Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Prudence (imported)
Articles: 0
Posts: 256
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 5:29 pm

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by Prudence (imported) »

clysmaniac (imported) wrote: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:36 am I'm still at a loss to figure out how one of these devices will "wirelessly" power my home. Maybe it can produce electricity as promised but I can't see how the device will then wirelessly power my refrigerator or run the water pump at the bottom of my well.

I don't think they were talking about the plug (wire) for the refridgerator, pump, etc... I'm guessing that by "wireless" they mean you don't have to be connected to the Electrical Grid (ie: your house would make its own power from one of these devices, rather than needing to be connected to power lines as it is now).

Thanks for posting this, Ramses. Very fascinating. I'll have to read up some more on this, and see if I can get a copy of that 60 minutes show. If these people really have figured out a way to make these things inexpensive and highly-efficient, then this is a major breakthrough. Although, I do share some of Paolo's views -- greed has so often killed/supressed amazing inventions in the past (why do you think we still use primarily oil as a fuel?).

I did a few papers on Fuel Cells back in the early 90's when I was in College. Back then (at least from the only info I was able to find -- this was before Web Pages) it was only Hydrogen+Oxygen as fuel, and Water as a by-product. They required a Platinum Grid and were thus very expesive and deemed "impratical" for general use.

Also, the problem with those type of fuel cells was that it was difficult to "throttle" them. If you wanted to change the output power you had to make adjustments slowly. This was the main reason it was "unthinkable" to use them in cars (because output power would need to change quickly -- ie: every time you accelarated or braked).
Dave (imported)
Articles: 0
Posts: 6386
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 6:06 pm

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by Dave (imported) »

>>I thought I'd seen these somehwere before. Maybe not built by Bloom but fuel cells nonetheless.

>>They aren't as small as you think. The niche market is for whole buildings that don't really have a good source of electric power.

>>In certain locations, it is difficult to add a building the size of a Walmart or Google or a small housing development to the grid. Many places have a limited supply of electricity. In many cases, there isn't a good way to add capacity to the grid unless you add a power plant. So these "blocks" or "boxes" are smallish (like a tractor trailer or a delivery truck is smallish) and are easy to operate, easy to maintain. And they provide the added capacity by generating electricity.

>>

>>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35549737/ns ... vironment/

Secretive startup unveils fuel cell ‘server’

EBay, Google, Walmart among customers for fuel cell system

msnbc.com staff and news service reports

updated 12:40 p.m. ET, Wed., Feb. 24, 2010

SAN FRANCISCO - A secretive Silicon Valley startup on Wednesday took the wraps off its cleaner energy product: a fuel cell "server" the size of a parking space that it hopes will allow homes and businesses to generate their own electricity.

Bloom Energy introduced its devices at eBay Inc. headquarters in San Jose, Calif., joined by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and several of its early customers.

"We believe that we can have the same kind of impact on energy that the mobile phone had on communications," CEO K.R. Sridhar, a former NASA scientist, said in a statement. "Just as cell phones circumvented landlines to proliferate telephony, Bloom Energy will enable the adoption of distributed power as a smarter, localized energy source.

"Our customers are the cornerstone of that vision," he added, "and we are thrilled to be working with industry leading companies to lower their energy costs, reduce their carbon footprint, improve their energy security, and showcase their commitment to a better future."

EBay as well as Google, Inc., have been testing the server at their corporate campuses, and other customers announced Wednesday include Bank of America, Coca-Cola, FedEx Express, Staples and Walmart.

The technology had been the subject of intense anticipation because it promises to produce more power — with less environmental damage — than other fuel cells on the market.

"Each system generates enough power to meet the needs of approximately 100 average U.S. homes or a small office building," Bloom Energy stated. "For more power, customers simply deploy multiple Energy Servers side by side."

