Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Energie regenerabila produsa de sistemeintegrate cu pile de combustie
Crina S Ilea PhDCrina S. Ilea, [email protected]
ContentContent
• Introduction
Hi t f P t t h• History of Prototech
• Fuel Cells & renewable energy Applications
• Fuel Cells for Space Applications
F l C ll f Oil d G A li ti• Fuel Cells for Oil and Gas Applications
• Solid Oxide Fuel Cell manufacturers
• PEM Fuel Cell manufacturers
Crina Silvia Ilea (n. Suciu)Crina Silvia Ilea (n. Suciu)
• 2010 – present Researcher, Prototech AS, Norway
• 2008‐2010 Post‐Doc researcher, Prototech, AS Norway
• 2004‐2007 PhD, Institute for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Norway
• 2000‐2001 Master of Science, Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, , y y g g,Babes‐Bolyai University, Cluj‐Napoca, Romania
• 1995‐2000 Bachelor of Science, Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Babes‐Bolyai University, Cluj‐Napoca, RomaniaBabes Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca, Romania
• 2011‐2014 Associate Professor (20%) Institute for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Norway
• 2001 2009 Assistant Professor Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering• 2001‐2009 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Babes‐Bolyai University, Cluj‐Napoca, Romania
• 2011 Prize – “Norsk Hydrogenforums prise for excellent PhD work for 2010”
• European Commission Evaluator: FP7 2011, H2020 2015, 2016
• Publications: 2 books, 3 patents, > 10 peer‐reviewed scientifc papers, PlenaryLectures, Invited lectures, Posters
• Supervision: 1 PhD, 7 MSc, 5 BSc.
Prototech in brief
• Christian Michelsen InstituteChristian Michelsen Institute• Founded in 1988
• Two departments:P t & S i (SOFC PEM‐ Parts & Services (SOFC, PEM,
Energy conversion, Energy optimization)‐ Research & Development p(Machining of complex structures, Small and medium series, Prototype productionHi h lit t
Space & Energy
High quality measurement laboratory)
History of SOFC module3 kW CHP
Kollsnes, Bergen, 2008
10 kW - Mjøllner
SOFC, 1991-1997 MF Vågen 12 kW HT-PEMBergen, 2010Bergen, 2010
20kW SOFC ModuleZEG Power, 2014
5
Cells and stacksTwin stack 2kW
InterconnectInterconnect
Cell
12 Twin stack 20kW 1 kW Stack
Fuel Cells vs. Electrolysis
Fuel Cell ElectrolyserFuel Cell2 H2 + O2 ‐> 2 H2O + electric power
Electrolyserelectric power + H2O ‐> 2 H2 + O2
Space p
Short stack / long term measurements
Measured OCV: 0.901 V Calculated OCV: 0.904 V
H2: 600ml/min, CO2: 600 ml/min, Air: 13.6 l/min
Two Cells 94 cm2Two Cells, 94 cm2
25 A = 0.26 A/cm2
2‐cell short stackMaterials: LSM/3YSZ/NiMaterials: LSM/3YSZ/NiInterconnects: LaCrO3
T = 900oCI = 0 21 A/cm2I = 0.21 A/cm2100 hoursDegradation: ∼ 1%/khour
Mjøllner project (1997)j p j ( )
1200
1400
1200
1400Power (W)
Temp (°C)
600
800
1000
600
800
1000
empe
ratu
re (o
C)
Pow
er (W
)
0
200
400
0
200
400
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Te
Time (hours)
BKK pilot plant ‐ SOFC for CHP (2008) • 3+3 kW SOFC plant for combined heat and power
• Operating on natural gas at Kollsnes Industrial Park
• 1800 hours of operation
• Max. temperature ~800 ºC
