Stage 2 of 15 / Comparison
Choose the electrolyzer technology label
Compare PEM, alkaline and SOEC as labelled screening envelopes, not as vendor selections.
- Advanced
- 15 stages
- 12 min
- Process and energy systems
After this stage you can
- Name what the technology label does and does not change in the model.
- State why SOEC electrical demand is not a complete plant energy statement without a heat source.
- Record the stack kWh/kg as an assumption until a vendor curve exists.
The engineering
PEM, alkaline and solid-oxide electrolyzers differ in electrolyte, operating temperature, water quality and typical specific electricity. This journey does not simulate those physics. It records the technology as a label and checks the entered stack kWh/kg against a published screening envelope.
PEM is often chosen for dynamic renewable coupling. Alkaline remains common at large scale. SOEC can show a lower electrical kWh/kg if high-temperature heat is available; that heat is outside this model unless you fold it into the stack figure yourself.
Do not treat the envelope as a specification. Replace the specific-electricity input with a datasheet or a reviewed design point before procurement.
EngiMetric / green hydrogen educational workbench
Green Hydrogen Plant — Educational Screening Workbench
Loading the hydrogen project state...
Draft development workbench (noindex). Inputs are saved in this browser only. Calculations shown are screening/educational outputs from the existing model where implemented; missing or unsupported quantitative areas remain explicit. Completing stages records self-declared learning progress only — it is not quantitative engineering capability, not an OEM guarantee, and not industrial/project approval.
Stage
Inputs
Edit the screening inputs for this stage, then calculate. Values you enter are marked as user-entered in the local project state; defaults remain illustrative until replaced.
Screening results
Results come from the existing hydrogen screening model. Unsupported quantitative areas, missing evidence, and review requirements remain explicit; outputs are not certified design or approval decisions.
Process & balance context
This educational workbench presents stage-specific calculated outputs and limitations. Detailed interactive diagrams are not required for journey completion; use the stage results and assumptions panels to review boundaries, flows, energy, storage, and economics context.
Assumptions, limitations & review
Your deliverable for this stage
A technology choice with an explicit stack-kWh/kg assumption.
Stage assumptions, limits and sources
Assumptions
- Technology envelopes are illustrative bands for teaching, not performance guarantees.
- Water quality and pressure limits are not enforced as warranty clauses.
Constraints
- No polarisation curve, current density, temperature or degradation physics.
Limitations
- No catalyst, membrane, KOH management or high-temperature materials model.
- No dynamic response, ramp rate or minimum-load constraint.
Review status
- Needs engineering review
- Professional review is required before publication or use as a design basis.
Sources
- CIAAW - Standard Atomic Weightsstandards
- NIST Chemistry WebBook - Hydrogengovernment
- U.S. Department of Energy - Hydrogen Production: Electrolysisgovernment
- IEA - Global Hydrogen Review 2024, Hydrogen productionresearch institution
- IRENA - Electrolyser costsengineering org
Stage progress is stored in this browser only. The explanation and every limit on this page remain readable with JavaScript disabled; the calculators need it to run.
Stage kind: Comparison / Journey: green-hydrogen / Stage: electrolyzer-technology