Upload
malo
View
43
Download
7
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Fuel Cells An Emerging High-Technology Industry. Rodger McKain, PhD 4/22/2006. Energy Sets the Scene. Setting the Scene for Fuel Cells: Petroleum supply, consumption, and imports, 1970-2025 (million barrels per day). 13 million Bbls/d. US EIA 2005. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Fuel Cells An Emerging High-Technology
IndustryRodger McKain, PhD
4/22/2006
Energy Sets the Scene
Setting the Scene for Fuel Cells: Petroleum supply, consumption, and imports, 1970-2025
(million barrels per day)
13 millionBbls/d
US EIA 2005
Setting the Scene for Fuel Cells: Petroleum supply, consumption, and imports, 1970-2025
(million barrels per day)
60% 71%
US EIA 2005
Primary energy use by fuel, 2003-2025 (quadrillion Btu)
1 quad = 170 million bbls= 1 trillion SCF (nat gas)= 45 million tons (coal)
Fuel Cells:
An Old Technology Provides New Solutions
First Communication of Fuel Cell Related Phenomena
“I cannot but regard the experiment as an important one…”
William Grove to Michael Faraday October 22, 1842
SOFC Fuel Cell Operation
2 H+ + O2- H2O + 2 e-
2O2-
H2
½ O 2 + 2 e-
H2O + 2 e-
O2-O2
H2 2 H+ + 2e-
2e-
Solid Oxide Electrolyte – ionic conducting
membrane
External electrical conducting circuit
Porous perovskite cathode
Porous nickel-cermet anode
Fuel Cell Operation
Source: U.S. Fuel Cell Council
Incr
easi
ng
Tem
per
atu
re
H2 + ½ O2 H2O
H2O
(Ionic transport)
O + 2e_ O
=
H2 + O= _ 2e_
H2O
Attributes of Fuel Cells
AFC AFC PACFPACF PEMPEM MCFCMCFC SOFCSOFC
ElectrolyteElectrolyte KOH KOH Phosphoric Phosphoric SulfonicSulfonic Molten Molten YY22OO33-ZrO-ZrO22 AcidAcid Acid Acid Carbonate Carbonate CeramicCeramic
Polymer SaltPolymer Salt
TemperatureTemperature 10010000CC 200 20000CC 80 80 00CC 650 65000CC 800-1000800-100000CC FuelFuel H H22 H H22 H H22 H H22/CO/CO H H22/CO/CO
Efficiency (HEfficiency (H22 fuel) fuel) 60% 60% 55% 55% 60% 60% 55% 55% 55% 55%
(NG fuel) -- (NG fuel) -- 40% 40% 35% 35% 50% 50% 50% 50%
PollutionPollution Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low
HydrocarbonHydrocarbon No No Difficult Difficult Difficult Difficult Yes Yes Yes YesFuel UseFuel Use
Start-UpStart-Up Fast Fast Moderate Moderate Fast Slow Fast Slow Slow Slow
Zirconia
Fuel Cell Power System
Fuel cell StackFuel cell StackSub AssemblySub Assembly
Useful heat
AirAirAirAir
FuelFuelFuelFuelA.C. Power
HeatHeat
ManagementManagement
PowerPowerConditionerConditioner
FuelFuelProcessorProcessor
ControlsControls
Fuel Cell Impact (from Hydrogen Economy Statements)
– Clean environment– Reduced Global Warming– Energy independence– National Infrastructure Security– Low cost, reliable electrical power
Contaminant
Average U.S. Utility
Emissions(lbs per megawatt-hour)
ONSI PC25 200 kW NG Fuel Cell
(lbs per megawatt-hour)
Nitrogen Oxides 7.65 0.016
Carbon monoxide 0.34 0.023
Reactive organic gases
0.34 0.0004
Sulfur oxides 16.1 0
Particulates (PM10) 0.46 0
Regulated Emissions Comparison:Coal Fired Utility vs. PA Fuel Cell
Fuel Cell System Trends Compared with other Distributed Generation Technologies
10
30
20
40
50
60
70
1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 500,000
Ele
ctr
ical
Ge
ner
atio
n
Eff
icie
ncy
%L
HV
Size in kW
PEM Fuel Cell
Carbonate Fuel Cell
IC Engines
0
PAFC
Microturbines
Industrial Gas Turbine
Aero Gas Turbines
Residential Commercial Industrial Wholesale
Solid Oxide Fuel Cells
Combined Cycle
Stirling Engine
Hydrogen Production
• Principle Sources of Hydrogen– Hydrocarbons (natural gas and crude oil)– Water
• Conversion Technology– Steam Methane Reforming (commercial) – Water Electrolysis (commercial)– Methane Pyrolysis (small scale)– Water-Sulfur-Iodide Process (small scale)
Hydrogen Production Dilemma
• 13 million barrels crude oil per day used in transportation – equivalent to 1.46 billion pounds per day hydrogen
• This would require doubling the total US power production (850 GWe to 1780 GWe) if hydrogen were produced by conventional electrolysis. (assume 1 MW per 1000 lbs and efficiency improvements)
OR• This would require 23 trillion cubic feet of natural gas per
year - approximately 110% of the 2002 total US consumption, nearly doubling the total natural gas requirement.
