UFTO Note - DOE H2&FC Reviews'03 - May 30, 2003
| Thu, Feb 18 2010 05:48pm PST 1 | ||
|---|---|---|
|
Cleantech 706 Posts |
Subject: UFTO Note - DOE H2&FC Reviews'03
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003
DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Merit Review Meeting
May 19-22, 2003, Berkeley, CA
(See UFTO Note 10 June 2002 for last year's meeting.)
"Annual Review Proceedings" are (will be) available:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/hydrogen/pubs.html
DOE's new organization for hydrogen and fuel cells is in place.
Steve Chalk heads the program, and has about 20 direct reports
for the many sub-areas. The org chart and key contacts list are
available here:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/organization.html
Of course, the program got a huge boost when the president
announced the $1.2 billion Hydrogen Fuel Initiative and
"FreedomCar" program in the state-of-the-union address this past
January.
In a plenary opening session, Steve Chalk gave an overview of
DOE's response, based on a major planning effort involving many
stakeholders. (This is all heavily documented on the website.) He
showed budgets steadily growing over the next several years.
H2: $47, $55, $77 million (FY 02, 03, 04)
FC: $29, $40, $88 million
The Plan involves a decade of R&D, with commercialization
decisions towards the end, and subsequent "transition" and
"expansion" in the marketplace. Meanwhile, "technology
validation" projects will attempt semi-real world demonstrations
of complete integrated infrastructure elements, e.g. refueling
stations (major RFP was announced May 6 for a 5 year "learning
demo" of hydrogen vehicle infrastructure.)
http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/2003_solicitation_notice.html
The DOE Secretary will have a new Hydrogen Policy Group (heads of
EE, FE, Nuclear, etc.) and the Hydrogen Technical Advisory
Committee. Lower down, Steve Chalk will work with the Hydrogen
Matrix Group and an Interagency Task Force. Of particular note, a
new Systems Integration and Analysis office will be set up at
NREL, and several "virtual centers" at national labs focused on
specific technical areas.
In each area, goals have been established for the various cost
and performance parameters. (e.g., by 2005 electrolytic hydrogen
at 5000 psi should be produced at 65% efficiency, for under
$3.75/kg. By 2010, moving hydrogen from central production sites
to distribution facilities should be under $0.70/kg.) [One kg of
H2 is about equivalent in energy content to one gallon of
gasoline, making comparisons easier.]
When Chalk's powerpoint becomes available, it will be worth
reviewing if you're interested in how all of this is going.
This year's annual review meetings drew a large crowd again. A
subset of projects were chosen from each technical area for 20-30
minute presentations, while other investigators were asked to do
poster papers instead. Hydrogen and Fuel Cell sessions were held
in parallel (last year they were on separate days), making it
impossible to cover everything. A two inch thick binder had all
the vugraphs, however, and all of it be posted on the website.
Here are the session headings:
Hydrogen
- Production -Biological & Biomass Based
- Production -Fossil Based
- Production -Electrolytic
- Production -Photolytic and Photoelectro-chemical
- Storage - High Pressure Tanks
- Storage - Hydrides
- Storage - Carbon & Other Storage
- Infrastructure Development -H2 Fueling Systems &
Infrastructure
- Codes & Standards
Fuel Cells
- High Temp Membranes/ Cathodes/ Manufacturing
- High Temp Membranes/ Cathodes/ Electrocatalysts
- Fuel Cell Power Systems Analysis
- Fuel Processing
- Direct Methanol Fuel Cells
- Fuel Cell Power System Development
- Fuels Effects
- Sensors for Safety & Performance
- Air Management Subsystems
A few highlights:
- Codes and standards were compared to the "iceberg below the
surface" (i.e. that sunk the Titanic). The voluntary
standards-making process in this country, along with the 40,000
independent local jurisdictions, represent a huge educational and
process challenge to make society ready for hydrogen. The
recently announced fueling station in Las Vegas needed 16
separate permits, and the local fire marshal was the toughest to
deal with.
- Carbon nanotube storage is living on borrowed time. It has the
distinction of a stern "Go-No go" decision that's been put in its
path (2005), and the science seems not to be making the greatest
progress.
- Another Go-No Go decision is set for late 2004, for onboard
fuel processing.
- Photolytic H2 production makes slow progress, but researchers
close to it acknowledge it's practical application can only
happen if the right materials are found. The search continues
using "combinatorial" methods. (see UFTO Note 2 April 2003).
- The fuel cell work seems mostly to do with the tough slugging
it out with materials and costs, finding formulations and
configurations that gradually improve the situation. A fair
amount of attention is going towards higher temperature PEM cell
membranes, where hydrogen purity is less of an issue, however no
breakthroughs seem imminent.
- Quite a bit of attention is going to fueling systems. Several
projects involve the building of equipment and actual
demonstration fueling stations and "power parks". DTE and
Pinnacle West are the only utilities that seem to have really
pursued this; each has a major demonstration project in
development.
In view of the volume and technical nature of this material, let
me suggest that I can dig deeper into any particular area of
interest to you, but that otherwise the DOE website has all the
documentation on the programs and specific projects.
^^^^^^^^^
Other Hydrogen news:
You may have seen Wired 11.4 (April). The cover story is by Peter
Schwartz, the famous futurist, who proclaims that a full-blown
hydrogen economy is urgent and inevitable. I saw him present the
argument at a seminar at Stanford recently, and found it very
short on practical specifics and less than compelling. For one
thing, he asserts that nuclear will be the major source of energy
to make hydrogen a decade or two from now.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.04/hydrogen.html
Along the same lines, the June issue of Business 2.0 came last
week, with a feature story about the head of Accenture's Resource
Group, Mary Tolan, and her blunt challenge to the energy industry
to go invest like crazy to make the hydrogen economy happen
quickly. She says it's the only way the oil majors in particular
will be able to continue to make big profits in the future. She
apparently let loose with this at CERA Week, back in February.
Business 2.0's website (http://www.business2.com) won't have it
online for a few weeks, but I was able to locate a reference to
an Accenture utility industry event that outlines the argument.
http://www.accenture.com/xd/xd.asp?it=enweb&xd=industriesresourcesutilitiesagenda_monday.xml
Curious to know what you think. In my own opinion, both sound
over the top. We've got a ways to go before the technology, or
the society, will be ready for hydrogen on a massive scale. I've
written to Ms. Tolan to see if I can get more details as to their
reasoning.
|
|
Viewing 1 - 1 of 1
Please login or sign up to post on this network.
Click here to sign up.


