1,
August 2011

14
NEW YORK
Office
Equipment, 4%
Ventilation, 4%
Refrigeration, 3%
Lighting, 11%
Cooling, 13%
Space Heating ,
33%
Water Heating ,
18%
Cooking, 5% Other, 9%
Lodging
There are over 1,922 establishments specializing
in travel/lodging accommodations that include
hotels, motels, or inns in New York.
Approximately 347 of these establishments have
150 or more rooms onsite, and can be classified as
“larger sized” lodging that may have additional
attributes, such as heated pools, exercise facilities,
and/or restaurants. 38
Of these 347 locations, 199
employ more than 94 workers and are located in
communities serviced by natural gas. 39
As shown
in Figure 4, more than 60 percent of total energy
use at a typical lodging facility is due to lighting,
space heating, and water heating. 40
The
application of a large fuel cell (>300 kW) at
hotel/resort facilities with less than 94 employees
may not be economically viable based on the
electrical demand and operational requirement;
however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be
appropriate. Popular hotel chains such as the
Hilton and Starwood Hotels have shown interest in
powering their establishments with fuel cells in
New Jersey and New York.
New York also has 636 facilities identified as convalescent homes, 58 of which have a bed capacities
greater than, or equal to 150 units, and are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I –
Figure 5: Lodging). 41
Table 6 - Lodging Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
2,558
(32)
76
(9)
76
(9)
22.8
(9)
607,856
(9)
1,637,160
(9)
155,003
(32)
Public Order and Safety
There are approximately 1,045 facilities in New York that can be classified as public order and safety;
these include 334 fire stations, 445 police stations, 198 state police stations, and 83 prisons. 42,43
Approximately, 173 of these locations employ more than 210 workers and are located in communities
38
EPA, “CHP in the Hotel and Casino Market Sector”, www.epa.gov/chp/documents/hotel_casino_analysis.pdf, December, 2005
39
On average lodging facilities consume 28,000 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel cell technology
(>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations show lodging
facilities employing more than 94 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the application of a larger fuel cell.
40
National Grid, “Managing Energy Costs in Full-Service Hotels”,
www.nationalgridus.com/non_html/shared_energyeff_hotels.pdf, 2004
41
Assisted-Living-List, “List of 675 Nursing Homes in New York (NY)”, http://assisted-living-list.com/ny--nursing-homes/,
September, 2011
42
43
USACOPS – The Nations Law Enforcement Site, www.usacops.com/me/
Figure 4 - U.S. Lodging, Energy Consumption

15
NEW YORK
serviced by natural gas.44,45
These applications may represent favorable opportunities for the application
of a larger fuel cell (>300 kW), which could provide heat and uninterrupted power. 46,47
The sites
identified (Appendix I – Figure 6: Public Order and Safety) will have special value to provide increased
reliability to mission critical facilities associated with public safety and emergency response during grid
outages. The application of a large fuel cell (>300 kW) at public order and safety facilities with less than
210 employees may not be economically viable based on the electrical demand and operational
requirement; however, a smaller fuel cell ( 5 kW) may be appropriate. Central Park Police Station in
New York City, New York is presently powered by a 200 kW fuel cell system.
Table 7 - Public Order and Safety Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
1,045
(32)
173
(55)
173
(55)
51.9
(55)
409,180
(55)
1,102,057
(5)
104,341
(58)
Energy Intensive Industries
As shown in Table 2, energy intensive industries with high electricity consumption (which on average is
4.8 percent of annual operating costs) have been identified as potential locations for the application of a
fuel cell.48
In New York, there are approximately 1,647 of these industrial facilities that are involved in
the manufacture of aluminum, chemicals, forest products, glass, metal casting, petroleum, coal products
or steel and employ 25 or more employees.49
Of these 1,647 locations, 1,401 are located in communities
serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 7: Energy Intensive Industries).
44
CBECS,“Table C14”, http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003set19/2003pdf/alltables.pdf,
November, 2011
45
On average, public order and safety facilities consume 12,400 kWh of electricity per worker on an annual basis. Current fuel
cell technology (>300 kW) can satisfy annual electricity consumption loads between 2,628,000 – 3,504,000 kWh. Calculations
show public order and safety facilities employing more than 212 workers may represent favorable opportunities for the
application of a larger fuel cell.
45
46
2,628,000 / 12,400 = 211.94
47
CBECS,“Table C14”, http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003set19/2003pdf/alltables.pdf,
November, 2011
48
EIA, “Electricity Generation Capability”, 1999 CBECS, www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/pba99/comparegener.html
49
Proprietary market data

16
NEW YORK
Table 8 - 2002 Data for the Energy Intensive Industry by Sector50
NAICS Code Sector Energy Consumption per Dollar Value of Shipments (kWh)
325 Chemical manufacturing 2.49
322 Pulp and Paper 4.46
324110 Petroleum Refining 4.72
311 Food manufacturing 0.76
331111 Iron and steel 8.15
321 Wood Products 1.23
3313 Alumina and aluminum 3.58
327310 Cement 16.41
33611 Motor vehicle manufacturing 0.21
3315 Metal casting 1.64
336811 Shipbuilding and ship repair 2.05
3363 Motor vehicle parts manufacturing 2.05
Companies such as Coca-Cola, Johnson & Johnson, and Pepperidge Farms in Connecticut, New Jersey,
and New York have installed fuel cells to help supply energy to their facilities.
Table 9 - Energy Intensive Industry Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
1,647
(35)
140
(33)
140
(33)
42
(33)
331,128
(33)
891,838
(33)
84,438
(38)
Government Owned Buildings
Buildings operated by the federal government can be found at 502 locations in New York; 41 of these
properties are actively owned, rather than leased, by the federal government and are located in
communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 8: Federal Government Operated Buildings).
There are also a number of buildings owned and operated by the State of New York. The application of
fuel cell technology at government owned buildings would assist in balancing load requirements at these
sites and offer a unique value for active and passive public education associated with the high usage of
these public buildings.
Table 10 - Government Owned Building Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
502
(40)
41
(46)
41
(46)
12.3
(46)
16,556
(46)
261,181
(46)
24,728
(50)
Wireless Telecommunication Sites
Telecommunications companies rely on electricity to run call centers, cell phone towers, and other vital
equipment. In New York, there are approximately 1,514 telecommunications and/or wireless company
tower sites (Appendix I – Figure 9: Telecommunication Sites). Any loss of power at these locations may
50
EPA, “Energy Trends in Selected Manufacturing Sectors”, www.epa.gov/sectors/pdf/energy/ch2.pdf, March 2007

