Electric motorcycles are very clean vehicles, they give off zero emissions, but every time I write about them someone is sure to point out the power came from a generating station which is itself, not so clean. The problem isn’t eliminated, it was just moved. Suppose you could recharge your bike at home with fuel cell generated electricity from a unit sitting next to your air conditioner, a unit that could power your entire house and recharge your electric motorcycle or car, too. Would the bike be clean now?
Bloom Energy is a silicon valley company that’s been operating in secret for 8 years but is just beginning to pull off the covers, with a 60 Minutes segment and an official introduction this Wednesday. They’ve developed a fuel cell that is currently operating on the campuses of several major corporations, delivering electricity at a cost that saves them money plus the Bloom Box is not on the grid. A unit at your home would take you off the grid, too. Google was the first to install the system, with Boxes now operating at eBay, Fedex and Walmart, to name a few. The eBay system, delivers 15% of their power and saved them $100,000 in 6 months.
The Bloom Box is a very nice bit of engineering. Ceramic wafers are made from ordinary beach sand and coated with a proprietary green and black ink on opposite sides They are then exposed on one side to a fuel like natural gas, biogas or landfill gas, oxygen on the other, a chemical reaction takes place and produces electricity. No combustion is involved. The ceramic wafers can be stacked, with an inexpensive metal alloy between the wafers, to scale the unit up as needed. They’re still keeping some details to themselves, obviously, but this looks pretty sweet.
60 Minutes had a segment on the company and the units look relatively compact. The major question mark is price which is still quite high, but if, as founder and inventor, K.R. Sridhar, formerly of NASA, predicts, a home unit in the future could be around $3000. Predictions from startup companies are often notoriously optimistic, but, if this unit delivers what the company intends, and you can recharge your electric vehicle at home from clean, non grid power, they may be on to something, … something very very big. Clean home electricity for recharging your vehicles and running your entire house sounds good to me, but, as with any invention like this, we’ll have to wait and see if the promise matches reality.
Link: Bloom Energy via Next Big Future
Jim Flower says
Ok, trying to wrap my mind around this. Since it runs on fuel and oxygen, there will come a day when this “battery” runs out. Sure it is clean, but as I read it, its power delivery is finite. Am I missing something here?
Jim
ducati 474 says
I wonder how cheap the Nazi electric companys will be selling KWs after these become avalible.
taxman says
i am NOT trying to be pessimistic about this. i just have a couple questions. it sounds like they are using some form of gas, mostly natural gas as that would be the most commonly available to residents, and turning that gas into electricity. this would of course lower your electric bill, but it would raise your gas bill. i’m just curious how well it converts gas to electricity. it could very well be a way to ultimately cut down on our reliance on gas if it is a better way to create energy. and i’m glad for that.
but i’d really like to see a little love for the VERY eco friendly ideas that do not rely on gas at all. like http://www.skystreamenergy.com/ imagine how much less pollutants we would be producing if every house had one of these? that would cut down on our reliance on all forms of gas as a method of energy production.
David/cigarrz says
instead of buying electricity you are buying natural gas and depending on how pure the oxygen required maybe that also. There is no free lunch if you need a million BTU it has to come from somewhere it is only a matter of cost per BTU. This may very well be much cheaper in some areas of the country.
GenWaylaid says
Obviously this is not actually emission-free energy. The reactants are fairly clear: oxygen and low-molecular-weight hydrocarbons such as methane and ethane. The reaction products are less clear. Since this is categorized as a fuel cell, it seems reasonable to assume the carbon and oxygen stay separate, and only the hydrogen crosses over to form water. That means that the other product must be hydrogen-impoverished hydrocarbons, perhaps propane or butane or even octane.
So, here’s my question. Assuming one can tweak the product mix into something lucrative such as raw gasoline, (and assuming the cell materials don’t get fouled by common natural gas contaminants) does the reaction make economic sense?
natural gas + oxygen -> water + gasoline + $?
I don’t see this as much of an energy solution (except in remote places that currently rely on generators), but it could be a clever addition to petroleum refineries, depending on the relative prices of natural gas and gasoline.