Hydrogen Production Solutions
• Near Term (small volumes)– Conventional technology distributed to point of use
• Fueling stations (hydrocarbon reforming or water electrolysis)
• Long Term (large volumes)– High Temperature gas Cooled Nuclear Reactor –
boost electrolysis efficiency from 20+% to 40+%. (Reduce power requirement by half)
– FutureGen – Hydrogen and power from coal– Solar Cell Direct Electrolysis
100Energy Units
IC Engine40%
Power Train37.5% 15
6020
Idling5
Friction
40
40Energy Units
Fuel Cell50%
Direct Drive75% 15
200
Idling5
Friction
20
Are Fuel Cell Powered Cars Really More Efficient?
Conventional Car
Fuel Cell Car
- 60 UnitsH2 production
Technology Commercialization Conundrum
• Public Expectations are high• But, Success Rates are less than 30%• And, Success generally takes longer and costs more
• Fuel Cell system OEM’s will determine the future• Much more investment is required• Development phase is more costly than anticipated• Strategic development is likely to dominate• But, focus is on suppliers and entrepreneurs
• Basis for a hard, clear-eyed review of the fuel cell opportunity • Role of OEM’s• Public expectations• Government and NPO involvement
When Will Fuel Cells Be Available?(An Ohio View)
Source: Projections represent Taratec Corporation’s estimate of market activity”based on input from industry analysts and information provided in executive interviews.
Today’s Technology Cost Comparison
Watts Sector Application $/kW
0.1 – 1.0 Biomedical Autonomous power for 105
sensors and implants
1 – 100 Electronics Battery replacement 104
100 - 10,000 Communications Battery replacement 103 – 104
Cell tower stationary power
5,000 - Transportation Propulsion 101 – 102
100,000 Auxiliary Power Units
> 10,000 Stationary power Emergency backup 102 – 103
grid supplement
Sales Projection (Ohio 2004 Fuel Cell Road Map)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Year
Bill
ion
s, $
Market Projections
Military/Aerospace
Vehicle
Stationary
Auxiliary
Portable
Portable Power leads the way
Public Expectations
• Set by “soft industry” successes– Dominated by services sector and incremental
changes to existing businesses• Low development costs• Investment usually for revenue growth• Less than 5 years for acceptable ROI• Satisfying unmet market needs (existing markets)• Returns through M&A’s or IPO’s• Not universally applicable
Years Since Commercial Introduction
Time to Max.TV – 30 yrsColor TV – 10 yrsElectricity – 75 yrsAutomobile – 80 yrsTelephone – 90 yrsCell phone – 20 yrsPC – 20 yrsInternet – 15 yrs
Market Penetration(Per Cent Households)
Fuel Cell vs. Service Sector Commercialization
• Some Fuel Cells are here today– Battery replacement– Military– Space Shuttle– Back-up power
But, to impact domestic energy consumption:• FC’s require
– 10-100X development funding $100-200 million per product (from now)
– 10X development time (20 yrs)But, FC’s offer similar market opportunities ($20
billion) to service sector businesses
Fuel Cell Commercialization
Service Sector
Log
[$]
Log [yrs]
Fuel Cells
Cost Comparison
DC
F (
mil
lio
n $
)
-200
0
2000
Yrs from 2006
Fuel CellsService
2010
Differentiators• Infrastructure• Capital intensity• Market Creation• Diversity• Competitive Alternatives
Service Sector vs. Fuel Cell Commercialization
Fuel Cell Cost Pyramid(DOE)
Stack
Hot Box Reformer, Recuperator
Manifold, Filter, enclosure/insulation
Controls/Power ElectronicsInverter, DC Boost, Sensors, Actuators
Balance of PlantPackaging, Air/Fuel Handling
Cost Contribution$/kW
Industrial Segments
184
325
46
128
Now Future
683
48%
27%
19%
6%
118
109
110
44 12%
28%
28%
30%
382
Fuel Cell Business Creation Gap
• This time around----20-year development cycle (profitable industry following silicon chip history)
• Suppliers betting on system integrators• System integrators require large infusions of
capital to advance to product stage…the bottleneck in the cycle...returns are still beyond the horizon.