• Stable SOFC performance under regular operating conditions
T‐Cell (2016)
• FP7 – FCH‐JU
C th (G ) t• Certh (Gr) + partners
• Triode operation (3‐electrode SOFC)
C ll i h ili l d• Cells with auxiliary electrode
• Aim: Increase performance, tollerance to sulphur avoid sootingsulphur, avoid sooting
• Stackable repetable parts
T i d ll ti t j tif• Triode cell operation must justify:– Loss due to reversed current
– Lower active area and higher current densitiesLower active area and higher current densities through other part of the stack
– Higher complexity for production
– Reversible electrodes
RoxSolidCell (2017)
• Eurostar project
• Testing of redox stableTesting of redox stable anode supported cells
• Technology from Fiaxell• Technology from FiaxellSwitzerland
Oth t UiA• Other partners: UiA(No), EPFL (Ch), CNRS‐IMN (F ) CTI (F )IMN (Fr), CTI (Fr)
BioZEG (Zero Emission Gas)20142014
‐ CH2P from Biogas‐ Phase one: 30 kW H2‐ Phase two: 30 kW H2 + 20 kW SOFC‐ Hybrid SOFC + burner‐ >70% efficiency
The footprint of the box (l x b x h) is 2024 mm x 1424 mm x 1565 mm.mm x 1424 mm x 1565 mm.24 stacks SOFC hot box
770
780 @ 36 hours• P = 4100 kW
740
750
760
ature (oC)
P 4100 kW• 53 V x 77.3 A• FU: 54%
720
730
Tempera
• Stack: 26.5 V x 6.44 A• Cell: 0.883 V
38
700
710
32.0 33.0 34.0 35.0 36.0 37.0 38.0
• T = 753oC
@ 37 3 h
32
34
36
tage
@ 37.3 hours• P = 7000 kW• 105 2 V x 66 5 A
28
30
Stack Vo
l • 105.2 V x 66.5 A• FU: 62%• Stack: 26 3 V x 11 1 A
24
26
32.0 33.0 34.0 35.0 36.0 37.0 38.0
hours
Stack: 26.3 V x 11.1 A• Cell: 0.877 V• T = 761oC
BioCellus (2007)
woodgas
1. Necessary gas quality for a safe operation2. Gas cleaning unit built3. Integration of the biomass ggasifier with the SOFC4. layers of fuel cells alternate with layers of heat pipes,1kW planar stack
heatTested on wood gas, stable performanceAverage power = 300 W
World first fuel cell tested using wood gas Max. power output = 700 W
Maritime ‐ REMKOF (2009)
• Demonstration of a HTPEM‐driven ferry boat in Bergen harbour
• 12 kW HTPEM + batteries, H2 in metal hydride tanks
• Aspects:p
• Green fuel reforming
• CO2 absorption system and thermal integration
• 5 kW APU for small ships integrated and tested in real marine environment
• Design and model a 100 kW demo power system for ship propulsion
High Speed passenger vessel (2014)– Examine possibility of using H2 as fuel for ships (offshore supply ships, ferries, passenger
vessels, etc.)
– Used existing high speed passenger vessel as basis for specific case
– Next step will be to develop full scale demo
(2016)
(2015)
https://vimeo.com/77206272
Green Fish Farms (2016)
Demonstration of a closed lool H2/O2 fuel cell system(2014)(2014)
Sun PhaseEclipse
‐ Contractor: European Space Agency‐ Aim: design manufacture and set up a closed loop regenerative fuel cell system for a‐ Aim: design, manufacture and set up a closed loop regenerative fuel cell system for a telecom satellite, and test it to represent 15 years of the satellite in orbit‐ Resume: H2 and O2 are fuel for the FC, generated from H2O by an electrolyzer using solar power and converted to H2O by the FC in a closed loop.power and converted to H2O by the FC in a closed loop.