FREEMAN says
There will always be naysayers to the whole “green” religion. The fact of the matter is that a power plant is much more efficient at producing electricity than any viable consumer generator currently out there. There have been power plants since the dawn of the light bulb and saying the energy came from “somewhere else” or was “moved” is ridiculous. It’s been there all along so it’s nothing new. Nobody ever brings up the fact that all the fuel you put in your bike is trucked in by a massive semi from who knows where, however the electricity to your home is brought in by a wire. If you’re going to compare apples and oranges and nitpick over tiny details while ignoring the big picture, then it’ll go nowhere. When it comes to disposing batteries, there are hundreds of companies that recycle batteries. Electric vehicles are cleaner since they don’t have an IC engine and are many times over more reliable. They currently aren’t better, as in range and down time “refueling,” but they are cleaner.
bblix says
The concept of micropower has been around for a while…But, as with all things, I’m sure there is something we’re missing.
Fuel is fuel is fuel. It’s got to come from somewhere, so who’s going to supply it? If the system is flexible enough, then we can get our fuel from a wide range of sources, seeking out the best buy…or can we? How will the fuel be delivered? Pipe (like NG) or will we store it on-site (like fuel oil) and have it delivered by truck?
My fear is that micropower generation will turn out to be a bit like the iPhone/iPad/Kindle. Looks great on paper (the concept), has a lot of features that we all enjoy, but you’re now tied to a specific company to get your content.
Also, will we really be buying the fuel cell generator, or will it be like a phone, you pay some upfront fee that looks like buying, but really you’re just licensing the right to use the generator–you don’t own it (much like the “books” you download with onto your Kindle…you don’t own them you borrow them for money…)
FREEMAN says
A bit more information about this technology can be found here and here.
Tin Man 2 says
Taxman, Thanks for your info on Skystreamenergy, I just spent 20 minutes on their site gathering info. It looks like a reasonable alternative considering you can get a 30% tax credit. Maybe this Gov Subsidy can help bring down production costs so it makes more sense in the future. Things are going in the right direction and mass production / competition should work to lower the costs.
Jax Dans LeBoite says
I have heard that we don’t need anymore power plants IF we could eliminate the losses through the transmission lines (have heard that 40 percent is lost in transmission). You have to step up the voltage to transmit (and add transformers along the lines to keep it high for transmission) then you have to step it down for residential use. Just getting rid of the waste via the transmission will be staggering. And as far as running out of fuel, with natural gas, methane (animal and human generated, take a walk by any water treatment plant and you’ll nose it lol) algae and a myriad of other viable fuels, I wouldn’t worry about running out before they (corporations) have perfected something else to power our homes.
I really hope this means I can flip off Exxon while I commute to work in my quiet and oil less transport while I breath in some fresh air.
Not a tree hugger but c’mon, gas is going over 3 bucks a gallon (this summer) and there isn’t the demand for it (at least in this country) Progress is not created by content people and I’m mad as hell (thanks to Peter Finch in Network!)…..
discontinuuity says
Jax, natural gas transmission has similar losses — just substitute “pressure” for “voltage.” I’m not sure how they compare exactly, but the general rule is that There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch (TANSTAAFL for short).
If this company can make cheap fuel cells, though, it will absolutely be a game changer. But forget about recharging your inefficient lithium ion batteries; you could put one of these fuel cells in your car or motorcycle and take your fuel supply with you.
kneeslider says
@ discontinuuity : “forget about recharging your inefficient lithium ion batteries; you could put one of these fuel cells in your car or motorcycle and take your fuel supply with you”
I thought about that as I was digging into this, but nowhere was that possibility mentioned by K.R. Sridhar, or anyone else. I wonder if there is something in the design that makes that unfeasible?
WRXr says
I think this has been covered a million times. But let’s make it a million and 1. When you turn off the lights and sleep at night, you stop using electricity for the most part. Meanwhile at the power plant….
1…they don’t pull the core from the nuclear reactor
2… they don’t stop shoveling coal into the furnace.
3 and water doesn’t stop going over the dam.
All of this is lost electric potential which could be used to charge an electric vehicle…which of course would mostly be plugged in at night.
So easily, you could power a large number of electric cars and bikes with no further emissions, no further investment, and no further trouble.
FREEMAN says
@ kneeslider and discontinuuity:
I doubt it. It’s dsigned to be a combined home furnace and generator; does two jobs for the price of one. Also, each of these boxes currently costs $700,000 to $800,000 each.
