PDA

View Full Version : Nanoparticles to Make Hydrogen Cheaper than Gasoline


Lukester
03-07-08, 11:17 AM
Nanoparticles to Make Hydrogen Cheaper than Gasoline

R. Colin Johnson

The hydrogen economy is getting a shot in the arm from a start-up that says its nanoparticle coatings could make hydrogen easy to produce at home from distilled water, and ultimately bring the cost of hydrogen fuel cells in line with that of fossil fuels.QuantumSphere Inc. says it has perfected the manufacture of highly reactive catalytic nanoparticle coatings that could up the efficiency of electrolysis, the technique that generates hydrogen from water. Moreover, the coatings could also eliminate the need for expensive metals like platinum in hydrogen fuel cells.

Boasting 1,000 times the surface area of traditional materials, the coatings can be used to retrofit existing electrolysers to increase their efficiency to 85 percent--exceeding the Department of Energy's goal for 2010 by 10 percent. The scheme holds the promise of 96 percent efficiency by the time cars powered by hydrogen fuel cells hit automobile showrooms, according to the Santa Ana, Calif., company."Instead of switching 170,000 gas stations over to hydrogen, using our electrodes could enable consumers to make their own hydrogen, either in the garage or right on the vehicle," said Kevin Maloney, president, chief executive officer and co-founder of QuantumSphere. "Our nanoparticle-coated electrodes make electrolysers efficient enough to provide hydrogen on demand from a tank of distilled water in your car."

The first commercial product inspired by QuantumSphere's technology will debut later this year: a battery using a cathode coated with the startup's nanoparticles, thereby increasing its energy density 5x over alkaline cells and boosting power by 320 percent. The first commercial nonrechargeable batteries with this increased capacity will be announced by an as-yet-unnamed major U.S. battery maker in the second half of 2008.QuantumSphere also claims to be able to improve rechargeable nickel-metal-hydride batteries to the point where they perform better than the less environmentally friendly lithium-ion batteries popular today. QuantumSphere's plan is first to retrofit existing electrolysis equipment with its nanoparticle electrodes to boost efficiency.

Next, it intends to partner with original equipment manufacturers to design at-home and on-vehicle electrolysers for making hydrogen from water for fuel cells. Finally, the company wants to work with fuel cell makers to replace their expensive platinum electrodes with inexpensive stainless-steel electrodes coated with nickel-iron nanoparticles.QuantumSphere's nanoparticles are available in four formulations: nickel cobalt, iron cobalt, nickel iron and silver copper. According to the Freedonia Group Inc. (Cleveland), the nanoparticles can be sold directly into the catalyst metals market, which it predicts will edge up to $4.7 billion this year.

QuantumSphere is also expected to have an impact on the battery market, which Freedonia estimates will grow to more than $5 billion by 2009. Portable fuel cells and direct hydrogen generation are markets that are growing even faster, with fuel cells estimated to top $11 billion by 2013, according to Wintergreen Research Inc. (Lexington, Mass.), and hydrogen generation to exceed $15 billion by 2016, according to Clean Edge Inc. (Portland, Ore.).QuantumSphere was founded in 2002 with just $100,000 of private funding and still has not taken in any venture capital, although it did have a public funding round last year.

The company's founding goal was to create a thimble full of the nanoparticles it invented. But now, just over five years later, it claims to have surpassed its original goal with a manufacturing plant capable of producing tons of nanoparticles per year.

QuantumSphere claims its current manufacturing capacity is enough for both the battery and electrolysis markets. With an eye on future growth, however, the company has partnered with the OM Group Inc. (Cleveland) for mass-producing nanoparticles when QuantumSphere can no longer meet demand.After perfecting the original invention, for which QuantumSphere was awarded a patent last year, the company hired an engineering team to adapt the nanoparticles for particular applications.