17
NEW YORK
result in a loss of service to customers; thus, having reliable power is critical. Each individual site
represents an opportunity to provide back-up power for continuous operation through the application of
on-site back-up generation powered by hydrogen and fuel cell technology. It is an industry standard to
install units capable of supplying 48-72 hours of backup power, which is typically accomplished with
batteries or conventional emergency generators.51
The deployment of fuel cells at selected
telecommunication sites will have special value to provide increased reliability to critical sites associated
with emergency communications and homeland security. An example of a telecommunication site that
utilizes fuel cell technology to provide backup power is a T-Mobile facility located in Storrs, Connecticut.
Table 11 - Wireless Telecommunications Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
1,514
(38)
151
(38)
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs)
There are 84 WWTPs in New York that have design flows ranging from 2,600 gallons per day (GPD) to
88 million gallons per day (MGD); 14 of these facilities average between 3 – 88 MGD. WWTPs
typically operate 24/7 and may be able to utilize the thermal energy from the fuel cell to process fats, oils,
and grease.52
WWTPs account for approximately three percent of the electric load in the U.S.53
Digester
gas produced at WWTP’s, which is usually 60 percent methane, can serve as a fuel substitute for natural
gas to power fuel cells. Anaerobic digesters generally require a wastewater flow greater than three MGD
for an economy of scale to collect and use the methane.54
Most facilities currently represent a lost
opportunity to capture and use the digestion of methane emissions created from their operations
(Appendix I – Figure 10: Solid and Liquid Waste Sites). 55,56
A 200 kW fuel cell power plant in Yonkers, New York, was the world’s first commercial fuel cell to run
on waste gas created at a wastewater treatment plant. The fuel cell generates about 1,600 MWh of
electricity a year, and reduces methane emissions released to the environment.57
Table 12 - Wireless Telecommunication Date Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
84
(15)
2
(13)
2
(13)
0.6
(13)
4,730
(13)
12,741
(13)
1,206
(14)
51
ReliOn, Hydrogen Fuel Cell: Wireless Applications”, www.relion-inc.com/pdf/ReliOn_AppsWireless_2010.pdf, May 4, 2011
52
“Beyond Zero Net Energy: Case Studies of Wastewater Treatment for Energy and Resource Production”, Toffey, Bill,
September 2010, http://www.awra-pmas.memberlodge.org/Resources/Documents/Beyond_NZE_WWT-Toffey-9-16-2010.pdf
53
EPA, Wastewater Management Fact Sheet, “Introduction”, July, 2006
54
EPA, Wastewater Management Fact Sheet, www.p2pays.org/energy/WastePlant.pdf, July, 2006
55
“GHG Emissions from Wastewater Treatment and Biosolids Management”, Beecher, Ned, November 20, 2009,
www.des.state.nh.us/organization/divisions/water/wmb/rivers/watershed_conference/documents/2009_fri_climate_2.pdf
56
EPA, Wastewater Management Fact Sheet, www.p2pays.org/energy/WastePlant.pdf, May 4, 2011
57
NYPA, “WHAT WE DO – Fuel Cells”, www.nypa.gov/services/fuelcells.htm, August 8, 2011

18
NEW YORK
Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP)
There are 83 landfills in New York identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through
their LMOP program: 40 of which are operational, six are candidates, and 45 are considered potential
sites for the production and recovery of methane gas. 58,59
The amount of methane emissions released by a
given site is dependent upon the amount of material in the landfill and the amount of time the material has
been in place. Similar to WWTPs, methane emissions from landfills could be captured and used as a fuel
to power a fuel cell system. In 2009, municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills were responsible for
producing approximately 17 percent of human-related methane emissions in the nation. These locations
could produce renewable energy and help manage the release of methane (Appendix I – Figure 10: Solid
and Liquid Waste Sites).
Table 13 -Landfill Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
83
(39)
5
(33)
5
(33)
1.5
(33)
11,826
(33)
31,851
(33)
3,016
(41)
Airports
During peak air travel times in the U.S., there are approximately 50,000 airplanes in the sky each day.
Ensuring safe operations of commercial and private aircrafts are the responsibility of air traffic
controllers. Modern software, host computers, voice communication systems, and instituted full scale
glide path angle capabilities assist air traffic controllers in tracking and communicating with aircrafts;
consequently, reliable electricity is extremely important.60
There are approximately 395 airports in New York, including 147 that are open to the public and have
scheduled services. Of those 147 airports, 19 (Table 3) have 2,500 or more passengers enplaned each
year and are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure 11: Commercial
Airports). An example, of an airport currently hosting a fuel cell power plant to provide backup power is
Albany International Airport located in Albany, New York.
58
Due to size, individual sites may have more than one potential, candidate, or operational project.
59
LMOP defines a candidate landfill as “one that is accepting waste or has been closed for five years or less, has at least one
million tons of waste, and does not have an operational or, under-construction project.”EPA, “Landfill Methane Outreach
Program”, www.epa.gov/lmop/basic-info/index.html, April 7, 2011
60
Howstuffworks.com, “How Air Traffic Control Works”, Craig, Freudenrich,
http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/air-traffic-control5.htm, May 4, 2011

19
NEW YORK
Table 14 – New York Top Airports' Enplanement Count
Airport61
Total Enplanement in 2000
John F. Kennedy International 16,155,437
LaGuardia 12,697,208
Buffalo Niagara International 2,140,002
Albany International 1,407,092
Great Rochester International 1,218,403
Long Island MacArthur 1,120,686
Syracuse Hancock International 1,060,746
Westchester County 507,145
Stewart International 274,126
Binghamton Regional, Edwin A. Link Field 128,827
Elmira/Corning Regional 112,866
Tompkins County 99,861
Chautauqua County / Jamestown 18,298
Clinton County 9,126
Duchess County 7,508
Oneida County 4,774
Adirondack Regional 4,342
Massena International, Richards Field 3,715
Watertown International 2,710
Seven of New York’s 395 airports are considered “Joint-Use” airports. Albany International (ALB),
Stewart International (SWF), Niagara Falls International (IAG), Schenectady County (SCH), Syracuse
Hancock International (SYR), Francis S Gabreski (FOK) and Westchester County (HPN) are facilities
where the military department authorizes use of the military runway for public airport services. Army
Aviation Support Facilities (AASF), located at these sites are used by the Army to provide aircraft and
equipment readiness, train and utilize military personnel, conduct flight training and operations, and
perform field level maintenance. These locations represent favorable opportunities for the application of
uninterruptible power for necessary services associated with national defense and emergency response.
Furthermore, all of these sites are located in communities serviced by natural gas (Appendix I – Figure
11: Commercial Airports).
Table 15 - Airport Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
395
(47)
22 (7)
(44)
22
(44)
6.6
(44)
52,034
(44)
140,146
(44)
13,269
(42)
61
Bureau of Transportation Statistics, “New York Transportation Profile”,
www.bts.gov/publications/state_transportation_statistics/new_york/pdf/entire.pdf, September, 2011