David/cigarrz says
@WRXr
Nice theory but the grid is already near the breaking point. Sure your electric vehicles wont matter but a couple million let alone one hundred million is a whole different story. If anyone is really interested in being off the grid and energy independent the only scale that works is on a personal level and you will soon realize what a full time job lights and transportation is. Its doable don’t hold your breath waiting for Lowe’s to have it on the shelf.
David/cigarrz says
The eBay CEO said to 60 Minutes, that they have saved $100,000 in electricity bills in the 9 months they have been installed. I wonder if this reflects actual saving or the influx of tax payer dollars from government largess. If it is really viable the IPO would put the stuffing back in your retirement. Time will tell.
Aldous Huxley says
Wow that is so cool that this is non-grid power and only requires natural gas which comes by pipeline after being drilled out of the ground, which itself is not part of any grid…oh, wait. Uhhm. Oh. OK.
So much for the public’s typical gullibility on energy “miracles.”
brian says
Its a fuel cells, it runs off a chemical reaction, in other words it continues to run off the same chemical reaction, it doesnt stop. to Sum it up you dont need to constantly refill. ITS A FUEL CELL!! There are different types of fuel cells but for the most part a fuel cell is a self reliant machine. It just runs and continues to run. Most of the fuel cells i have heard of are hydrogen but they dont produce enough power, this using nat gas could be the game changer.
To sum up my point, research fuel cells, they dont emit they continue to run off the same constant repeating chemical reaction.
Davidw says
Saw the segment on 60 mins and theres nothing new about fuel cell tech but maybe they can make them cheaper via mass production, Assuming a unit can be made compact enough and with sufficient power to propell a vehicle of some sort, the oxygen and fuel could be purchased in the form of a recyclable cartridge consisting of compressed units that would just ‘plug in’ the vehicle. having a few cartridges on hand at a time should solve the range/recharge time bugaboo that is the principle downside to electric vehicles. not much infrastructure would be required fot the distribution of fuel in this manner. still no free ride there but definitely greener than ic engines and for those who think ‘noise saves lives’ there could be a throttle controlled sound device that plays back thru the bikes stereo speakers.
WRXr says
@dave/cigarzz
Not theory.
The electical grid is typically well below it’s load potential and it’s transmission potential. Night time hours are typically 1/2 to 1/3 less than peak hours during the day.
That’s hardly “near breaking point”
You can play around with some historical hourly usage charts for your area here. I selected New York.
http://currentenergy.lbl.gov/ny/index.php
If everyone in the country buys an electric vehicle will we need more electrical capacity: Yes, of course. But there is substantial room before that investment is required.
PeteP says
The savings this thing realizes depend on cheap natural gas, which we CURRENTLY have in abundance in the US. What happens when that finite supply runs low?
Scott says
My father was working on fuel cells in the ’80s, so I have had an interest in them since that time. I’m curious why this particular one is being featured. There are many, many people currently working with fuel cells and some of them seem closer to production than this (such as Clear-Edge power http://www.clearedgepower.com/ ).
Without having studied this particular system, I don’t want to make any judgements, but I do have a question I would like to ask:
What does “clean” mean? Without combustion, you aren’t going to have soot, but what about CO2 ? Fuel cells work by combining hydrogen and oxygen. The methane (as one example) provides hydrogen and the atmosphere provides oxygen, but carbon dioxide will be generated during the reaction. Unless that CO2 is captured and stored in some way, it’s not (based on our concerns about CO2 in the environment) “clean”.
Scott says
And Paul, regarding your question of putting this in a vehicle, there is quite a bit of work being done with fuel cells in vehicles, but there are very special and unique considerations for a vehicle that don’t need to be addressed with a unit like this.
For the most part all experimental vehicle fuel cells cary pure hydrogen rather than raw fuels that need to be reformed (the reformers add too much complexity and weight to my understanding). There are some experimental fuel cell vehicles that are out there producing comparable performance to ICE vehicles, but two of the big problems that still need to be addressed are storage and distribution of hydrogen.