1 Commercial HTPEM fuel cell module1. Commercial HTPEM fuel cell module• 4kW electrical power• Tested with circulated pure oxygen, and realistic eclipse cycles• Operating conditions: 160C & 1atm Operating conditions: 160C & 1atm• Result: completed 52 out of 250 cycles, stopped due to membrane malfunction.• Cause: improper operating procedures/conditions
2. Liquid‐cooled bipolar plates were developedMaterial selection: testing of steel and graphite composites bipolar plates
Short stack with steel bipolar plates3. Design and construction of closed loop H2/O2 RFCS bread board demonstratorFC i d i i hFC incorporated in to a pressure tightenclosureUnitised Fuel Cell modified to dedicated PEM electrolyserelectrolyser1 kW class, 38 cells, graphite composite bipolar plates, external O2 manifold
Short stack with graphite compositebipolar plates
Very stable and reliable system performance. Operated in a closed loop, recirculating the reactantsFuelCell stack performance decrease amounted for 8,4% after 1362 cycles, or 0,0062% per cycle, which is better then the target of 0,01% U per cycleElectrolyser stack did not show noticeable decrease in performance during the test periodOnly slight current differences due to temperature fluctuations
1362 on‐off fuel cell cycles performed successfully along with approximately 2700 Electrolyser on‐off1362 on off fuel cell cycles performed successfully along with approximately 2700 Electrolyser on off cycles•Roundtrip efficiency under test conditions of 45 %•System efficiency 45% (can be significantly improved by new materials, pressure and lower electrolysis l )voltage)
HTPEM FC stack development (2015)‐ Design, build and test HTPEM FC stacks operating at 160‐200oC
‐ Durable, compact, lightweight design
‐ Thin (0,1‐0,2 mm) metallic plates
Methane Pyrolysis (2016)
External
NG (CH )
NG
SOFC
electricity
source
NG (CH4)pyrolysis
C
Gasification
heat
H2
CO2
Storage CO2
2CO
electricity
SOFC
H20Air O2
Main purpose: utilize natural gas (NG) for power production and co-production of H2while capturing CO2 in the process. p g 2 p
ACT – Accelerating CCS TechnologiesCountry Partner Contribution
GermanyForschungszentrum Jülich GmbH Projektträger Jülich (FZJ/PtJ)
€6 M
Centre for Research and Technology HellasGreece
Centre for Research and Technology Hellas (CERTH)
€0
The NetherlandsMinistry of Economic Affairs/Rijksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland (RVO)
€4 M
NorwayThe Research Council of Norway (RCN) and
( )€6 MNorway
Gassnova SF (GN)€6 M
RomaniaExecutive Agency for Higher Education, Research and Innovation Funding (UEFISCDI)
€1 M
SpainSpanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO)
€0.3 MCompetitiveness (MINECO)
SwitzerlandSwiss Federal Department for the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications (DETEC)
€4 M
TurkeyThe Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK)
€2 My ( )
United KingdomDepartment of Energy and Climate Change (DECC)
€5.5 M
http://www.act‐ccs.eu/ACT is a European initiative to establish CO2 capture and storage (CCS) as a tool to combat global warming.2 p g ( ) g gUpcoming ACT Call to be published 7 June 2016
Solid Oxide Fuel Cells for Mars (2016)Climate: ‐153oC to 20oCAtmosphere: 95% CO2, 6 mbar
Water cooled top cover
SOFC used for energy storage with large storage capacity utilizing onsite CO2 as reactant.Reversible fuel cell operation, CO/CO2/O2 as reactantsOperating at 900 oC
f b
200oC Zone Current collection
20-30V
Storage of CO at 10 bars
Stack pressure rods
900oC, 10bar
<< 100 mbar zon
Oxygen inlet
500oC,
Insulation
200oC Zone Water cooled bottom cover
Regenerative energy storage system for l ( )space exploration missions (2015)
Aim: development and testing of a 1 kW reversible solid oxide fuel cell RSOFC consists of two 30 layer CFY‐stacks from Plansee/IKTS St k t d t f h th ith f l if ldStacks were mounted on top of each other with a common fuel manifold and an external air manifold designed for both stacks Tests: ‐ SOFC/SOEC mode (1000h)
‐ 2 full cycles starting with CO2 / CO as fuely g /
A reversible fuel cell breadboard has been tested for more than 1300 hours:
‐ The system has successfully produced its own fuel starting from H2O and CO2.The system has successfully produced its own fuel starting from H2O and CO2.
