So Where Are The Fuel Cells?

prostoalex writes: "While fuel cells have been touted as a revolutionary innovation for the electronics industry, they have not hit the market yet. This article in eWeek talks about the current problems with fuel cells, and claims that 'these devices, designed to last as much as 10 times longer than a standard lithium-ion battery, should hit the market by 2004.'" There are a few fuel-cell devices on the market, but this article points out a few reasons they're not yet more widespread.

Comments

Not an expert but...

[tcd004]

I do own a fuel cell. To be exact, it's a small direct methanol cell, which runs on a 3% methanol and 97% water solution. I'm damn sure that 3% methanol is not too flamable.

My guess is that the number one thing keeping fuel cells off the mainstream market is the cost of production. Specifically, the poles of the cell have to be made of platinum. Last time I checked platinum isn't too cheap.

Visit

tcd004

What about Flywheels?

[evilviper]

So, are we completely giving up on flywheels? They may not be too mainstream, but they hold the promise of incredibly light devices (at least they can be) with the ability to hold incredible ammounts of energy, and store it with practically no loss, for a very long period.

That would also relieve the long charging times necessecary with batteries (at least they could).

Correcting some misinformation...

[RedBear]

You're probably thinking mainly of the Hindenburg disaster when talking about something with hydrogen in it exploding. The problem with that is, A) the Hindenburg didn't explode, and B) it is highly unlikely that the fire that did consume the craft was caused by hydrogen being ignited by a spark. I got this from my dad and then later saw a report on it on PBS. Through a quick search on Google, I found the most relevant page I could, here.

The gist of it is that the skin of the Hindenburg was made of fabric and coated with laquers and metal based paints, and the material itself was highly flammable. (The guy on the PBS documentary had a piece of the original fabric and showed how nicely it burned.) That's why the entire surface of the dirigible burned within seconds and it crashed to the ground, and that's also why it burned with a bright orange flame. A hydrogen flame is nearly invisible in daylight; in darkness it's a pale blue. Hydrogen is lighter than air, thus always burns upwards, not in all directions. The long and short of it is that there were many indicators that a few thousand observant engineers and scientists over the decades should have picked up on, that should have told them their assumptions about hydrogen's involvment in that disaster were wrong. But to this day, the Hindenburg "explosion" is used in books and courses to show how "dangerous" hydrogen is. Just goes to show that just because something has been "known" a for a long time, doesn't mean it's correct.

While we were talking about this (dad and I), he also told me about some experiments he'd seen and/or done many years ago with hydrogen. For example, if you have a tank filled with hydrogen and poke a hole in the side, and light the stream of hydrogen that's coming out with a match, guess what happens? No, it doesn't explode. If it's dark, you'll see a blue flame right at the edge of the hole. You'll see it until there isn't any gas left in the bottle. The pressure of the escaping gas is always just enough to keep it from burning back into the bottle. But there's also another reason it doesn't burn back into the bottle and blow up. Say you stick that match into the hole, guess what happens? The hydrogen will put it out. Poof. Not enough oxygen. See, hydrogen is only flammable in the presence of oxygen. And it's only explosive in tightly confined spaces. So inside you're battery's fuel cell, you'd first have to mix it with a certain percentage of oxygen, while it's still sealed, and then somehow introduce a spark, inside the case, aslo while it's still sealed. Good luck.

Anyway, I just wanted to spread some updated information on the Hindenburg, and I've always thought that whole pure-hydrogen-puts-out-a-match thing really interesting.

Re:What about Flywheels? ( see Rosen Motors )

[Locutus]

There once was a US company who built a hybrid car which used a shoe-box sized turbine engine and a small flywheel. They designed both components from scratch and debugged it to the point where they drove the car across country. I don't even think it broke down once (unlike that fuelcell car that just made it's trip x-country and broke down many times).

http://www.awl.com/englishpages/tech_talking_har dw are.htm
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/business/botli ne/fall97 /9_25/Benrosen.html

there were more links a couple of years ago but now many are no longer posted. There used to be a good one with illustrations and pictures. Anyway, none of the Big Three would buy into their design so they closed shop. Capstone still makes compact turbine engines though.....

Could be a good time to auction off the car on ebay?

LoB

Re:That's Bullshit.

[7-Vodka]

actually I remember a company in brazil that made very nifty self-sharpening razor blades. Those things lasted a LONG time, measured in years no less.

They were promptly bought out by gillette together with all their patents, then shut down. This was more than a decade ago. I only know this because my grandfather was telling me about it recently, he still has some. To this day I still have to buy razor blades that last for less than a month.

Go figure.

I had the argument about the lightbulb with my physics teacher. I lost. Do some research. Cheap efficient lightbulbs that last for decades aren't hard to produce. The parent poster is right when he says the companies who make lightbulbs aren't interested and destroy anyone who attempts it.

Capitalism in practice does not work like you think. Monopolies and cartels are a dime a dozen in this world, stiffling competition and using power and influence to maintain outdated buisness models.