The company said its patented technology "is fundamentally different from the legacy 'hydrogen' fuel cells most people are familiar with" in four primary ways:

# it uses lower cost materials;

# is more efficient in converting fuel to electricity;

# can run on a wide range of renewable or traditional fuels; and

# is more easily set up and maintained.

Customers "can expect a 3-5 year payback on their capital investment from the energy cost savings." Bloom Energy stated. "Depending on whether they are using a fossil or renewable fuel, they can also achieve a 40-100 percent reduction in their carbon footprint as compared with the U.S. grid."

"Even running on a fossil fuel," it added, "the systems are approximately 67 percent cleaner than a typical coal-fired power plant. When powered by a renewable fuel, they can be 100 percent cleaner."

Niche areas for now?

Yet analysts warn that the technology has yet to be widely proven.

"Fuel cells have always held the promise that they're going to be this huge thing, but so far it hasn't really materialized," said Shu Sun, an energy technologies analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance. "What we are seeing is some of these fuel cell companies are making inroads into niche industries."

A 2008 study by his firm found that the fuel cell market would reach $1.5 billion by 2015, primarily in wireless telecommunications, recreational vehicles and midsize "distributed generation," which refers to fuel cells that would power, say, a block of apartments rather than individual homes.

Fuel cells themselves aren't new. Scientists have been working on them since the 1800s, and they are used today in the space program, telecommunications and the military. They haven't caught on widely for residential use largely because of costs.

Even in Japan, where fuel cells are more common, their use is limited to powering smaller devices because those cells don't generate a lot of energy, said Dallas Kachan, managing director of the Cleantech Group, a research and consulting firm.

Kachan said Bloom Energy's product offers a "glimpse at this possible nirvana" of placing cells that can generate huge amounts of power closer to where the power is being used. Large technology companies could attach them to their computing centers, which can be energy hogs.

Google cites payoff

For instance, Google said Bloom Energy's fuel cells are helping to power some of the facilities at the company's headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. In 18 months, those cells produced 3.8 million kilowatt-hours of electricity — many more times the 16,500 kWh the average U.S. household consumes over that same period.

Kachan said Bloom Energy's technology is exciting because of the amount of power it can produce and its ability to run on a variety of fuels, including renewable energy sources.

Fuel cells make power through chemical reactions, but they need fuel themselves to work. Instead of only being able to use hydrogen, Bloom Energy cells can use natural gas, wind, solar power and whatever else is available, which could vary from community to community.

Kachan also was drawn to the cells' relatively low cost. The boxes that businesses are buying currently cost $700,000 or more, but the company hopes to have the price down to just a few thousand dollars for residential customers.

Bloom Energy, which is based in Sunnyvale, has lured a high amount of venture capital — around $400 million, its co-founder and CEO, K.R. Sridhar, told the "60 Minutes" news show in a segment that aired last Sunday.

Kachan said he is "cautiously optimistic."

"With $400 million having gone to this company, there are some exciting claims, but like everything else out of Silicon Valley, the market will separate fact from fiction, and will prove claims versus reality," he said.

CEO Sridhar, who earlier worked on fuel cells while at NASA's Mars space program, says his goal is nothing short of this: "making clean, reliable energy affordable for everyone in the world."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35549737/ns ... vironment/
DeaconBlues (imported)
Articles: 0
Posts: 941
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:24 am

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by DeaconBlues (imported) »

OH MY GOODNESS!! I do just love to rake up some really old bit, like this thread started more than a decade ago....

MORE than ten years have passed and..... still no "bloom boxes" that I can see.

What has happened in the past decade? Well, obviously no bloom box or any other miracle solutions to our problems. The price of gasoline has gone up, positively amazing!! I would have never guessed that gasoline prices would go up (that is dripping with sarcasm just in case you don't see it). "Cold fusion" still has not solved all of our energy problems.... Honestly, some things are better now, and lot of things are worse.

Still, where are the damn "Bloom Boxes" they promised us?
Losethem (imported)
Articles: 0
Posts: 3342
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2001 9:01 am

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by Losethem (imported) »

Personally? I'm holding out for teleportation.