‐ 1 kW power for 4 hours has been achieved for 16 cycles.
‐ 500 W power for 6 hours has been achieved for 37 cycles.
l l f h d f k h h h h b h d f l‐ Electrolysis of hydrogen for 7 kWh within 7 hours has been achieved for 33 cycles.
‐ Changing between full power in fuel cell mode and full power in electrolysis mode in
66 minutes.
‐ No degradation observed for the first 830 hours, discontinuous degradation around
830 hours giving 8.5 % lower performance after 1000 hours operation. 550
490
510
530
ack voltage
y = ‐0.0086x + 527.02
y = ‐0.0024x + 524.16
450
470
460 500 540 580 620 660 700 740 780 820 860
Sta
Time (hours)
y = 0.0099x ‐ 688.46
‐640
‐620
‐600
W)
Time (hours)
Power 3 Power 4
y = 0.012x ‐ 708.26740
‐720
‐700
‐680
‐660
Stack po
wer (W
‐760
‐740
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Time (hours)
Power 3 Power 4
CHEOP – Clean Highly EfficientCHEOP Clean Highly Efficient Offshore Power
• 16 mNOK JIP‐project (Research Council of Norway (RCN) 50% Petromaks 2)(RCN) 50% ‐ Petromaks 2)
• Statoil and Shell are industry partners• Petrobras, ExxonMobil and FMC have shown greatPetrobras, ExxonMobil and FMC have shown great
interest in the project
• Develop an optimal fuel‐cell stack – ideal both offshore and onshore
• Main goal is to produce an optimised 10 kW fuel cellstack, which will be the main building block in theSOFC MW system
3636
SOFC MW‐system
Subsea Fuel Cell Concept 12MW Electricity output (modular) 12 MWElectrical efficency (net) >65%Natural gas input energy 18.4 MW thNatural gas input flow 1600 Sm3/hrModule size 2 MWNo of stack boxes each module 204Power each stack box 10 kW
Subsea power from Fuel Cells
• Module based (2MW)Module based (2MW)• 60‐85% Power efficiency• Runs on local NG• Redundancy reduction
d• Low maintenance need• Few movable parts
32MW Topside Concept32MW Topside Concept
AfterburnerExhaust
7 MWel
Afterburner
Heat
Carbon rich reformate
15 MWheat25 MWel
HeatReformer with H2
membrane
NG + H2O
H2
H2O
• Module based• 60 85% Power efficiency including heat capture
Advantages of hybrid concept:Weight and cost reduction due to integration of the PEM‐system• 60‐85% Power efficiency including heat capture
• Redundancy reduction compared to gas turbines• Low maintenance need• Few movable parts
Highly efficient reformation of NG utilizing excess heat from the SOFCExhaust suitable for CO2 captureFew movable parts
Technical specificationsElectricity output (modules of 3MW) 32 MWElectrical efficency (net) >60%Natural gas input energy 53 MW thNatural gas input flow 23000 Sm3/hrHeat output (oil at 160C) 15 MW
Mass 130t
Size Similar to turbine skidSize Similar to turbine skid
Solid Oxide Fuel Cell manufacturers( )• FZJülich (D)
– Short stack test for 40.000 hours (5 years)
– 20 kW system – one year operation
– Prototech and FZ Jülich is partners in H2020 project
• Sunfire (D)• Sunfire (D)
– 30 kW SOFC module
– Focus on power to gas/liquid
• SolidPower (It)
– 2.5 kW CHP for demonstration purposes2.5 kW CHP for demonstration purposes
– High production capacity (~ 5MW/year)
– Prototech and SOFC Power is partners in FCH‐JU project
• Bloom (US) – 200‐250 kW commercial SOFC energy servers
– Several multi‐MW plants delivered
• Plansee/IKTS (AU/D) ‐ Stack production
PEM Fuel Cell technology manufacturersgy
• Nedstack (NL)
– PEM
– 2‐10kW stacks
• Largest module produced: 1MW
– >20.000 hours proven lifetime
• Advent (GR/US)( / )
– HT‐PEM
– 20.000 hours proven lifetime
– Size according to customer specificationsSi e according to customer specifications
• Ballard (CA)
– PEMPEM
– > 215MW of products deployed worldwide
• Serenergy (DK)Serenergy (DK)
– Produce HT‐PEM stacks and systems
– Stacks are scalable from 1‐6kW
Test program: i) Fuel cell mode: 0.5 kW for 5 hours followed by 1 kW for 4 hours; ii) Electrolyzer mode: Fuel for 7 kWh of electricity produced in 7 hours;ii) Electrolyzer mode: Fuel for 7 kWh of electricity produced in 7 hours; iii) Continuous testing for 1000 hours with less than 10% degradation, and iv) Two full electrolysis / fuel cell cycles starting with CO2 and producing CO as fuel.
