Ca Fuel Cell Partnership, Tech Forum 4/23/01
For those cutting to the chase, drop to points 7,8 and 9... but the full story
of evolving fuel choices for FCs is more subtle, intricate and harder to
describe whether from this tech forum or any other one day event...
Alastair Livesey (2 presentations: ECD, the only company to do so)
I. Fuel infrastructure for FCVs
H2 agreed ultimately (BP,TX,RD,GM,F etc.) - timing is disagreed
ECD offers both storage and transport solutions for H
Big bang theory of H2 adoption untenable- that is despite big bang providing H originally
...the switch to H as an energy carrier will not be
Current H infrastructure exists in part already:
For instance, there is a 36" pipeline circling Houston carrying H2 now
-the typical refinery produces enough H2 to run 300K vehicles
-dominant source will be reformation: CH4 and refinery waste gases due to low cost
-electrolysis will be significant in niche countries e.g. those countries producing
more electricity than they consume: Canada, Norway, Iceland
-potential game changer is low cost amorphous Si PVs-100 MW plant
from ECD-will be cheapest source
Staged H infrastructure development likely
and occurs via maximizing existing infrastructure.
TX Ovonic Practical H infrastructure:
-existing refiners can steam reform waste/off gases (ethane, propane,butane) to
generate H2
- bulk hydride transport in containers from refinery via existing infrastructure:
ships, railway, roads.
- hydride tank can act as a pump itself
- hydride acts as a purifier preferentially absorbing H
- hydride must be long-lived and ECD figured industry would want 1000 cycles, so tested
to 2054 cycles (equivalent of 600K miles) and test stopped
-ECD's hydride is the lowest volumetric storage for H
-with multiple hydrides developed by ECD, you can use as a step-wise solid state compressor
-ECD has a multiplicity of solutions in terms of Pressure/Temp characteristics
II. ECD's Hydrogen Powertrain Innovations (Livesey 2nd presentation)
-H the ultimate fuel and ECD shortens the timetable for its' use.
-NiMH batteries store electricity via H as in 80% of cellphone batteries
-EV vehicles developed, ECD builds NiMH batteries to give 200+ mile range
-Hybrid vehicles developed, and ECD develops high power batteries, 1000W/kg,
with long cycle life for either ICE hybrids or FC hybrids.
-Industry shifts to 42 V SLI and our NiMH fits in the same space as a current
12 V Pb/acid battery
-Industry works towards FC Vehicles and our solid state hydride stores volumetrically
H sufficient to give 98% the range of same vol. of gasoline (given current PEM efficiencies)
-This Mg alloy hydride is low cost
-Control of heat exchange, removal of heat during filling is on target
-Developments are ahead of schedule
ORFC is in research phase
It is reversible in the sense that it stores regenerative braking energy in FCV versions,
(side note: could be more deliberately a hydrolyser/FC for other uses, eg photo-systems IMO)
no noble metal catalysts used and since it operates at higher temps, requires a smaller radiator size (I think I heard this but all presentations were badly marred by poor acoustics/PA systems inside the large empty auto bays)
III. Spoke with Livesey at the ECD booth afterwards and with Batchelor of Texaco at the Texaco booth (Texaco is still chief spokesman for the fuel providers of the CaFCP) along with other exhibitors and in general here are my impressions:
1. Oil companies are not interested in building a methanol fuel infrastructure.
2. Oil/fuel company partners maintain a fuel neutral stance at the partnership, but stand ready to provide what the automakers need for FCVs. TX is in contact with all automakers of the partnership.
3. TX is focussed on ECD's technology as a center of profit and ultimately, with these future energy systems, as a large scale business. TX is unwilling to predict how fast the transition to H2 will occur and that is because no one knows the answer.
4. The 'choice of fuel system' ball is in the automakers court and whatever they decide on, automakers own use of it in volume will drive the cost of said system down.(note 6 below) Ultimately, the least expensive system will win and in different regions different systems might be used, so a multiplicity of systems is likely for now. When PVs really undercut hydrocarbon fuel's cost as a source for H2, transport/storage/conversion devices concentrating on this cheap source of H2 will follow.
5. ECD will not announce or promise or give details on its' tech (for instance, ORFC) before it can deliver this tech. I sense no lack of confidence from this at all, just a determination not to promise before ECD and TX can fully deliver. (This discipline, IMO, may be a defense against a history of prior announcements in earlier decades with unexpectedly longer timelines than originally suggested... and not to be repeated this time... at least that is my read.)
6. It was pointed out to me that one automaker is using hydride for H2, Toyota. And yes I answered but only 2.2 wt % storage... but that was not the point of this speaker's comment... the point is Toyota is
using their own metal hydrides in trial and I think this means if they advance their learning of such hydride systems in FCVs and are overall pleased with performance but desire higher storage then they can come to someone like ECD. Not expending our efforts to drive the envelope but standing by as potential partners and making them aware of our technology so when automakers decide and know more specifically what they want, their considerable and expensive development knowledge combined with ours can be used to custom tailor a hydrogen solution to their needs.
7. Some OEMs are getting a look at our hydride via the usual non-disclosure agreements currently. Type of OEMs, automotive or otherwise, was not disclosed.
8. I expect more details on the ORFC (therefore a working model per above) by the end of this year IMO
9. Per Livesey, we're adding several top-notch hydrogen engineers to ECD's hydrogen program. (Ray: Heat exchange with hydride transfer does not strike him as a problem, nor is it for OEM engineers they are presenting the system to!) He is clearly very pleased to be with TX/ECD and as for Shell Hydrogen, in a departure discussion with one of his former colleagues, they agreed that if ECD's hydride succeeds, instead of being competitors, Shell and ECD would likely become collaborators. Livesey is smart (a source of some of the most cogent questions of other presenters), he knows the fuel industry first-hand and clearly relishes the opportunity to bring our hydrides to center stage.
Al |