• Gap: Financing development for an uncertain market.
Years Since Commercial Introduction
Fuel Cells? 2005-2060
FC’s Early Adopter Chasm (Created by Government Development Programs)
DC
F [
$]
Years
Revenue Chasm• Early demand for components• OEM’s commercial development lags demonstration gov programs• Transition to commercial prototypes• Renewed demand as OEM’s book product sales
How does a fuel cell business survive and thrive?
• Military “bootstrap”
• Federal agency funding
• Private investors
• Strategic partners/customers
• Leveraging Resources
Building an Industry
General Requirements
• Source(s) of ideas
• Availability of funds
• Accessible Workforce– Education and Training Resources
• Informed and supportive infrastructure
• Competitive business environment– Regulations, Taxation, Financing etc.
Critical Role for Building a Fuel Cell Industry in Ohio
• Educate Policymakers• Create realistic expectations• Facilitate information exchange• Inform the public• Engage all interests• Create opportunities• Focus on government-University-Industry Relationships• Maintain an independent perspective• Enable new and existing companies to access resources
to pursue fuel cell business plans more aggressively in Ohio than anywhere else
Fuel Cells for 2010Today’s Glimpse into the Future
Motive Power
Motive Power
Auxiliary Power
Fueling Stations
Small-Scale Power Systems
Concept: Truck Auxiliary Power UnitsSave 700 Million Gallons Diesel Fuel per Year
Long-haul trucks idle about 2,000 hours per year
Idling trucks consume 860 Millions gallons of fuel per year!
Fuel cells can reduce truck idling fuel consumption from 1 gal/hr to 0.2 gal/hr or by 688 million gallons.
Concepts: Aircraft Power Systems
Benefits to commercial aircraft cabin power• 50% fuel savings over conventional turbine APU• Reduced emissions (e.g., >20% NOx reduction)• Reduced noise (>10db reduction at gate)Commercial Aircraft
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
High-Altitude, Long Endurance UAV
Benefits to UAVs:• Emergency power – improved vehicle recovery• Payload power – significant increase in payload
Benefits to HALE UAVs:• Longer mission endurance• Higher payloads
NASA LEAP Project (Low Emissions Alternative Power)
Today’s Designs – Tomorrow’s Products
Summary
Challenges for Widespread Use of Fuel Cells
• Cost: (capital and operating) – further breakthroughs?• Operating Life: 4000 – 40,000 hours (automotive vs.
stationary power)• Reliability• Investment – Catch 22?• Many demonstrations• Hydrogen Infrastructure (fuel transportation and storage)• Codes and Standards
Fuel Cell Types
Source: U.S. Fuel Cell Council
Incr
easi
ng
Tem
per
atu
reNASA Glenn
Parker HannifinGrafTechCAPIBattelle
HydroGen
AMPOhio
NexTechMetaMateriaSOFCo-EFSTMICWRU-First EnergyNASA Glenn
Ohio Interests
The Ohio Fuel Cell Enterprise• Ohio Fuel Cell Coalition – Ken Alfred• Wright Fuel Cell Group – John McGrath• NorTech – Dorothy Baunach• CWRU – Bob Savinell, Tom Zawodzinski• OSU – Giorgio Rizzoni• CSU – Orhan Talu• U of Toledo – Martin Abraham• U of Akron – Steven Chuang• Ohio University – Dave Bayless• NASA Glen – Serene Farmer• Wright Patterson AFRL – Tom Reitz• Battelle – Dave Salay• EMTEC – Frank Svet, Mike Martin• EWI – Frank Jacob• Stark State College of Technology – Dorey
Diab• Hocking College
• Catacel – Bill Whittenberger• MetaMateria Partners – Dick Schorr • NexTech Materials – Bill Dawson• SOFCo-EFS – Rodger McKain • TMI – Benson Lee• Parker-Hannifin• AEP• First Energy• Dana Corporation• Rockwell International• Keithley Instruments• Solarflo• Vanner• Governor Bob Taft• Ohio Department of Development – Pat
Valente, Mike McKay• Stark County Development Board – Steve
Paquette• Congressman Regula
Thank You!