800
825
850
875
30
32
34
36
erature
voltage
y = ‐0.0242x + 287.76
y = ‐0.0441x + 309.8
220
240
260
280
300
Stack p
ower (W
)
700
725
750
775
22
24
26
28
575 580 585 590 595 600 605 610 615 620 625
Tempe
Stack v
Time (hours)
Stack 3 Stack 4 Temp
200
220
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (hours)
Power 3 Power 4
550Stack 3 Stack 4 Temp
10
20
30
40
0
500
1 000
1 500ent (A)
ower (W)
y = ‐0.0086x + 527.02
y = ‐0.0024x + 524.16470
490
510
530
Stack v
oltage
‐30
‐20
‐10
0
‐2 000
‐1 500
‐1 000
‐500
575 580 585 590 595 600 605 610 615 620 625
Curre
Stack po
Time (hours)Power Current
450460 500 540 580 620 660 700 740 780 820 860
Time (hours)
Power 3 Power 4
y = 0.0099x ‐ 688.46‐620
‐600
Power Current
Stack voltage, current, power and temperature during twofull cycles
y = 0.012x ‐ 708.26
‐760
‐740
‐720
‐700
‐680
‐660
‐640
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Stack p
ower (W
)
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Time (hours)
Power 3 Power 4
Power vs. time at 10.4 A (top), 20.9 A (middle) and ‐20.2 A (down)
Fuel cell performance on CO/CO2
Hydrogen CO/CO2 Hydrogen
10
20
35
40
ege
‐10
0
25
30
Temperature
Stack voltag
‐20201260 1280 1300 1320
Time (hours)
St k 4 C tStack 4 Current
Electrolysis – a voltage has increased from 34.7 V at ‐20 A to 36.5 V at 17.5 A when H2O is replaced with CO2. ‐ increase can neither be explained by differences in temperature, reactant composition nor reactant utilisation thus it is a result of slower reaction rates for CO than for Hreactant utilisation, thus it is a result of slower reaction rates for CO than for H2.
‐ using 28.8 V as OCV, the area specific resistance (ASR) increased from 1.25 Ω⋅cm2 to 1.86 Ω⋅cm2, giving an increase of 0.6 Ω⋅cm2.
Fuel cell mode ‐ performed at 23.3 V and 7.0 A, which is significantly lower than during hydrogen operation, 25.5 V and 10 A.
‐ Calculation of theoretical OCV for the different fuel composition gives 30.2 V for 80 % H2in steam while only 27 8 V for 40 % CO in CO Hence calculating the ASR values give us a value of 2 0in steam while only 27.8 V for 40 % CO in CO2. Hence, calculating the ASR values give us a value of 2.0 Ω⋅cm2 for H2 operation and 2.6 Ω⋅cm2 for CO operation. This represents exactly the same increase as observed during electrolysis mode