20
NEW YORK
Military
The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) is the largest funding organization in terms of supporting fuel
cell activities for military applications in the world. DOD is using fuel cells for:
Stationary units for power supply in bases.
Fuel cell units in transport applications.
Portable units for equipping individual soldiers or group of soldiers.
In a collaborative partnership with the DOE, the DOD plans to install and operate 18 fuel cell backup
power systems at eight of its military installations, two of which are located within the Northeast region
(New York and New Jersey).62
In addition, Fort Drum, Fort Hamilton, and Watervliet Arsenal are
potential sites for the application of hydrogen and fuel cell technology (Appendix I – Figure 11:
Commercial Airports).63
Table 16 - Military Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
3
(21)
3
(21)
3
(21)
0.9
(21)
7,096
(21)
19,111
(21)
1,809
(25)
62
Fuel Cell Today, “US DoD to Install Fuel cell Backup Power Systems at Eight Military Installations”,
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/online/news/articles/2011-07/US-DOD-FC-Backup-Power-Systems, July 20, 2011
63
Naval Submarine Base New London, “New London Acreage and Buildings”,
http://www.cnic.navy.mil/NewLondon/About/AcreageandBuildings/index.htm, September 2011

21
NEW YORK
POTENTIAL TRANSPORTATION TARGETS
Transportation is responsible for one-fourth of the total global GHG emissions and consumes 75 percent
of the world’s oil production. In 2010, the U.S. used 21 million barrels of non-renewable petroleum each
day. Roughly 29 percent of New York’s energy consumption is due to demands of the transportation
sector, including gasoline and on-highway diesel petroleum for automobiles, cars, trucks, and buses. A
small percent of non-renewable petroleum is used for jet and ship fuel.64
The current economy in the U.S. is dependent on hydrocarbon energy sources and any disruption or
shortage of this energy supply will severely affect many energy related activities, including
transportation. As oil and other non-sustainable hydrocarbon energy resources become scarce, energy
prices will increase and the reliability of supply will be reduced. Government and industry are now
investigating the use of hydrogen and renewable energy as a replacement of hydrocarbon fuels.
Hydrogen-fueled fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) have many advantages over conventional
technology, including:
Quiet operation;
Near zero emissions of controlled pollutants such as nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide,
hydrocarbon gases or particulates;
Substantial (30 to 50 percent) reduction in GHG emissions on a well-to-wheel basis compared to
conventional gasoline or gasoline-hybrid vehicles when the hydrogen is produced by
conventional methods such as natural gas; and 100 percent when hydrogen is produced from a
clean energy source;
Ability to fuel vehicles with indigenous energy sources which reduces dependence on imported
energy and adds to energy security; and
Higher efficiency than conventional vehicles (See Table 4).65,66
Table 17 - Average Energy Efficiency of Conventional and Fuel Cell Vehicles (mpge67
)
Passenger Car Light Truck Transit Bus
Hydrogen Gasoline Hybrid Gasoline Hydrogen Gasoline Hydrogen Fuel Cell Diesel
52 50 29.3 49.2 21.5 5.4 3.9
FCEVs can reduce price volatility, dependence on oil, improve environmental performance, and provide
greater efficiencies than conventional transportation technologies, as follows:
Replacement of gasoline-fueled passenger vehicles and light duty trucks, and diesel-fueled transit
buses with FCEVs could result in annual CO2 emission reductions (per vehicle) of approximately
10,170, 15,770, and 182,984 pounds per year, respectively.68
64
“US Oil Consumption to BP Spill”, http://applesfromoranges.com/2010/05/us-oil-consumption-to-bp-spill/, May31, 2010
65
“Challenges for Sustainable Mobility and Development of Fuel Cell Vehicles”, Masatami Takimoto, Executive Vice President,
Toyota Motor Corporation, January 26, 2006. Presentation at the 2nd
International Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Expo Technical
Conference Tokyo, Japan
66
“Twenty Hydrogen Myths”, Amory B. Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute, June 20, 2003
67
Miles per Gallon Equivalent
68
Fuel Cell Economic Development Plan, Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development and the
Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc, January 1, 2008, Calculations based upon average annual mileage of 12,500

22
NEW YORK
Replacement of gasoline-fueled passenger vehicles and light duty trucks, and diesel-fueled transit
buses with FCEVs could result in annual energy savings (per vehicle) of approximately 230
gallons of gasoline (passenger vehicle), 485 gallons of gasoline (light duty truck) and 4,390
gallons of diesel (bus).
Replacement of gasoline-fueled passenger vehicles, light duty trucks, and diesel-fueled transit
buses with FCEVs could result in annual fuel cost savings of approximately $885 per passenger
vehicle, $1,866 per light duty truck, and $17,560 per bus.69
Automobile manufacturers such as Toyota, General Motors, Honda, Daimler AG, and Hyundai have
projected that models of their FCEVs will begin to roll out in larger numbers by 2015. Longer term, the
U.S. DOE has projected that between 15.1 million and 23.9 million light duty FCEVs may be sold each
year by 2050 and between 144 million and 347 million light duty FCEVs may be in use by 2050 with a
transition to a hydrogen economy. These estimates could be accelerated if political, economic, energy
security or environmental polices prompt a rapid advancement in alternative fuels.70
Strategic targets for the application of hydrogen for transportation include alternative fueling stations;
New York Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) refueling stations; bus transits operations;
government, public, and privately owned fleets; and material handling and airport ground support
equipment (GSE). Graphical representation of potential targets analyzed are depicted in Appendix I.
Alternative Fueling Stations
There are over 7,000 retail fueling stations in New York;71
however, only 240 public and/or private
stations within the state provide alternative fuels, such as biodiesel, compressed natural gas, propane,
and/or electricity for alternative-fueled vehicles.72
Development of hydrogen fueling at alternative fuel
stations and at selected locations owned and operated by NYSDOT would help facilitate the deployment
of FCEVs within the state. (See Appendix I – Figure 12: Alternative Fueling Stations). There are
approximately 16 existing or planned transportation fueling stations in the Northeast region where
hydrogen is provided as an alternative fuel.73,74,75
Fleets
There are over 18,700 fleet vehicles (excluding state and federal vehicles) classified as non-leasing or
company owned vehicles in New York.76
Fleet vehicles typically account for more than twice the amount
of mileage, and therefore twice the fuel consumption and emissions, compared to personal vehicles on a
per vehicle basis. There is an additional 20,963 passenger automobiles and/or light duty trucks in New
York, owned by state and federal agencies (excluding state police) that traveled a combined 172,555,800
miles for passenger car and 14,000 miles for light trucks (U.S. EPA) and 37,000 average miles/year per bus (U.S. DOT FTA,
2007)
69
U.S. EIA, Weekly Retail Gasoline and Diesel Prices: gasoline - $3.847 and diesel – 4.00,
www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_a_epm0r_pte_dpgal_w.htm
70
Effects of a Transition to a Hydrogen Economy on Employment in the United States: Report to Congress,
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/congress_reports.html, August 2011
71
“Public retail gasoline stations state year” www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/data/docs/gasoline_stations_state.xls, May 5, 2011
72
Alternative Fuels Data Center, www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/
73
Alternative Fuels Data Center; http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/
74
Hyride, “About the fueling station”, http://www.hyride.org/html-about_hyride/About_Fueling.html
75
CTTransit, “Hartford Bus Facility Site Work (Phase 1)”,
www.cttransit.com/Procurements/Display.asp?ProcurementID={8752CA67-AB1F-4D88-BCEC-4B82AC8A2542}, March, 2011
76
Fleet.com, “2009-My Registration”, http://www.automotive-
fleet.com/Statistics/StatsViewer.aspx?file=http%3a%2f%2fwww.automotive-fleet.com%2ffc_resources%2fstats%2fAFFB10-16-
top10-state.pdf&channel