As far as legitimate sources, there is encouraging work on solid state electricity storage (solid state batteries), which have very high energy density compared to anything available today such as lithium ion batteries, and I believe they have a lower impact on the environment as well as lighter weight, which is important for transportation applications.

There are LI battery vehicles today approaching 500-600 miles on a single charge, which should begin eliminating range anxiety for people. Frankly, the little car I had which could go 20 miles on a charge was good enough for about 80% of the driving I do, so I'm not sure why everyone is so hung up on needing to go as far on a charge as petrol engine powered cars do. Still... If they can get the 500-600 LI batteries, and solid state batteries can hold more, this should eliminate the range anxiety problems among the public.

Imagine, an electric vehicle which could make it from San Francisco, CA to Seattle, WA on a single charge AND STILL HAVE enough energy to drive around Seattle for about the same distance as a single tank of gas in some petrol cars. East coast USA? You could drive Richmond, VA to Miami FL on a single charge. Europe? How about Brussels to Oslo, via the bridge from Denmark to Sweden?

The point is, this is coming. The only problem is the charging infrastructure. It's a chicken and egg problem. If I were to purchase a vehicle I planned to drive on trips routinely in the USA, I'd go with a Tesla, because it's the only one which can be charged reliably at routine intervals, similar to having gas stations available.
Paolo
Articles: 0
Posts: 9709
Joined: Wed May 16, 2001 8:53 am

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by Paolo »

Ah, yes, another fascinating, moldy, old thread!

Range?

My truck gets about 300 miles/tank, if I'm lucky, and have a good tailwind. That's on normal gas.

It also burns E85, sick joke that that is, to the tune of about 8 mpg.

Some stations have non-ethanol gas, but here, they charge up to $2/gal. more for it. I can sometimes pull 20 mpg off that. Downhill, AC off, and with a tailwind.

It wouldn't matter what great discovery was made to propel personal vehicles. Those supplying it would still make it quite expensive.

Still, a 400-500 mile range would tickle me pink!

It's largely irrelevant, though. No one makes a vehicle that I like anymore.
fhunter
Site Admin
Articles: 0
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2024 9:57 am
Location: Serbia
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by fhunter »

Losethem (imported) wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:00 pm Personally? I'm holding out for teleportation.

As far as legitimate sources, there is encouraging work on solid state electricity storage (solid state batteries), which have very high energy density compared to anything available today such as lithium ion batteries, and I believe they have a lower impact on the environment as well as lighter weight, which is important for transportation applications.

There are LI battery vehicles today approaching 500-600 miles on a single charge, which should begin eliminating range anxiety for people. Frankly, the little car I had which could go 20 miles on a charge was good enough for about 80% of the driving I do, so I'm not sure why everyone is so hung up on needing to go as far on a charge as petrol engine powered cars do. Still... If they can get the 500-600 LI batteries, and solid state batteries can hold more, this should eliminate the range anxiety problems among the public.

Imagine, an electric vehicle which could make it from San Francisco, CA to Seattle, WA on a single charge AND STILL HAVE enough energy to drive around Seattle for about the same distance as a single tank of gas in some petrol cars. East coast USA? You could drive Richmond, VA to Miami FL on a single charge. Europe? How about Brussels to Oslo, via the bridge from Denmark to Sweden?

The point is, this is coming. The only problem is the charging infrastructure. It's a chicken and egg problem. If I were to purchase a vehicle I planned to drive on trips routinely in the USA, I'd go with a Tesla, because it's the only one which can be charged reliably at routine intervals, similar to having gas stations available.

More energy density with batteries, it will be even more dangerous - remember Samsung Galaxy Note 7 fiasco? And that was 1/10 of gasoline energy density. Unless the battery can withstand damage - it will be explosive at best (and VERY hard to extinguish).

