[Wonder Warthog]

"They're just to d*mn expensive, so everything that drives down prices is welcome."

Well, that is ONE of their problems. But the SOFC variant has a number of others, specifically that the solid oxide "electrolyte" requires: 1)high temperatures to function at all, 2)is very brittle, and 3)tends to crack while undergoing thermal expansion (which is necessary due to requirement 1)). I'd want to see how they solve those other problems. At this point, the supposed advantage is "they don't use platinum", so the particular drawback of the expense of using platinum is apparently addressed. I know that there have been some advances in "nanostructuring" the solid oxide to get the conductivity down (made very thin), which also helps with the thermal expansion problem.

[wolf78]

Well, that is ONE of their problems.

Well, yes and no. When I said price I didn't mean cost of acquisition only, but rather total cost of ownership. That way limited durability factors into price: i.e. often having to replace stuff drives up costs. On the other hand, if something is cheap enough (cell phone batteries, motor oil etc.), frequent replacements can make sense economically.

At this point, the supposed advantage is "they don't use platinum", so the particular drawback of the expense of using platinum is apparently addressed.

If I understand it correctly another advantage is production method, i.e. using some kind of nanotech ink and then just print the fuel cell components on rather inexpensive ceramic.

[TXnMA]

"I know that there have been some advances in "nanostructuring" the solid oxide to get the conductivity down (made very thin)..."

R = rho L / A

Yep: maximize A (Area)

...and -- minimize L (thickness)