You are browsing the archives of solid oxide fuel cell.

Oxygen (red spheres) migrates from one vacancy to another inside the scandia-doped cubic zirconia. In this new SOFC material, the oxygen must brush past cations (marked by the letter E).

The DOE Pulse reported that, using specialized cubic zirconia, scientists from Nanjing Normal University in China and Pacific Northwest National Lab created a membrane that could drop the temperature inside solid oxide fuel cells. Lowering the temperature means these cells could be built from less expensive materials.

Currently, the temperature inside SOFCs is about 1,000°C. With this much heat, the cells must be constructed using very durable and expensive ceramics. The team, led by NNU’s ed by Zhongging Yu, says its new scandia-doped cubic zirconia can work at temperatures as low as 650°C.

Using oxygen-plasma-assisted molecular beam epitaxy, the researchers grew scandia-stabilized zirconia films on sapphire substrates. The films were examined using x-ray diffraction, electron spectroscopy and microscopy.

The team used theoretical calculations and computational models to determined that nanoscale, nanosecond interactions occurring in the scandia-doped cubic film conducted oxygen faster than the yttrium doping in current electrolytes.

They say their work provides a fundamental understanding of how ions move in scandia-doped zirconia, and shows the material is very stable. “Our integrated approach takes the science to the next level,” says Theva Thevuthasan, who worked on the project and currently oversees the deposition and microfabrication capability at Environmental Molecular Science Lab at PNNL.

According to a PNNL news release, the group also has high hopes for another SOFC material made from nanolayers of zirconia and ceria.

Share

The California Public Utility Commission voted yesterday to approve projects by Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison to install utility-owned solid oxide and molten-carbonate fuel cells on several University of California and California State University campuses.

PG&E’s $20. 3 million project consists of the installation and operation of three fuel cell generating facilities with a total capacity of 3.0 megawatts at two California State University campuses - CSU East Bay and San Francisco State University. SF State would get both a 1.4 MW molten carbonate fuel cell and a 200-kW solid oxide fuel cell (made by Bloom Energy). CSU East Bay would host a 1.4-MW molten carbonate fuel cell. The molten carbonate fuel cells (made by FuelCell Energy) would be combined-heat-and-power units that would aid the campus’ thermal load, such as heating the Olympic-sized swimming pool at CSU East Bay. Water by-product would be used for landscape irrigation. PG&E says the plants have an estimated useful life of 10 years.

PG&E told the CPUC that it plans to coordinate with the two universities to implement educational outreach programs to maximize the educational benefits of the fuel cell facilities. For example, PG&E would install an educational kiosk at each campus, coordinate signage and educational material, help develop class curriculum, host tours of the facilities, and facilitate educational and community outreach. CSU East Bay says it plans to develop multidisciplinary curriculum and research-based learning opportunities centered on the fuel cell system. SF State claims it will use the fuel cell project  to enhance its graduate and undergraduate business, engineering and environmental studies programs in sustainability.

SCE’s $19.1 million project is similar to PG&E’s. SCE will install, own and operate three fuel cell units (makers unknown) with a combined capacity of up to 3.0 MW on three other California state university campuses. CSU San Bernardino and CSU Long Beach would each get a CHP system of 1 to 1.4 MW. UC Santa Barbara would get one 200-kW solid oxide fuel cell that would demonstrate an electricity-only high-efficiency SOFC where the waste heat is used in the generation process.

These projects didn’t get approved without resistance. The CPUC’s Division of Ratepayer Advocates and The Utility Reform Network protested several points. For example, SCE requested authorization to use $10.8 million in unspent and uncommitted Self Generation Incentive Program funds to pay for 50 percent of their capital costs.

The CPUC said, “Nice try SCE, but no dice.” That’s because it agreed with DRA and TURN that the SGIP monies are earmarked for distributed energy systems installed on the customer’s side of the utility meter and to achieve “market transformation.” The two groups also noted that because utilities, such as SCE, are supposed to be administering the SGIP program, opening the door to them to tap these funds would create a huge conflict of interest.

DRA and TURN also noted that the small scale of these projects would do little, if anything, to advance fuel cell technology. Finally, DRA questioned the educational value of the projects and cited the lack of supportive evidence about how the fuel cells will be used to further class work, and contended that it would be more economical to transport students to visit an installed fuel cell at another site.

As the New York Times reports, the decision also overturns a March ruling by administrative law judge Dorothy J. Duda who found the cost of the projects, which ultimately are financed by the utilities’ customers, to be excessive. “It is unreasonable to spend three times the price paid to renewable generation for the proposed Fuel Cell Projects, which are nonrenewable and fueled by natural gas,” Duda wrote in her decision.

Share

According to a new report from Lux Research, the market for batteries, supercapacitors and fuel cells targeting transportation and smart grid applications will more than double from $21.4 billion in 2010 to $44.4 billion in 2015.

ACerS’ upcoming Ceramic Leadership Summit will introduce key figures in the energy storage technology sector that will expound on how to harness that $44 billion. The Energy Innovations track on Tuesday, June 10, will include talks on enabling a nuclear renaissance, current and future prospects of fuel cells, the strategic field of energy conversion. A representative from United Technologies will also present an industry perspective on energy storage, SOFCs and energy and emission reduction in gas turbines.

The Lux report, titled “Emerging Technologies Power a $44 Billion Opportunity for Transportation and Grid,” analyzes the prospects for several technologies, including batteries, supercapacitors, fuel cells in transportation and storage, distributed generation and transmission and distribution technologies on the power grid.