Leading that team was director of fuel cell research Kimberly McGrath, a protege of George Olah, the 1994 Nobel Prize winner in chemistry. Olah, inventor of the direct liquid-methanol fuel cell, serves as a scientific adviser to QuantumSphere.
"We have formulated a nanoparticle coating that has a very high surface area, enabling inexpensive coated stainless-steel electrodes to exceed the performance of the expensive platinum electrodes used today," said McGrath. "We start with raw material that covers about the size of a sheet of paper, but after converting into nanoparticles, it covers a soccer field.

"The nanoparticles are perfect spheres, consisting of a couple hundred atoms measuring from 16 to 25 nanometers in diameter. They are formed by means of a vacuum-deposition process that uses vapor condensation to produce highly reactive catalytic nanoparticles, for which the engineering team has formulated several end-use applications."Our biggest engineering challenge was finding a way to get the nanoparticles to stick to metal electrodes," McGrath said.

The company has solved that problem, she said, "enabling existing electrolysis equipment to realize a 30 percent increase in hydrogen output just by retrofitting our coated electrodes."QuantumSphere projects that the efficiency of electrolysis using its nanoparticle-coated electrodes, now at 85 percent, can be increased to 96 percent by the time hydrogen fuel cell automobiles are in wide use. Adjusting for rising gasoline prices, QuantumSphere projects that performing electrolysis at home to power hydrogen fuel cells will then be less expensive than burning fossil fuels.

The company has also made progress in its quest to eliminate the need for expensive platinum electrodes inside the fuel cell itself, claiming that today it can replace half a fuel cell's platinum with nanoparticle-coated stainless steel. QuantumSphere hopes to demonstrate fuel cells with no platinum at all in the coming years.

www.eetimes.com (http://www.eetimes.com/)

c1ue
03-07-08, 06:10 PM
Ah, EE Times that paragon of useful information.

My name has even appeared there - now you know it is a worthless rag...

Lukester
03-07-08, 06:33 PM
I have a sneaking suspicion I'm slowly being converted to the "E.J. thesis" that miraculous technology will come in (the march of the propeller-heads) and save us from catastrophic petroleum decline decimating the world's fleets of gasoline and diesel engine vehicles.

But there is one hell of a big MAYBE attached to the back of that theory.

Maybe one of these days we'll even get a grudging admission from Rajiv that there is real potential for a non-hydrocarbon vehicle to be rolled out to replace the globe's existing fleet of internal combustion engines. Once Rajiv capitulates on that, it will be a "whole new era"! :D

metalman
03-07-08, 06:45 PM
I have a sneaking suspicion I'm slowly being converted to the "E.J. thesis" that miraculous technology will come in (the march of the propeller-heads) and save us from catastrophic petroleum decline decimating the world's fleets of gasoline and diesel engine vehicles.

But there is one hell of a big MAYBE attached to the back of that theory.

Maybe one of these days we'll even get a grudging admission from Rajiv that there is real potential for a non-hydrocarbon vehicle to be rolled out to replace the globe's existing fleet of internal combustion engines. Once Rajiv capitulates on that, it will be a "whole new era"! :D

i don't see a gee whiz, california egg head, techno babbling weenie thesis here. itulip shits all over that in energy and money (http://www.itulip.com/energyandmoney.htm). right, grg?

1. conservation & less consumption
2. technology

Lukester
03-07-08, 07:48 PM
Metalguy -

<< conservation & less consumption >>

"Less consumption" is an American idea. You can't sell "less consumption" to people in furiously developing nations for whom an extra twenty gallons of gas more a year translates directly into greater earning power. It's the difference between being able to travel 2 miles to a place of work on a donkey, or 20 miles to a place of work on a motorbike or in a car. "Less Consumption" in those places is not gonna fly. Conservation will do miracles in America. It won't do squat in the developing world. Of course you knew that already, right?