23
NEW YORK
miles in 2010, while releasing 12,370 metrics tons of CO2. 77
Conversion of fleet vehicles from
conventional fossil fuels to FCEVs could significantly reduce petroleum consumption and GHG
emissions. Fleet vehicle hubs may be good candidates for hydrogen refueling and conversion to FCEVs
because they mostly operate on fixed routes or within fixed districts and are fueled from a centralized
station.
Bus Transit
There are approximately 7,780 directly operated buses that provide public transportation services in New
York.78
As discussed above, replacement of a conventional diesel transit bus with fuel cell transit bus
would result in the reduction of CO2 emissions (estimated at approximately 183,000 pounds per year), and
reduction of diesel fuel (estimated at approximately 4,390 gallons per year).79
Although the efficiency of
conventional diesel buses has increased, conventional diesel buses, which typically achieve fuel economy
performance levels of 3.9 miles per gallon, have the greatest potential for energy savings by using high
efficiency fuel cells. In addition to New York, other states have also begun the transition of fueling transit
buses with alternative fuels to improve efficiency and environmental performance.
Material Handling
Material handling equipment such as forklifts are used by a variety of industries, including
manufacturing, construction, mining, agriculture, food, retailers, and wholesale trade to move goods
within a facility or to load goods for shipping to another site. Material handling equipment is usually
battery, propane or diesel powered. Batteries that currently power material handling equipment are heavy
and take up significant storage space while only providing up to 6 hours of run time. Fuel cells can
ensure constant power delivery and performance, eliminating the reduction in voltage output that occurs
as batteries discharge. Fuel cell powered material handling equipment last more than twice as long (12-
14 hours) and also eliminate the need for battery storage and charging rooms, leaving more space for
products. In addition, fueling time only takes two to three minutes by the operator compared to least 20
minutes or more for each battery replacement, which saves the operator valuable time and increases
warehouse productivity.
Fuel cell powered material handling equipment has significant cost advantages, compared to batteries,
such as:
1.5 times lower maintenance cost;
8 times lower refueling/recharging labor cost;
2 times lower net present value of total operations and management (O&M) system cost.
63 percent less emissions of GHG (Appendix XI provides a comparison of PEM fuel cell and
battery-powered material handling equipment and Ports).
Fuel cell powered material handling equipment is already in use at dozens of warehouses, distribution
centers, and manufacturing plants in North America.80
Large corporations that are currently using or
planning to use fuel cell powered material handling equipment include CVS, Coca-Cola, BMW, Central
Grocers, and Wal-Mart (Refer to Appendix X for a partial list of companies in North America that use
77
U.S. General Services Administration, “GSA 2010 2010 Fleet Reports”, Table 4-2,
78
NTD Date, “TS2.2 - Service Data and Operating Expenses Time-Series by System”,
http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/data.htm, December 2011
79
Fuel Cell Economic Development Plan, Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development and the
Connecticut Center for Advanced Technology, Inc, January 1, 2008.
80
DOE EERE, “Early Markets: Fuel Cells for Material Handling Equipment”,
www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/education/pdfs/early_markets_forklifts.pdf, February 2011