As for range - I am not sure about USA. I lived in Russia - my distance from home to office was ~18km one way, that was in one city. 40km trip in a day (usually by public transit). Add climate and traffic jams - and your range will go down even more - you no longer have 'free' heating from the gasoline engine.

Add here that below freezing (actually below about +5°C) lithium batteries do not behave well, and can't be/should not be charged - so you lose recuperative braking in cold weather, or you need to heat the battery.

Again - not sure about USA, but in Russia, where I lived average was below +5 from October till about April?

All in all - I like electric vehicles (but well, biggest I had was electric scooter - 40km of range and up to 45km/h on a full battery - mmm, nice ride, in warm weather 😄 ).

Oh, and it is not only about charging infrastructure - in Europe, in denser populated areas there would be problems with electric grid, because you need high power to charge the car. Or - you'd need actually more clean power - nuclear, anyone? But somehow people are allergic to it?

And well, given current state of electrics and modern cars - 'you do not own the car', so - nope. Not for me.
JessicaH (imported)
Articles: 0
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:28 pm

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by JessicaH (imported) »

May be an old thread but it stirs discussion and engagement which is sadly lacking as of late.
Losethem (imported)
Articles: 0
Posts: 3342
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2001 9:01 am

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by Losethem (imported) »

fhunter wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 8:37 am More energy density with batteries, it will be even more dangerous - remember Samsung Galaxy Note 7 fiasco? And that was 1/10 of gasoline energy density. Unless the battery can withstand damage - it will be explosive at best (and VERY hard to extinguish).

As for range - I am not sure about USA. I lived in Russia - my distance from home to office was ~18km one way, that was in one city. 40km trip in a day (usually by public transit). Add climate and traffic jams - and your range will go down even more - you no longer have 'free' heating from the gasoline engine.

Add here that below freezing (actually below about +5°C) lithium batteries do not behave well, and can't be/should not be charged - so you lose recuperative braking in cold weather, or you need to heat the battery.

Again - not sure about USA, but in Russia, where I lived average was below +5 from October till about April?

All in all - I like electric vehicles (but well, biggest I had was electric scooter - 40km of range and up to 45km/h on a full battery - mmm, nice ride, in warm weather 😄 ).

Oh, and it is not only about charging infrastructure - in Europe, in denser populated areas there would be problems with electric grid, because you need high power to charge the car. Or - you'd need actually more clean power - nuclear, anyone? But somehow people are allergic to it?

And well, given current state of electrics and modern cars - 'you do not own the car', so - nope. Not for me.

The Galaxy Note 7 didn't use a solid state battery. But even petrol cars, or hybrid petrol and something else, can light on fire, just ask Jay Leno. (https://people.com/health/jay-leno-disc ... line-fire/)

All this hand wringing from not knowing if the car will start on fire or not, I'd guess there are at least as many petrol vehicles lighting on fire as full electric. It's just something folks who don't want this to come to pass throw around to scare people.

Addressing the cold weather issue, yes, you'll lose some range, in the case of my 20-mile/32km batter car (which had a petrol engine after discharging the battery to drive further), in the weather you describe it went down to 18-miles/29km or so. It wasn't a big deal.

With that car I once made it from Sacramento, CA to Carson City, leaving Sacramento with only 1/4 tank of fuel or about 3.5 gallons/13-litres. The distance was 130 miles/210km, driving from nearly sea level to 7000 feet. I didn't run out of fuel, but only had about 1 gallon (3.8 litres or so) left when I got to the filling station in Carson City. Of course, the battery completely recharged itself going down the mountain from Lake Tahoe to Carson City. Still going over the Sierra's on that trip and not running out of fuel starting that low, is quite an accomplishment.

I managed about 52 MPG going over those mountains, an amazing feat considering how steep the roads are there. Most vehicles would be lucky to get half that fuel economy in those conditions.
WheelyCurious
Articles: 0
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2022 9:23 pm

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by WheelyCurious »

I tend to agree w/ Fhunter that in all the effort to push electric vehicles, there hasn't been enough discussion about having the grid infrastructure to charge them.