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2998 (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2998)

Rajiv
03-07-08, 07:59 PM
Maybe one of these days we'll even get a grudging admission from Rajiv that there is real potential for a non-hydrocarbon vehicle to be rolled out to replace the globe's existing fleet of internal combustion engines. Once Rajiv capitulates on that, it will be a "whole new era"! :D

I tend to lean towards Richard Heinberg's "Post Carbon Living (http://energybulletin.net/41231.html)" ideas


The Guardian quoted departing chief scientific adviser Sir David King as saying, “any approach that does not focus on technological solutions to climate change—including nuclear power—is one of ‘utter hopelessness’.”

It is useful to have this view so succinctly stated, because it is nearly the reverse of the position I will be exploring in this column, which is that there is an overwhelming need for non-technological responses to our global environmental crisis.

If I could debate the point with Dr. King, I would begin with a discussion of our differing understandings of the nature of the crisis itself. In his view, climate change is caused by technology and therefore must have a technical solution. But to me this is a blindingly superficial framing of the situation. It’s not just climate change that threatens us, but depletion of resources including oil, natural gas, coal, fresh water, fish, topsoil, and minerals (ranging from antimony to zinc, and including, significantly, uranium); as well as destruction of habitat and accelerating biodiversity loss—which is exacerbated by climate change, but is also happening for other anthropogenic reasons. In essence, there are just too many of us using too much too fast.

Thus the problem is not merely technological; it is cultural in the deepest sense. Starting a couple of centuries ago, our species embarked on a path of unprecedented growth, founded on a temporary subsidy of cheap hydrocarbon energy. Climate change is a side effect of fossil fuel consumption, and has emerged as the most critical symptom of our growth binge. But unless we address the core of the problem, other symptoms will soon overwhelm us even if we manage technically to resolve the dilemma of carbon emissions.

Addressing the core of the problem means letting go of growth; in fact, it means engaging in a period of controlled societal contraction characterized by a stable or declining population consuming at a per-capita level far lower than is currently taken for granted in the industrialized world.

For anyone who understands the basics of ecology—having to do with relationships between population, resources, and carrying capacity—nothing could be clearer. But for those who insist on seeing only technical problems with technical solutions, the forest remains lost from sight behind a single tree.

To be sure: minimally polluting technologies must be part of our response to climate change and all the other symptoms of global crisis—whether those technologies include wind turbines, better public transit systems, or more efficient electrical storage devices. But just as important are changes in individual attitudes, habits, and expectations; and more essential still is a fundamental reworking of economic institutions and policies, so that endless growth ceases to be seen as good or even possible.
.
.
.
.
(contd (http://energybulletin.net/41231.html))

Lukester
03-07-08, 09:22 PM
Pithy quote Rajiv.

<< For anyone who understands the basics of ecology—having to do with relationships between population, resources, and carrying capacity—nothing could be clearer. But for those who insist on seeing only technical problems with technical solutions, the forest remains lost from sight behind a single tree. >>

We might consent to remember that massive change of basic societal paradigms throughout human history has only ever found it's galvanizing spark in harsh crisis. No "well-planned transitions" ever occurred, when the fundamental paradigms of an era's social and industrial organization were challenged. Why should it be different this time?

Metalman - I welcome you to put your objections to Rajiv here. For myself, I have none.

___________

FROM A ROBERT NEWMAN SKIT - HISTORY OF THE WORLD BACKWARDS (Seventeenth century Duchess contemplating the 20th Century in her past):

http://www.robnewman.com/historylute.jpg

The mighty Lucy Liemann! Here she is playing the science-mad Duchess of Padua, patron to Galileo and Kepler. She collects antique junk technology from 400 years ago and together the three of them try to work out what this salvage might have been used for back in the 20th and 21st centuries, be it a Sat Nav or a solar panel.

AND TOTALLY OFF TOPIC, BUT FOR THE HELL OF IT

http://www.robnewman.com/historypaper.jpg

This is Colin Macfarlane playing a character called Dougie Fredericks - in a story which runs through episode 3 and ends in a song and dance number. He is so real and so absorbed in every role he plays that when you act in a scene with him you lose yourself in it like a game of make-believe when you were a kid.