24
NEW YORK
fuel cell powered forklifts).81
There are approximately 80 distribution center/warehouse sites that have
been identified in New York and may benefit from the use of fuel cell powered material handling
equipment (Appendix I – Figure 13: Distribution Centers/Warehouses & Ports).
Ground Support Equipment
Ground support equipment (GSE) such as catering trucks, deicers, and airport tugs can be battery
operated or more commonly run on diesel or gasoline. As an alternative, hydrogen-powered tugs are
being developed for both military and commercial applications. While their performance is similar to that
of other battery-powered equipment, a fuel cell-powered GSE remains fully charged (provided there is
hydrogen fuel available) and does not experience performance lag at the end of a shift like battery-
powered GSE.82
Potential large end-users of GSE that serve New York’s largest airports include Air
Canada, Delta Airlines, Continental, JetBlue, United, and US Airways (Appendix I – Figure 11:
Commercial Airports).
83
Ports
Ports in New York/New Jersey, which service large vessels, such as container ships, tankers, bulk
carriers, and cruise ships, may be candidates for improved energy management. New York’s largest port,
the Port of New York/New Jersey handles cargo such as, roll on-roll off automobiles, liquid and dry bulk,
break-bulk and specialized project cargo.84
With a daily average of 9,799 in twenty-foot equivalent units
(TEU) the Port of New York/New Jersey ranked 22nd
on the list of the world’s top container ports and 3rd
in the United States.85
The cruise industry in New York also provides $600 million in economic activity
and approximately 3,300 jobs for the City.
In one year, a single large container ship can emit pollutants equivalent to that of 50 million cars. The
low grade bunker fuel used by the worlds 90,000 cargo ships contains up to 2,000 times the amount of
sulfur compared to diesel fuel used in automobiles.86
While docked, vessels shut off their main engines
but use auxiliary diesel and steam engines to power refrigeration, lights, pumps, and other functions, a
process called “cold-ironing”. An estimated one-third of ship emissions occur while they are idling at
berth. Replacing auxiliary engines with on-shore electric power could significantly reduce emissions.
The applications of fuel cell technology at ports may also provide electrical and thermal energy for
improving energy management at warehouses, and equipment operated between terminals (Appendix I –
Figure 13: Distribution Centers/Warehouses & Ports).87
Table 18- Ports Data Breakdown
State
Total
Sites
Potential
Sites
FC Units
(300 Kw)
MWs
MWhrs
(per year)
Thermal Output
(MMBTU)
CO2 emissions
(ton per year)
NY
(% of Region)
26
(22)
3
(16)
3
(16)
0.9
(16)
7,096
(16)
19,111
(16)
1,809
(18)
81
Plug Power, “Plug Power Celebrates Successful year for Company’s Manufacturing and Sales Activity”,
www.plugpower.com, January 4, 2011
82
Battelle, “Identification and Characterization of Near-Term Direct Hydrogen Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Markets”,
April 2007, www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/pemfc_econ_2006_report_final_0407.pdf
83
JFK International, “Airlines”, http://www.panynj.gov/airports/jfk-airlines.html, October, 2011
84
Panynj.gov/port, http://www.panynj.gov/port/, September 2011
85
Bts.gov, “America’s Container Ports, Page 17”,
http://www.bts.gov/publications/americas_container_ports/2011/pdf/entire.pdf, January, 2011
86
“Big polluters: one massive container ship equals 50 million cars”, Paul, Evans; http://www.gizmag.com/shipping-
pollution/11526/, April 23,2009
87
Savemayportvillage.net, “Cruise Ship Pollution”, http://www.savemayportvillage.net/id20.html, October, 2011

25
NEW YORK
CONCLUSION
Hydrogen and fuel cell technology offers significant opportunities for improved energy reliability, energy
efficiency, and emission reductions. Large fuel cell units (>300 kW) may be appropriate for applications
that serve large electric and thermal loads. Smaller fuel cell units (< 300 kW) may provide back-up power
for telecommunication sites, restaurants/fast food outlets, and smaller sized public facilities at this time.
Table 19 –Summary of Potential Fuel Cell Applications
Category Total Sites
Potential
Sites
Number of Fuel
Cells
< 300 kW
Number of
Fuel Cells
>300 kW
CBECSData
Education 6,991 54188
291 250
Food Sales 25,000+ 41589
415
Food Services 30,000+ 17090
170
Inpatient Healthcare 1,609 16591
165
Lodging 2,558 25792
257
Public Order & Safety 1,045 17393
173
Energy Intensive Industries 1,647 14094
140
Government Operated
Buildings
502 4195
41
Wireless
Telecommunication
Towers
1,51496
15197
151
WWTPs 84 298
2
Landfills 83 599
5
Airports (w/ AASF) 395 22 (7) 100
22
Military 3 3 3
Ports 26 3 3
Total 71,457 2,088 442 1,646
As shown in Table 5, the analysis provided here estimates that there are approximately 2,088 potential
locations, which may be favorable candidates for the application of a fuel cell to provide heat and power.
Assuming the demand for electricity was uniform throughout the year, approximately 1,236 to 1,646 fuel
88
541 high schools and/or college and universities located in communities serviced by natural gas
89
415 food sale facilities located in communities serviced by natural gas
90
Ten percent of the 3,025 food service facilities located in communities serviced by natural gas
91
165 Hospitals located in communities serviced by natural gas and occupying 100 or more beds onsite
92
321 hotel facilities with 100+ rooms onsite and 58 convalescent homes with 150+ bed onsite located in communities serviced
by natural gas
93
Correctional facilities and/or other public order and safety facilities with 212 workers or more.
94
Ten percent of the 1,401 energy intensive industry facilities located in communities with natural gas.
95
Three actively owned federal government operated building located in communities serviced by natural gas
96
The Federal Communications Commission regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire,
satellite and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories.
97
Ten percent of the 1,514 wireless telecommunication sites in New York targeted for back-up PEM fuel cell deployment
98
Ten percent of New York WWTP with average flows of 3.0+ MGD
99
Ten percent of the landfills targeted based on LMOP data
100
Airport facilities with 2,500+ annual Enplanement Counts and/or AASF

26
NEW YORK
cell units, with a capacity of 300 – 400 kW, could be deployed for a total fuel cell capacity of 494 to 659
MWs.
If all suggested targets are satisfied by fuel cell(s) installations with 300 kW, a minimum of 3.89 million
MWh electric and 10.49 million MMBTUs (equivalent to 3.07 million MWh) of thermal energy would be
produced, which could reduce CO2 emissions by at least 993,147 tons per year.101
New York can also benefit from the use of hydrogen and fuel cell technology for transportation such as
passenger fleets, transit district fleets, municipal fleets and state department fleets. The application of
hydrogen and fuel cell technology for transportation would reduce the dependence on oil, improve
environmental performance and provide greater efficiencies than conventional transportation
technologies.
• Replacement of a gasoline-fueled passenger vehicle with FCEVs could result in annual CO2
emission reductions (per vehicle) of approximately 10,170 pounds, annual energy savings of 230
gallons of gasoline, and annual fuel cost savings of $885.
• Replacement of a gasoline-fueled light duty truck with FCEVs could result in annual CO2
emission reductions (per light duty truck) of approximately 15,770 pounds, annual energy savings
of 485 gallons of gasoline, and annual fuel cost savings of $1866.
• Replacement of a diesel-fueled transit bus with a fuel cell powered bus could result in annual CO2
emission reductions (per bus) of approximately 182,984 pounds, annual energy savings of 4,390
gallons of fuel, and annual fuel cost savings of $17,560.
Hydrogen and fuel cell technology also provides significant opportunities for job creation and/or
economic development. Realizing approximately $292 million in revenue and investment, the hydrogen
and fuel cell industry in New York is estimated to have contributed approximately $18 million in state
and local tax revenue, and over $166 million in gross state product. Currently, there are approximately
180 New York companies that are part of the growing hydrogen and fuel cell industry supply chain in the
Northeast region. Eight of these companies are defined as hydrogen system or fuel stack or system
OEMs, and were responsible for supplying 808 direct jobs and $119 million in direct revenue and
investment in 2010. If newer/emerging hydrogen and fuel cell technology were to gain momentum, the
number of companies and employment for the industry could grow substantially.
101
If all suggested targets are satisfied by fuel cell(s) installations with 400 kW, a minimum of 5.48 million MWh electric and
25.73 million MMBTUs (equivalent to 7.54 million MWh) of thermal energy would be produced, which could reduce CO2
emissions by at least 1.40 million tons per year.