Some key findings are listed in the summary:

• Electric vehicle storage technology markets will nearly double from $7.7 billion in 2010 to $14.5 billion in 2015, a CAGR of 13.5 percent. Surprisingly, markets for electronic bike (e-bike) and scooter batteries will lead the charge, growing from $6.4 billion this year to $10.9 billion in 2015, a CAGR of 11 percent.
• Lead-acid batteries will drive 93 percent of China’s e-bikes in 2010, and dominate the micro-hybrid automotive market. However, lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries in e-bikes are growing fast, and have gained further momentum from plug-in and electric vehicles. The upshot: With a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 22 percent through 2015, Li-ion battery markets are growing almost three times faster than those for lead-acid.
• Markets for emerging technologies in the power grid will skyrocket from $13.7 billion in 2010 to $30 billion in 2015, a CAGR of 17 percent. Here the largest market is the smart-grid, which will grow at an explosive CAGR of 23 percent, from $5.4 billion this year to $15.8 billion in 2015.

Share

Ann Arbor-based Adaptive Materials Inc, a specialist in making microtubular solid oxide fuel cells, announced yesterday that it has won $3 million in new funding through Michigan’s Centers of Energy Excellence Program.

AMI, until now, has focused most of its efforts on military uses for its SOFCs, such as soldier-worn units, power sources for unmanned vehicles and field uses. The company has both 50- and 250-watt SOFCs that can be fuel with off-the-shelf propane and butane canisters.

While AMI’s business plan has always mentioned applications in the recreational vehicles, boating and medical devices markets, the reality is that it has been easier for military customers to justify the relatively high costs of these portable power devices.

However, a press release from AMI notes that, “The company will use the funding to support the commercialization of its fuel cells within the consumer leisure market.”

AMI may be on to something. It has always struck me that there is some pretty strong logic behind developing small SOFC products whose form factor incorporates safe, cheap and easy to find fuel cartridges. Generations of campers, for example, have grown up using portable stoves and lamps that use these small gas canisters.

Michelle Crumm, AMI chief business officer, says, “Funding from COEE provides the extra boost we need to break into the consumer market and deliver a truly game-changing technology. . . By focusing our technology on readily-available fuels, Adaptive Materials solved a problem associated with fuel cells: Consumers could certainly find need for a fuel cell, but no fuel to actually sustain the unit.”

Presumably, AMI will use the funds to continue to drive down the production costs of making their SOFCs. The company uses a unique co-extrusion method to form its microtubular SOFCs. Earlier this year, in the pages of ACerS’ International Journal of Applied Ceramic Technology, the University of Birmingham’s (U.K.) Kevin Kendall praised recent developments in microtubular SOFC science and applications:

Significant progress is being made in the development of microtubular SOFCs. Since its invention in the early 1990s, information about its benefits has been disseminated, leading to the start-up of several companies interested in applications from laptop power supplies to combined heat and power to transport and APUs.

Plastic extrusion is the main method for producing microtubular cells. This is an economic process, which can lead to high-quality ceramics with good strength and Weibull modulus. Co-extrusion is also a promising possibility that could produce one-step processing of cells.

A key benefit of microtubular SOFC is the increased power density, inversely proportional to diameter. Power densities of 1 kW/L are possible but the number of cell connections rises with the square of power density and could become the limiting factor. Thermal shock resistance of microtubes is many orders of magnitude better than that of planar SOFCs. Ramp rates of 8000 K/min are possible.

Aaron Crumm, Adaptive Materials’ chief visionary officer and co-founder, along with John W. Halloran, published an excellent paper in ACerS’ Journal of the American Ceramic Society back in 1998 about innovative methods to micromanufacture complex ceramic–metal structures:

These structures are fabricated by multiple pass co-extrusion of a feedrod comprised of several powder-filled thermoplastic compounds. The compounds contain either ceramic, metal or fugitive powders. To illustrate the capabilities of microfabrication, a demonstration part containing lead manganese niobate-lead titanate ceramic and silver palladium was fabricated. The final part was microconfigured, with a fenestrated structure containing 3110 repeat units per square centimeter. The repeat unit feature sizes were 15 and 5 µm for the ceramic and electrode, respectively. Microfabrication by co-extrusion is proposed as a fabrication technique for the production of smart structures and materials.

Illustration from Crumm and Halloran paper. Credit: JACerS

The COEE program, administered by the Michigan Economic Development Corp., supports the development, growth and sustainability of alternative energy sectors throughout the state. The COEE program focuses on where the state has competitive advantages in areas of the workforce, intellectual property and natural resources but where funding is required to overcome technical and supply-chain hurdles that could prevent or stall the commercialization process.

Share

(Either JavaScript is not active or you are using an old version of Adobe Flash Player. Please install the newest Flash Player.)

Jeff Stevenson is a Laboratory Fellow in the Energy Materials Group at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and has been working on SOFCs for more than a decade. This video, shot at the recent ICACC’10 conference in Daytona Beach, Fla., provides some history on the development of these fuel cells, and discusses some of the remaining science and manufacturing challenges that are hindering their widespread commercialization.

Stevenson also discusses some of the work being done by the Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance, a government-industry collaboration, that is working on methods to employ SOFCs that can make cleaner use of coal and other fossil fuels for energy generation, and describes some of the “early adopters” of SOFC systems, such as systems being used for auxiliary power units (APUs) used by some tractor-trailer operators.

Besides working at PNNL, Stevenson serves as an associate editor of the Journal of the American Ceramic Society and reviews and edits manuscripts in the field of SOFCs.

7 minutes.

Share