Exotic composites are currently required to store gaseous hydrogen at pressures that allow reasonable ranges and those composities drive up the vehicle cost. There is a lot of work being done with carriers that adsorb hydrogen and reduce the pressure required, but while agencies are working on standards, no standards have been set. Until standards are set, large scale distribution can’t happen and until large scale distribution happens, manufacturers can’t realistically sell vehicles.
But if some of those issues could be solved, fuel cells could offer clean vehicles that don’t have to give up the performance and range that current battery technologies force us to sacrifice.
kneeslider says
Scott, yep, I’m familiar with fuel cells in vehicles to some degree but this particular setup requires some form of heating, if I’m not mistaken, which is where I think the problem of adapting it to a vehicle might run into problems, not sure though.
Since reading about this initially, I’ve found quite a few follow up articles around the web with some more info, lots of skepticism from many quarters and generally a wait and see attitude until tomorrow’s official introduction. Maybe it’s dramatically different, maybe it’s a money and hype driven machine, we should know more shortly.
As for hydrogen fuel cells they’ve been the darling of fuel cell advocates for vehicle use for many years, and they have been “just around the corner” for as many years. Some of the technology has been interesting, but costly, all of those fuel cell Hondas a few select folks get to drive, are nowhere near affordable but make for great PR.
scritch says
The only big advantage I can see with this type of home-based fuel cell generator is that power generation is decentralized, allowing individual homes to move “off the grid”. An immediate plus for people like me, whose electricity comes in on overhead wires through a fairly heavily-wooded area, is that I would no longer be subject to the annual power outages whenever the wind blows or it snows heavily. Another plus, eliminating the need for an electric grid removes the need for running expensive wires between houses, saving infrastructure costs.
However, as far as I can tell, fuel cells still need fuel, so if the source of the fuel is non-renewable (natural gas) or requires more energy to make than you get at the fuel cell (hydrogen), what’s the ultimate point from a greenhouse gas point of view? Seems like this might be another bridge technology until we can move to power generation that is truly renewable, from multiple and redundant sources, e.g., solar, wind, water, geothermal, biofuel, etc.
Paul says
A great deal more information can be found here:
http://anz.theoildrum.com/node/6242
mechtician says
There is a critical omission in the technical explanation, being that the unit operates at upwards of 1000 degrees C. The unit is essentially a small-scale solid oxide fuel cell. I find it very interesting from a technical standpoint, since the only metal alloys I know of that can withstand 1000+ degC service in the presence of oxygen are the opposite of cheap. I smell a little bit of snake oil, but the fact remains that they have several units up and running and working reliably by the sounds of it, and I can’t argue with results like that. I will be keeping an eye on these guys for sure!
@Scott; Funny you mention the confusion regarding standard storage pressures, my employer (Powertech Labs Inc) participated in a hydrogen road rally last year with several different manufacturers (http://www.hydrogenroadtour.com/) and serviced no less than 4 different fill pressures. Interesting also that Honda has started leasing their FCV’s to “customers” in the Los Angeles area without any commercial filling stations anywhere! Talk about chicken before the egg 😛
FREEMAN says
@ mechtician,
By cheap, I believe they mean by not using platinum as the white stuff in their ceramic oreos.
Ted says
No one seems to be thinking about what the naturnal gas companys will do when we all have these boxs and are dependent on gas to run them, want to bet the price will go up and up and up.
Phoenix827 says
I love the idea of clean energy. My problem is electric vehicles lack feel and passion to me. I would gladly ride electric for commute. I’m can’t give up my IC engine yet. I believe the US desperately needs to get off foreign oil. No one option will be able to do it. We need to follow every avenue to see if it is viable. From what I have been able to make out these fuel cells generate a steady output. A vehicular fuel cell needs to be able to vary its output. Currently this is too high cost to mass produce. Most current electric vehicles have range limitations. I personnaly ride a bio-diesel bike that I built. Its cleaner and putting Americans to work supplying fuel. Its not alot but its my part till I can do more. When the time comes, I’ll commute electric or whatever is best. I’ll still break out my IC bike when I need a fix.
Paulinator says
The grid IS stressed when its hot and every operational AC unit is fighting the effects of the sun. 50 million people will attest to that. Look around and you will see many ways to reduce peak-load energy consumption – AND that is the expensive energy. Maintaining system over-capacity is incredibly inefficient. This fuel cell smells like BALLARD 2.010. Its a panacea target that always resides just over the horizon yet firmly in our sights.