27
NEW YORK
APPENDICES

28
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 1: Education

29
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 2: Food Sales

30
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 3: Food Services

31
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 4: Inpatient Healthcare

32
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 5: Lodging
Appendix I – Figure 6: Public Order and Safety

33
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 7: Energy Intensive Industries

34
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 8: Federal Government Operated Buildings

35
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 9: Telecommunication Sites

36
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 10: Municipal Waste Sites

37
NEW YORK

38
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 11: Commercial Airports
Appendix I – Figure 12: Alternative Fueling Stations

39
NEW YORK
Appendix I – Figure 13: Distribution Centers/Warehouses & Ports

40
NEW YORK

41
NEW YORK
Appendix II – New York Estimated Electrical Consumption per Sector
Category Total Site
Electric Consumption per
Building (1000 kWh)102
kWh Consumed per Sector
Mid Atlantic
Education 7,270 548.529 3,987,805,830
Food Sales 25,000+ 226.142 5,653,550,000
Food Services 30,000+ 121.041 3,631,230,000
Inpatient Healthcare 1,609 10,472.33 16,849,985,406
Lodging 2,558 457.97 1,171,484,702
Public Order & Safety 1,332 243.328 324,112,896
Total 67,769 31,618,168,834
Residential103
50,532,000,000
Industrial 19,946,000,000
Commercial 76,821,000,000
Other Commercial 31,618,168,834
102
EIA, Electricity consumption and expenditure intensities for Non-Mall Building 2003
103
DOE EERE, “Electric Power and Renewable Energy in New York”;
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/states/electricity.cfm/state=NY; October, 2011

42
NEW YORK
Appendix III – Key Stakeholders
Organization City/Town State Website
New Energy New York Albany NY http://www.neny.org/
New York State Energy
Research and Development
clean energy R&D
Albany NY http://www.nyserda.org/
Committee on Environment
and Public Work
New York
City
NY http://epw.senate.gov
Capital District Clean
Communities (Clean Cities)
Albany NY http://www.afdc.energy.gov/cleancities/coalition/albany
Greater Long Island Clean
Cities Coalition
Stony Brook
NY http://www.gliccc.org/
NYCLHVCC
New York
City
NY http://nyclhvcc.org/about/
Genesee Region Clean
Communities (Clean Cities)
Genesee
NY http://www.grcc.us/
New York Power Authority
(NYPA)
White Plains NY http://www.nypa.gov/
Long Island Power Authority
(LIPA)
Uniondale
NY http://www.lipower.org/
STS/Public Policy, Rochester
Institute of Technology
Rochester NY http://www.rit.edu/
Building Department
Administrators
Riverhead
NY http://www.gcexpediting.com
New York City Economic
Development Corp.
New York
City
NY http://www.nycedc.com/Pages/HomePage.aspx
Mayor's office of
Environmental Coordination
New York
City
NY http://www.nyc.gov
New York State Public
Service Commission Augusta NY http://www.dps.state.ny.us/
Utility Companies
National Grid http://www.nationalgridus.com/
Central Hudson Gas & Electric http://www.cenhud.com/
National Fuel Gas Distribution http://www.natfuel.com/
NYSEG http://www.nyseg.com/
St. Lawrence Gas Co. http://www.stlawrencegas.com/about.shtml

Appendix IV – New York Incentives and Programs
Funding Source: NYSERDA
Program Title: Local Option – Municipal Sustainable Energy Program
Applicable Energies/Technologies: Solar Water Heat, Solar Space Heat, Solar Thermal
Process Heat, Photovoltaics, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal Electric, Fuel Cells, Geothermal
Heat Pumps, Anaerobic Digestion, Fuel Cells using Renewable Fuels, Geothermal Direct-Use
Summary: Property-Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing effectively allows property owners
to borrow money to pay for energy improvements. The amount borrowed is typically repaid via a
special assessment on the property over a period of years.
Restrictions: In order to qualify for a loan, energy audits or renewable energy feasibility studies
must be performed by a contractor certified according to standards set by the New York State
Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) or by a local government under
standards at least as stringent as those developed by NYSERDA. Energy efficiency improvements
must meet cost-effectiveness criteria also established by NYSERDA. Please see the program web
site above for information on the status of the development of these standards.
Timing: To speak with a NYSERDA representative about collaborating with these existing
programs, please send us an email at standards@nyserda.org.
Maximum Size:
Loan amounts may not exceed 10% of the appraised real property value or cost of the qualified
improvements; other terms locally determined
Requirements: **The Standards are currently under development and will be posted as they are
completed. Please check our website frequently for updates**
http://www.nyserda.org/About/energy_services_standards.asp
Rebate amount: Depends on project
For further information, please visit:
http://www.nyserda.org/About/energy_services_standards.asp
Source:
NYSERDA; “Standards for Providing Energy Services in New York”;
http://www.nyserda.org/About/energy_services_standards.asp; September, 2011
DSIRE USA; “Local Option – Municipal Sustainable Energy Program”;
http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=NY68F&re=1&ee=1; September 2011

44
Funding Source: RPS surcharge
Program Title: Fuel Cell Rebate and Performance Incentive
Applicable Energies/Technologies: Fuel Cells, Fuel Cells using Renewable Fuels
Summary: The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) offers
incentives for the purchase, installation, and operation of customer sited tier (CST, also called
"behind the meter") fuel cell systems used for electricity production
Restrictions: Incentive levels and limitations vary by system size. Bonus capacity incentives are
available for large projects that provide secure/standalone capability at sites of Essential Public
Services.
Timing: 12/31/2015 (or until funds are exhausted)
Maximum Size:
►Total Incentives:
Large systems (larger than 25 kW): $1 million
Small systems (up to 25 kW): $50,000
►Capacity Incentives:
Large systems only (larger than 25 kW): $200,000 for basic capacity incentive, $100,000 for bonus
capacity incentive
►Performance Incentives:
Large systems (greater than 25 kW): $300,000 per year per project site
Small systems (up to 25 kW): $20,000 per year per project site
Requirements: http://www.nyserda.org/funding/2157pon.asp
Rebate amount:
►Capacity Incentives:
Large systems only (larger than 25 kW): Basic incentive of $1,000/kW + possible $500/kW bonus for systems
that provide standalone capability to serve essential services
►Performance Incentives:
All systems: $0.15/net kWh
For further information, please visit: http://www.nyserda.org/funding/2157pon.asp
Sources:
NYSERDA “RPS Customer-Sited Tier Fuel Cell Program” – September 27, 2011
DSIRE “NYSERDA – Fuel Cell rebate and Performance Incentive”, September 27, 2011

