A recent article in the architectural design magazine, Building Design, discusses the future use of fuel cells in new buildings. Growing concerns about GHG and carbon emissions are leading to greener design efforts, especially given London’s plan for new commercial buildings to cut carbon emissions by 20 percent. There are now plans for five London buildings to have a portion of their power supply delivered by fuel cells, and around the world fuel cells are fast becoming part of the climate change discussion. Just last year, Ballard Power Systems and Plug Power sponsored a study outlining the role fuel cells can play in addressing these issues. The author in Building Design quotes an engineer involved in these projects, who says “Ten to 15 years from now, every single new building will be powered by fuel cells…It’s the magic bullet — until we get fusion power going.” For more building installations, check out Fuel Cells 2000’s worldwide installation database here - Japan has already installed more than two thousand fuel cells at residences across the country, and there are thousands more worldwide.
|Back|
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
August 5, 2008 @ 6:20 am
John Trocciola says...
I would like to start a new topic related to this particular blog , namely CO 2 reductions which result from installation of a fuel cell at a site.
When a fuel cell is sited it reduces the demand on the local electric grid therefore reducing the amount of electricity generated at a Central Plant. The conventional way to estimate the resulting reduction in CO2 is to compare the amount of CO2 produced by the average local central plant to that produced by the fuel cell.
This approach can be misleading since the so called local “average” central plant is made up of natural gas, coal and oil fired plants plus nuclear and hydro. Of course the CO2 produced by the latter two is “zero” therfore lowering the average value.
In fact as fuel cells become installed and result in a reduction in demand, nuclear and hydro, being the lowest in operating cost since they use no hydrocarbon fuel, would continue to run at basically full load. The plants to be “turned down” would be the most expensive to operate which , today, would be old oil and natural gas power plants.
So the suggestion is to estimate CO2 reduction from fuel cell use either on the average local fossil plant or , if possible, on oil followed by natural gas.
October 8, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Richard P. Horwitz says...
No doubt you have heard all the politicians spouting off about the new era of clean energy items, “Wind, Solar, “Clean Coal,” (whatever that is) Nukes, and blah blah” and not one mention of fuel cells. The only real tech that’s ready for prime time. If the Fuel Cells 2000 Newsletter, has been telling us, month after month, about the successful installations in the USA, Europe, Japan and China,etc., then why is there no mention of companies like Plug Power, Acumentrics, Ballard, and other successful FC makers/installers. It feels as if the whole business of FC’s have been “Tip-Toeing” into the conscious public mind.
I worked 15 years at Wyeth Labs as a graphic artist in their “Marketing” department for training the young men and women (Detailers) who visit the medics with their bag of tricks to sell the Wyeth label. This is what is lacking in the FC industry. Someone must do that job to make the people who can use their products be aware that it is available now. I have asked people if they had ever heard of Fuel Cells and mostly get a blank look and that is too bad. When the pols talk about the great new industries for alternative energy sources, they are talking “wind, solar, coal (!) etc.” the same old. There has to be more noise about successful FC installations.
October 8, 2008 @ 8:42 pm
Philip A. Block says...
Right on, Richard. I learned about Fuel Cells in the late 1950s and commented that some day they would power the world. Whenever I mentioned them to fellow engineers or in my class room, all I received was the brook trout look, a smirk, or a stupid remark. This, from some supposedly educated people. Rarely was I asked what they were. A couple of years ago I visited my alma mater’s (a small school) electrical engineering dept. and inquired of an EE professor why there was no provision for a course in Fuel Cells , but one for nuclear power. I received a sarcastic answer “what about hydrogen?” and he turned and walked off from me. This, from a PhD who is a graduate of the University of South Carolina where much research on Fuel Cells and hydrogen is going on. Also, the capital of SC is touting itself as the H2 capital. I understand that a group of scientists from the Savannah River plant has set itself up outside the government property to pursue research on H2. Why not much from the Fuel Cell mfgs? Maybe because around 2000 when Fuel Cells hit the news there was a lot of hype put out that could not be backed up and the stocks eventually tanked. They found out that although Fuel Cells are basically simple in theory, they are difficult to make. Murphy’s law– the simpler something is, the more difficult it is. Also, as one who is experienced in marketing, you surely realize it takes a lot of money to advertise properly, better spent on R&D. During the 1960s and 1970s a lot of money flowed from the wealthy for venture capitol and quite a few companies sprung up during this period of time. How many Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Dells have emerged in the past 25 or so years? The tax laws in this country have changed from financing government to redistributing wealth. So, you figure out the results. Also, the news media? has spent their resources you know where and not in meaningful ways. Face it, except for a very few, Fuel Cell technology is beyond the mentality of most people in the news media. They are experts on nuclear power, global warming, wind and solar power, but not an ion on Fuel Cells, this from people with no science background. Al Gore is an example–an expert on global warming, but absolutely no science background. Power Companies–the people who run them today know how they got conned by the government and creamed in the 1970s and 1980s on nuclear power, so the military could have the spent fuel to make into weapons grade material–the problem the world is facing today. Most electrical engineers that work for power companies are not the best and brightest from the engineering schools, so they tend to avoid any really new technology that may upset their comfortable enclaves. Don’t make waves mentality. The rest of the world is racing toward replacing the old 20th century central power plant technology with Fuel Cells while, except in a few cases, the U.S. is touting nuclear power. Already 90 billion, yes 90 billion dollars has or will be spent on Yucca Mountain in Nevada for a storage facility for spent fuel. When it will be completed, if ever, is never really answered. No one includes the cost of the transmission lines, substations, and the thousands of acres of land to be confiscated for the lines in the cost of of a multi billion dollar nuclear plant. Imagine how many Fuel Cells could be made with all that money. How many acres of land not destroyed. etc., etc. Not too far in the future, Fuel Cells will replace most central power plants and when you and your grand children drive past one that is shut down and ask you what that is, you will probably answer “oh! that is an old 20th century technology.”