Devilish says
Corporate greed will be the downfall of this nation, that combined with short sightedness and an illinformed populace. Steps must be taken away from fosil fuels, this technology looks like one of those steps. You can bet that there are those out there who are already gearing up to push negative, and or false information out about this development.
Question Everything
David/cigarrz says
@Devilish this technology is fossil fuel get off your mantra high horse and read the article. Oh and quit being part of the ill informed populace.
Greg says
Just checked the Bloom information. The cell is up to 48% efficient. It uses natural gas or other forms of fuel. Published efficiencies of Natural Gas Combined Cycle power plants is 50% to 54% nationally with up to 59% in the next 5 to 10 years.
douglas says
You can allways choose from were your electricity comes from, from a oil powerplant, from a wind generator or from a nucular powerplant. all has pros and cons, some allot greener then others. So it depends of were you buy your electricity from.
Electric vehicles can be VERY clean, more then fossil fueled ones anyway.
Anton B says
As I understand it, the magic of this device is that it makes electricity more efficiently than a standard gas powered electrical generating station, is quiet and safe. It generates at the point of use, taking load off the grid, and elmininates transmission losses and it generates heat as waste, as do all processes, but since it is at the point of use, they use the heat to heat water or building space. Also, it will allow charging of electric cars at high efficiencies.
Once you take all that into account, the overall efficiency approaches 95%, compared to 10 or 20% overall with standard methods.
So yes, it uses natural gas, a non renewable energy source that produces carbon, but if we could achieve 95% efficiency in all out energy uses, we would be in a very different world.
Tom Lyons says
I like solar energy better.
It’s a more mature technology, and it can reach efficiency levels of up to 30% in NASA-grade panels.
That’s not 48% efficiency, but it’s pretty good, and doesn’t cost $800k, and doesn’t use natural gas, and doesn’t require 1000*C temps to work.
It also is point-of-use technology which eliminates long-distance transmission losses.
And there are ~1100 watts per square meter available for collection any time the sun is out.
The problems are night-time use, and it must be stored somehow for that purpose.
There are new ways being developed to do that.
IMO, for motorcycle use, the bodywork of the motorcycle could be made of molded thin-format battery segments, and covered in flexible(or molded) solar cells, which could be made as the actual bodywork shapes, and form the collector system and battery system, all molded together as the bodywork.
Then, the electric motor system has a continuously charging system during the day, and a storage system for night or bad days.
In a pinch, the thing could be plugged-in if there is high usage or alot of bad weather, as a back-up plan.
Just parking it in the parking lot all day when you’re at work, could give you a charge, to some extent, depending on the solar cell area and battery capacity.
It could make and store a certain amount of its own energy, before you have to resort to the grid for a plug-in. Maybe many people might be able to get away without any plug-ins for commuter use. And it also charges as you ride, during the day.
Anton B says
Tom, I agree 100% that PV is a great, mature technology that is ready to go right now, but I believe that in the future there will be numerous technologies that will all contribute to our energy mix, with anything that makes electricity being the most useful and easy to harness.
However, I also believe that there is a period of time wherin we have to use some interim energy sources, and I think that using NG at 90% efficiency will be a much better interim source than conventional fission or coal, both of which I think have the potential to poison our world forevermore.
I believe that CoGen, maybe not this specific technology, but the concept of CoGen, is going be very important in achieving our energy goals.
Seventhson says
Here is one finite fact about electric energy transmission:
The further you need to send it along power grid lines the more loss you have. Send it North or South and energy loss is fairly reasonable, send it East or West and energy loss is massive, because it is in conflict with the Earth’s magnetic field (Its like turning the Earth into a giant electric motor). With a power cell fed by natural gas in your back yard, the energy loss is insignificant.
Seventhson says
I for One, do not want tens of thousands of wind turbines destroying our beautiful countryside, not to mention the thousands Raptors and Bats that they kill every year, so Green Granola Crunching Activists can feel good about the insignificant percentage of energy they produce. Has anybody got an opinion on how they have destroyed the scenery in places like Palm Springs?
Seventhson says
If you do not say something soon, you may be looking at the Grand Canyon through a bunch of these ugly monstrosities. What a price to pay.