45
Appendix V – Partial list of Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Supply Chain Companies in New York
104
Organization Name Product or Service Category
1 AWS Truepower LLC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
2 Bergmann Associates P.C. Engineering/Design Services
3 Blasch Precision Ceramics Inc. Components
4 CG Power Solutions Inc. Equipment
5 Clough Harbour & Associates LLP Engineering/Design Services
6 College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering at SUNY Albany Research & Development
7 E2TAC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
8 Einhorn Yaffee Prescott Architecture & Engineering P.C. Engineering/Design Services
9 Environmental Advocates of New York Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
10 Heslin Rothenberg Farley Mesiti P.C. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
11 Hoffman Warnick LLC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
12 Intertek Lab or Test Equipment/Services
13 MTI Instruments Inc. Components
14 MTI Micro Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM
15 National Grid Other
16 New York Energy Research and Development Authority Research & Development
17 New York State Office of Science, Technology and Innovation Research & Development
18 New York Thruway Authority Other
19 NY-BEST (New York Battery and Energy Storage) Other
20 NYSERDA Other
21 O'Brien & Gere Engineers Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
22 Research Foundation of SUNY Research & Development
23 Suburban Propane Partners LP Fuel
24 SUNY Albany Research & Development
25 Tyco Electronics Components
26 Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
27 Alfred University Research & Development
28 Stearns & Wheeler GHD Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
29 Power Management Concepts LLC Engineering/Design Services
30 SUNY Binghamton Research & Development
31 Axiom Consulting Partners LLC Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
32 Nextek Power Systems Inc. FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services
33 Lee Spring Company Equipment
34 Caplugs (Protective Industries Inc.) Equipment
35 Cobey Inc. Equipment
36 Conax Technologies LLC Components
37 Continental Fan Mfg. Inc. Components
38 ENrG Inc. Components
39 G-Tec Equipment
40 SUNY Buffalo Research & Development
41 Subgard International Equipment
42 CDH Energy Corporation Engineering/Design Services
104
Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster Supply Chain Database Search, http://neesc.org/resources/?type=1, August 11, 2011

46
43 The Linde Group Fuel
44 Bren-Tronics Inc. Components
45 Corning Inc. Components
46 PCB Piezotronics Inc. Components
47 SRA International Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
48 AES Greenidge LLC Other
49 Sabin Metal Corporation Materials
50 Island Pump & Tank Corp. Fuel
51 Weico Wire & Cable Inc. Equipment
52 AEYCH LLC Engineering/Design Services
53 PAETEC Holding Corp. Engineering/Design Services
54 Torrey Pines Research Research & Development
55 Xactiv Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
56 American Aerospace Controls Inc. Components
57 SUNY Farmingdale Research & Development
58 Air Liquide Fuel
59 Zicar Zirconia Inc. Materials
60 Burnham Polymeric Materials
61 Exergy LLC Components
62 Hobart and William Smith Colleges Research & Development
63 Air Products and Chemicals Inc. Fuel
64 Clean Harbors Other
65 The Raymond Corporation FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services
66 Mercury Aircraft Inc. Manufacturing Services
67 eVionyx Inc. FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services
68 Hofstra University Research & Development
69 Delphi Automotive LLP Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM
70 Sitron-USA Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services
71 General Motors Battery and Fuel Cell Research Center Hydrogen System OEM
72 MicroPen Technologies Corporation Materials
73 Oak-Mitsui Technologies Components
74 EmPowerCES LLC Other
75 Alloys International Inc. Materials
76 J B Nottingham Co. Inc. (Duraline) Components
77 Advanced Plastic and Material Testing Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services
78 Cornell Fuel Cell Institute Research & Development
79 Primet Precisions Materials Inc. Materials
80 Widetronix Inc. Components
81 Capital Express International Inc. Transportation/Packing Services & Supplies
82 Water Cooling Corporation (The Pump Warehouse) Equipment
83 Tech City Properties Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
84 AVOX Systems Inc. Equipment
85 Harper International Components
86 IMR Test Labs Lab or Test Equipment/Services
87 Atlantic Detroit Diesel-Allison LLC Equipment
88 H2 Pump LLC Hydrogen System OEM
89 Plug Power Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM

47
90 Barton & Loguidice P.C. Engineering/Design Services
91 Diversified Manufacturing Inc. Manufacturing Services
92 Hardware Specialty Co. Inc. Components
93 Piller USA Inc. Equipment
94 Curtis Instruments Inc. Components
95 AECOM Technology Corporation Engineering/Design Services
96 American Wind Power and Hydrogen LLC Hydrogen System OEM
97 Arotech Corporation Equipment
98 CH2M Hill Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
99 City University of New York Research & Development
100 Columbia University Research & Development
101 Consolidated Edison Company of New York Inc. Other
102 Direct Energy Other
103 FXFOWLE Architects LLP Engineering/Design Services
104 General Electric Manufacturing Services
105 Hunter College Research & Development
106 Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. Manufacturing Services
107 Mitsui & Co. Inc. Transportation/Packing Services & Supplies
108 Pred Materials International Inc. Materials
109 Sendyne Corp. Components
110 Sojitz Corporation of America Transportation/Packing Services & Supplies
111 Solid Cell Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM
112 Tokyo Gas Co. Ltd. Fuel
113 Tradition Energy (TFS Energy) Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
114 Verizon Communications Inc. Other
115 WilmerHale LLP Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
116 SiGNA Chemistry, Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM
117 IEC Electronics Corp. Manufacturing Services
118 Ultralife Corporation Manufacturing Services
119 Upstate Refractory Services Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services
120 Precision Process Equipment Inc. Equipment
121 GE Global Research Research & Development
122 Custom Electronics Inc. Components
123 Ioxus Inc. Components
124 HARBEC Plastics Inc. Manufacturing Services
125 Flow Safe Inc. Equipment
126 Tecknowledgey Inc. Components
127 Global Equipment Company Inc. (Systemax Inc.) Equipment
128 WATT Fuel Cell Corp. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM
129 Clarkson University Research & Development
130 Axio Power Inc. Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
131 CH Energy Group Inc. Other
132 Hitachi Metals America Ltd. Materials
133 The Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Letter Other
134 Airflow Catalyst Systems Components
135 American Aerogel Corporation Materials
136 AMETEK Power Systems & Instruments Components

