"We prefer to take a low-key approach to publicity...we see a very real danger in arousing a level of euphoria towards fuel cell technology that is out of step with the reality of current developments. An example of this would be our experience with heat pump technology in Germany. This technology was far too prematurely installed and publicised back in the 1980s. When the high expectations held for it were not met, the heat pump suffered from an enormous loss of credibility in Germany that has persisted to this day. This is unfortunate as there are now systems on the market which feature excellent performance." These words of caution come from a paper by Andreas Willeke of E.On Energie presented at the Eighth Grove Fuel Cell Symposium, held in London, 24-26 September. They are given added credibility by the fact that E.On has many years of experience with fuel cells, and as Dr Willeke says, is "one of Germany's most committed and active users." However, while it is still fairly easy to find examples of what appear to be outbursts of misplaced euphoria in the fuel cell business, there are also many in the field (including a large proportion of those presenting papers at the Grove Symposium) who appear to have a realistic appreciation of what needs to be done, how long its going to take and how much investment will be needed. In other words the heat pump phenomenon identified by Dr Willeke should be avoidable in the fuel cell case. Let us hope so.
A recent market survey (by Mark Cropper) of fuel cells in large stationary applications (10 kW and above) issued by the Johnson Matthey sponsored information service, Fuel Cell Today, concludes that "we will not see significant volumes in this sector until fuel cells can meet two key commercial requirements: they must be durable and affordable." The survey notes that today's PAFC (phosphoric acid fuel cell) systems such as that which kept the lights on at a New York City police station in Central Park during the 14 August blackout cost in the region of US$4500 per kW, while the first generation of MCFC (molten carbonate fuel cells) are perhaps close to US$10 000 per kW. "It is generally believed," the survey says, "that costs must fall to around US$1500 per kW to allow sales into real-world markets. Until then installations will either require government support (fiscal or legislative) or have to offer the end-user a niche benefit that justifies the cost. For instance, in Japan there is interest in fuel cells as a source of water in case of earthquakes (a 250kW system produces in the region of 70 litres per hour)." The survey estimates that so far a total of 650 large stationary fuel cell systems have been built and operated worldwide, with an average output getting on for 200 kW (the largest to date being an 11 MW PAFC manufactured by Toshiba and UTC Fuel Cells, which started operation in 1991).
In terms of technology, the survey concludes that "the large stationary sector is at a crossroads." In particular the dominance of the PAFC, notably in the form of UTC Fuel Cells' 200 kW PC25 plant, is under serious threat. Around 260 PC25 fuel cell power plants have been sold since its introduction in the early 1990s. But while the PC25 has for many years been able to claim that it is the only commercially available large fuel cell power plant, units, with a price tag of about US$900 000, have rarely been purchased without large subsidies, mainly from the US government. "Sales volumes have never taken off", according to the Fuel Cell Today survey and UTC is understood to be ceasing production of the PC25 and switching to offering a PEMFC stationary power plant of slightly lower capacity.
Other technologies on the rise in the large stationary sector are MCFC (as used in FuelCell Energy and MTU plants), and perhaps most strikingly of all the SOFC (solid oxide fuel cell). Both these are high temperature fuel cells with the possibility of integral reforming, which means they can work with a variety of fuels and do not need a hydrogen infrastructure. But while most fuel cells installed in 2003 were of the MCFC type, the SOFC looks set to play an increasingly important role in a few years time. Indeed, according to the Fuel Cell Today survey, compared with MCFC, there are at least twice as many organisations preparing to build large (by fuel cell standards) SOFC plants in the near future.
Indications of this burgeoning interest in SOFC for stationary power were reflected in papers presented at this year's Grove Symposium, for example by Rolls-Royce, Mitsubishi, and Wärtsilä. The latter, well known of course as a reciprocating engine specialist, has a co-operation agreement with Haldor Topsøe to start development of a planar SOFC system in the 250 kW size range, with commercial introduction not envisaged before about 2011. A conceptual study done by Wärtsilä and Haldor Topsøe suggests that the planar SOFC technology has "outstanding properties, such as high efficiency and low emissions, for stationary CHP applications." It is also interesting to note that MCFC specialist FuelCell Energy is in the process of acquiring SOFC developer Global Thermoelectric and that the US Department of Energy has been increasing its focus on SOFC in recent times. The US DoE estimates that a 5kW SOFC system could achieve $400 per kW at "reasonable manufacturing volumes." The US DoE sponsored SECA (Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance) aims to accelerate the commercial readiness of SOFC systems using 3-10kW modules by exploiting the economies of mass production, with potential for "ganging" of these modules to create distributed power plants.
This is similar to the thinking that has been going on at Rolls-Royce, which has committed itself to SOFC technology and from the outset has made cost reduction a central feature of its R&D strategy, avoiding the exotic and striving to use what might be called bathroom grade materials (see pp 19-21).
However, it is going to be a good few years yet before anyone makes a profit out of fuel cells. According to the PricewaterhouseCoopers 2003 Fuel Cell Industry Survey, released in conjunction with the opening of the Grove Symposium, "the North American fuel cell industry enjoyed a 71% increase in revenues to US$219 million in 2002, up from US$128 million in 2001," but "experienced significant operational losses as heavy spending on research and development continued." As Michael Binder of US DoD said at the Grove Symposium, "There are a lot of people making a small fortune in the fuel cell business. They are people who started with a large fortune."
Linkedin
