A few more thoughts on PLUG.
The overall pollution is far less per KWH than from traditional generation.
Actually, no longer true. A company in California has a combustor for natural gas turbines that has lower emissions than a Plug Power fuel cell. They have achieved NOx <1.5 ppm and carbon monoxide <2 ppm. Plug's fuel cell emits about 50 ppm CO and does not publish data on NOx emissions. As for cost, natural gas turbines blow away fuel cells, and probably will for the next 10-20 years.
As for supporting the current valuation, the market is acting like Plug Power is the only company working on this stuff. Here is a list of the multitude of others doing similar work.
216.51.18.233
I agree with you, though, that there is a niche market for Plug's product. I recently saw a home gas range selling for $5,000. If there are people willing to pay that for a gas range, they would certainly be willing to pay $7,000-$10,000 for a reliable power source. As for savings, however, I put my info into Plug's calculator, and I would save $3 per month on my electric bill. Hard to justify initial cost of the unit, yearly maintenance and major overhaul every 40,000 hours (4.5 years). Granted, I live in a temperate climate and have very reliable power, so my perceptions are a bit skewed.
Appreciate the discussion here and must admit, even though I do not believe this technology is quite ready for mainstream use, I would bet that Plug Power is successful before Ballard.
Erik |