48
137 Applied Coatings Group Inc. Materials
138 Cerion Enterprises LLC Components
139 Eastman Kodak Company Materials
140 Eldre Corporation Equipment
141 Impact Technologies LLC Engineering/Design Services
142 MWI Inc. Materials
143 PEKO Precision Products Inc. Manufacturing Services
144 Precision Design Systems Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services
145 RocCera LLC Materials
146 Rochester Institute of Technology Research & Development
147 University of Rochester Research & Development
148 Viewpoint Systems Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services
149 KNF Clean Room Products Corporation Lab or Test Equipment/Services
150 Vacuum Instrument Corp. Lab or Test Equipment/Services
151 Precision Flow Technologies Inc. Lab or Test Equipment/Services
152 DiGesare Mechanical Inc. FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services
153 SuperPower Inc. Research & Development
154 Amphenol Corporation Components
155 SUNY Stony Brook Research & Development
156 Fluid Metering Inc. Equipment
157 C & S Companies Engineering/Design Services
158 Carrier Corp. Other
159 Cooper Industries Inc. Components
160 Evans Analytical Group Research & Development
161 Marjama Muldoon Blasiak & Sullivan LLP Consulting/Legal/Financial Services
162 SUNY Center for Sustainable & Renewable Energy Research & Development
163 901 D LLC Components
164 e2v Inc. Components
165 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Research & Development
166 T & J Electrical Corporation FC/H2 System Distr./Install/Maint Services
167 The Paper Battery Company Other
168 Long Island Power Authority Other
169 Brookhaven National Laboratory Research & Development
170 Applied Mechanical Technologies Inc. Engineering/Design Services
171 Progressive Machine and Design Manufacturing Services
172 Praxair Inc. Fuel
173 Chem-Tainer Industries Inc. Equipment
174 United States Military Academy at West Point Research & Development
175 Electro Industries/GaugeTech Equipment
176 New York Power Authority Other
177 Pace Energy and Climate Center Other
178 Pearlman Public Relations LLC Other
179 Tech Air Inc. Fuel
180 Poly Lam Products Corp. Other
181 Cosa Instrument Corporation Equipment
182 Markinter Co. Materials

49
Appendix VI – Partial list of Hydrogen and Fuel Cell OEM Companies in New York
105
Organization Name Product or Service Category Website Address
1 MTI Micro Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.mtimicrofuelcells.com/
2 Delphi Automotive LLP Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.delphi.com/
3 General Motors Battery and Fuel Cell Research Center Hydrogen System OEM http://www.gm.com/
4 H2 Pump LLC Hydrogen System OEM http://www.h2pumpllc.com/index.html
5 Plug Power Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.plugpower.com/
6 American Wind Power and Hydrogen LLC Hydrogen System OEM http://www.windpowerandhydrogen.com/index.html
7 Solid Cell Inc. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM http://www.solidcell.com/index.htm
8 WATT Fuel Cell Corp. Fuel Cell Stack or System OEM www.wattfuelcell.com
105
Northeast Electrochemical Energy Storage Cluster Supply Chain Database Search, http://neesc.org/resources/?type=1, August 11, 2011

50
Appendix VII – Comparison of Fuel Cell Technologies106
Fuel Cell
Type
Common
Electrolyte
Operating
Temperature
Typical
Stack
Size
Efficiency Applications Advantages Disadvantages
Polymer
Electrolyte
Membrane
(PEM)
Perfluoro sulfonic
acid
50-100°C
122-212°
typically
80°C
< 1 kW – 1
MW107
>
kW 60%
transportation
35%
stationary
• Backup power
• Portable power
• Distributed
generation
• Transportation
• Specialty vehicle
• Solid electrolyte reduces
corrosion & electrolyte
management problems
• Low temperature
• Quick start-up
• Expensive catalysts
• Sensitive to fuel
impurities
• Low temperature waste
heat
Alkaline
(AFC)
Aqueous solution
of potassium
hydroxide soaked
in a matrix
90-100°C
194-212°F
10 – 100
kW
60%
• Military
• Space
• Cathode reaction faster
in alkaline electrolyte,
leads to high performance
• Low cost components
• Sensitive to CO2
in fuel and air
• Electrolyte management
Phosphoric
Acid
(PAFC)
Phosphoric acid
soaked in a matrix
150-200°C
302-392°F
400 kW
100 kW
module
40%
• Distributed
generation
• Higher temperature enables
CHP
• Increased tolerance to fuel
impurities
• Pt catalyst
• Long start up time
• Low current and power
Molten
Carbonate
(MCFC)
Solution of lithium,
sodium and/or
potassium
carbonates, soaked
in a matrix
600-700°C
1112-1292°F
300
k W- 3 M
W
300 kW
module
45 – 50%
• Electric utility
• Distributed
generation
• High efficiency
• Fuel flexibility
• Can use a variety of catalysts
• Suitable for CHP
• High temperature
corrosion and breakdown
of cell components
• Long start up time
• Low power density
Solid Oxide
(SOFC)
Yttria stabilized
zirconia
700-1000°C
1202-1832°F
1 kW – 2
MW
60%
• Auxiliary power
• Electric utility
• Distributed
generation
• High efficiency
• Fuel flexibility
• Can use a variety of catalysts
• Solid electrolyte
• Suitable f o r CHP & CHHP
• Hybrid/GT cycle
corrosion and breakdown
of cell components
operation requires long
start up
time and limits
Polymer Electrolyte is no longer a single category row. Data shown does not take into account High Temperature PEM which operates in the range of 160o
C to 180o
C. It solves
virtually all of the disadvantages listed under PEM. It is not sensitive to impurities. It has usable heat. Stack efficiencies of 52% on the high side are realized. HTPEM is not a
PAFC fuel cell and should not be confused with one.
106
U.S. Department of Energy, Fuel Cells Technology Program, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/fuelcells/pdfs/fc_comparison_chart.pdf, August 5, 2011
107
Ballard, “CLEARgen Multi-MY Systems”, http://www.ballard.com/fuel-cell-products/cleargen-multi-mw-systems.aspx, November, 2011

Ny h2 dev_plan_041012

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Ny h2 dev_plan_041012

Semelhante a Ny h2 dev_plan_041012 (20)

Último

Último (20)

Ny h2 dev_plan_041012