I also see endless mentions of "new improved" battery technology on the wheelchair hacking forum I spend a lot of time on. If one compares the number of new tech announcements to the number of actual products on the shelves as things that are available outside the lab, you quickly learn to label such things as 'vapor-ware' until proven otherwise....

Commercial power chairs are STILL almost all powered by lead bricks (the only exception being some of the 'Chinese folder' portable chairs that are very limited and sketchy in many ways besides the batteries) but a lot of folks are switching to Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) which allows as much as a 6X increase in stored power and 50% weight reduction for the same physical size pack, plus 10X better lifespan than lead bricks.

OTOH there are no full size all electric Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles (I.e. drive into in a power chair) available that I know of (at least in the US). There is one conversion of a Chrysler Hybrid mini-van available - for big money and with a long waiting list... A lot of the theoretical problem with creating an electric wheelchair van is that we need to keep the floor height down (The biggest part of a minivan conversion is dropping the floor of the van by 6-12") which means that the underfloor area is no longer available for stuffing w/ batteries...

My adapted Dodge Caravan minivan will get about 22mpg if I drive 70-75mph, the typical highway speed... However I find that slowing down to 60mph gets me into the 24+mpg range (and lack of T seems to keep me from going nuts when everyone else is passing me... 🙄) This gets me about 350-400 miles on a tank.

My most common daily drive between home and the makerspace is about 50 miles, add in other errands and I end up at about 1 tank per week. So an electric vehicle would work for me most of the time.

Where I see the pure EV falling down, even w/ 5-600 mile range is on the very occasional long drives I've done. When I'm in marathon drive mode, I do at least 800-1K miles a day, with stops for food / fuel / restroom and back on the road... A petro vehicle can get a refill in under 10 minutes so I spend more time refilling (and emptying) *MY* tanks... Even the fastest charging EV's take at least a few hours or so for a full charge, so it would severely limit that aspect.

What IMHO would be a potentially useful thing is a 'strap-on' generator, perhaps using a trailer-hitch mount style system that could be used on long trips (I could easily see it being a rental item) to extend the range of an EV when needed, but mostly be left off for local travel.

WheelyCurious
fhunter
Site Admin
Articles: 0
Posts: 1634
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2024 9:57 am
Location: Serbia
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Posting Rank

Re: Exciting fuel cell advance!!! A game changer?

Post by fhunter »

Losethem (imported) wrote: Sun Nov 27, 2022 4:09 pm The Galaxy Note 7 didn't use a solid state battery. But even petrol cars, or hybrid petrol and something else, can light on fire, just ask Jay Leno. (https://people.com/health/jay-leno-disc ... line-fire/)

All this hand wringing from not knowing if the car will start on fire or not, I'd guess there are at least as many petrol vehicles lighting on fire as full electric. It's just something folks who don't want this to come to pass throw around to scare people.

The issue with lithium over gasoline is that you CAN extinguish the gasoline.

As for lithium battery - once it starts burning the only strategy is to cool it and hope it doesn't reheat enough to start burning again.

Ever seen procedures for electric vehicle fires? That basically involves pouring water on it, until battery fully discharges.

Galaxy Note 7's problem was bad battery design (too low tolerances and damage to the battery), and as soon as you get a short - you get thermal runaway, and ALL the energy that was stored in the battery will turn into heat.

There are LiFePO4 batteries, that do not get thermal runaway, but they have about 1/2 of energy density or regular lithium ones.

Also - as an owner of electric scooter - I have seen results of battery fires, thankfully not mine (be it from damage, or from charging issues). And I have seen idiots with lighters at gas stations.

Compare this: https://youtu.be/CzPjCvQ9kNQ?t=169 or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCOYOLqx7Sk with average lithium battery fire.

PS. If there will be self-healing solid state batteries with high energy density and high current capacity - I am all for it, but not yet, as far as I have seen.
Post Reply

Return to “Archive Technical Help”