Posted on 06/13/2008 12:02:30 PM PDT by Red Badger
120W fuel cell system
Internal portion of the 120W fuel cell stack
300W generation system mounted in a luggage room (left)
Genepax Co Ltd explained the technologies used in its new fuel cell system "Water Energy System (WES)," which uses water as a fuel and does not emit CO2.
The system can generate power just by supplying water and air to the fuel and air electrodes, respectively, the company said at the press conference, which took place June 12, 2008, at the Osaka Assembly Hall.
The basic power generation mechanism of the new system is similar to that of a normal fuel cell, which uses hydrogen as a fuel. According to Genepax, the main feature of the new system is that it uses the company's membrane electrode assembly (MEA), which contains a material capable of breaking down water into hydrogen and oxygen through a chemical reaction.
Though the company did not reveal the details, it "succeeded in adopting a well-known process to produce hydrogen from water to the MEA," said Hirasawa Kiyoshi, the company's president. This process is allegedly similar to the mechanism that produces hydrogen by a reaction of metal hydride and water. But compared with the existing method, the new process is expected to produce hydrogen from water for longer time, the company said.
With the new process, the cell needs only water and air, eliminating the need for a hydrogen reformer and high-pressure hydrogen tank. Moreover, the MEA requires no special catalysts, and the required amount of rare metals such as platinum is almost the same as that of existing systems, Genepax said.
Unlike the direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC), which uses methanol as a fuel, the new system does not emit CO2. In addition, it is expected to have a longer life because catalyst degradation (poisoning) caused by CO does not occur on the fuel electrode side. As it has only been slightly more than a year since the company completed the prototype, it plans to collect more data on the product life.
At the conference, Genepax unveiled a fuel cell stack with a rated output of 120W and a fuel cell system with a rated output of 300W. In the demonstration, the 120W fuel cell stack was first supplied with water by using a dry-cell battery operated pump. After power was generated, it was operated as a passive system with the pump turned off.
This time, the voltage of the fuel cell stack was 25-30V. Because the stack is composed of 40 cells connected in series, it is expected that the output per cell is 3W or higher, the voltage is about 0.5-0.7V, and the current is about 6-7A. The power density is likely to be not less than 30mW/cm2 because the reaction area of the cell is 10 x 10 cm.
Meanwhile, the 300W fuel cell system is an active system, which supplies water and air with a pump. In the demonstration, Genepax powered the TV and the lighting equipment with a lead-acid battery charged by using the system. In addition, the 300W system was mounted in the luggage room of a compact electric vehicle "Reva" manufactured by Takeoka Mini Car Products Co Ltd, and the vehicle was actually driven by the system.
Genepax initially planned to develop a 500W system, but failed to procure the materials for MEA in time and ended up in making a 300W system.
For the future, the company intends to provide 1kw-class generation systems for use in electric vehicles and houses. Instead of driving electric vehicles with this system alone, the company expects to use it as a generator to charge the secondary battery used in electric vehicles.
Although the production cost is currently about ¥2,000,000 (US$18,522), it can be reduced to ¥500,000 or lower if Genepax succeeds in mass production. The company believes that its fuel cell system can compete with residential solar cell systems if the cost can be reduced to this level.
A common misperception about electrolysis (likely the process in this system) is that energy is being created.
Water being a molecule has energy stored in its very structure—actually more energy per gallon than a gallon of gasoline.
While the process of releasing that energy stored in water does require energy—and traditional electrolytic methods are notoriously inefficient, there is no reason why, with the proper technology, efficiency can not be reached to release more of the energy stored in water than it takes to “crack” that energy (the hydrogen) out of it.
This is not therefore any violation of the law of thermodynamics—since no energy is being created or added to the whole equation, only released—following standard laws of physics—from storage.
In the same way that a woodstove releases more energy than it is requred to feed it—since the energy is released from the burning wood, so too water, like any chemical, can, theoretically release more of it’s energy than it takes to “feed” the reaction(s) it takes to release it.
I believe hydrogen derived from water, be it in onboard, on demand systems (such as this) or in micro-plants-at-the-filling-station, will be the fuel of the future.
And high oil prices will push the market that direction!
No less than BMW already has a practical hydrogen powered car—and a practical onboard system (if this Japanese invention is not it) cracking water, is not far away.
Thanks for the shout-out. If only we could start a war between the prepetual-motioners and the angle-trisectors...
(Phony Scots Accent) But, Captain Kirk, ye canna mix matter with antimatter with a swizzlestick!
I guess with your calculations, since their van has 1/7 the HP as a push-lawnmower, it can barely move.
Better tell that to the driver cruising normally around Japan.
“Just don’t look in my box or ask my what chemical changes have happened to my copper and zinc.”
You’re cheating — there is more in your black box besides the copper and zink electrodes, (whisper, whisper, whisper)
Briefly stated, a hydrogen-oxygen reaction will never release more energy that it took to release the hydrogen in the first place. In effect, the hydrogen is a way of storing energy. If you have a cheap source of electrical energy (say, a nuclear power plant) you can use the electricty to seperate the hydrogen, and then the hydrogen to power a vehicle, but what you doing is effectively powering the vehicle with the nuclear power plant, and adding an overhead for the conversion. The kicker is whether electricity is cheap enough to make this process (plus the infrastructure outlay) feasible, and for that we’d need a lot more nukes. (Which is a good idea in any case.)
P.S. Hydrocarbons, such as gasoline, release their energy through oxidation. Water is already oxidized.
Water—despite the flooding in the Midwest-— IS NOT in abundant supply in the western half og the country.
Are we going to deny the use of water to grow our food so that the water can be used for fuel?
The Ethanol debacle is really hitting the skids, IMO, with the flooding and hail and heavy rain ruining the corn crop in about 7 states that are high in corn production. There will be no or very little crop of corn this year, and with any surface crop that is subject to Mother Nature, it is an uncertain source for fuel or food each and every year. Where are the Ethanol refineries going to get their raw materials this year???
Actually, you just made my point in a round-a-bout sort of way. It is exactly that kind of arrogance from which I expected we would need to step back. I just assumed it would be from others rushing to answer your question. Silly me.
How much power does it take to produce the fuel electrode? If it’s more than the unit puts out, they’ve invented a “perpetual backwards machine”.
I might be off track, but I always thought that the real potential for “fuel cell” technology is really to make better Storage Devices for Wind or solar Power. Less toxic, easier maintenance, etc.
Any kind of power, but IIRC wind and solar don't produce enough juice for the buck.
You know you can’t trust laws passed by a bunch of dead white men!
barbra ann
LOL!
Would you believe that there are people who say that unironically?
Soylent Green
Congress may repeal the Second Law of Thermodynamics; it nearly repealed the economic law of supply and demand; raising gasoline taxes to lower gasoline prices!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.