Slashdot Mirror
Boeing Installs World's Largest 'Reversible' Renewable Energy Storage System (computerworld.com)
Lucas123 writes: Boeing announced that it has installed a first-of-its-kind 50MW Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) system on a naval base in Port Hueneme, Calif. The fuel cell system, which can scale to 400KW, is unique in that it uses solar power to generate hydrogen gas from seawater, which it then stores until it releases the gas into a fuel cell stack to produce electricity, heat and water. Because the system can both store energy and produce electricity, Boeing is calling the fuel cell system "reversible." The Navy's Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center is testing the fuel cell system on a microgrid to determine its viability for use at both remote bases and during overseas military missions.
"The Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) system, which can generate 50 kilowatts (KW) of power, is the largest of its kind and can use electricity from wind or solar power to generate hydrogen gas, which it then compresses and stores."
Yea, we've been calling that 'Rechargeable' for the last hundred years, but the marketing gonks at Boeing go with 'Reversible' instead then like it's something novel.
Gibberish.
That is, if you're near a large supply of readily accessible water. Even with scavanging the water vapor off the fuel cells, there will be losses. And it's likely to use a lot of water to start up. Here in the desert, water is a BIG issue.
50 kw per hour is 36 megawatts a month. Enough to power a small town. And this tech scales easily? It could be an answer for said small towns, a few 50-400kw plants should do them. I like decentralised energy generation. Less choke points. Less transmission infrastructure to maintain.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
But call me old-fashioned.
Giving correct numbers is such a thing of the past those days... All matters is the headline, not the actual facts.
Actually 50 MW would have made the whole thing really interesting... 50 KW makes it an anecdote.
The initial test is only 50 kilowatts (not megawatts), with the ability to scale it up to 400kw. Would be interested to know how long it takes to build up the gas reserve for that amount of power and how quick it can provide it.
--- To save space, would readers please insert their own witty comment -here-
Iz realy noboddy proofeadng submisions on thiz saite?
Reversible energy storage systems have been around for a while. Pumped water storage scales to GW levels with 70% efficiency, but depend on specific geography.
Another scheme is to use an electric locomotive to push rail cars up a hill, and use motor braking on the downhill run to extract the energy again.
Storage in hydrogen is less efficient: electrolysis is 70% efficient, a fuel cell is 40-60%, so chain efficiency is around 35%. The advantage is it's scalable and can be made portable (which is why the DOD is interested).
features decommissioning of the inbred mutant crown royal corepirate nazi depopulation machines? perfect balance will have to wait for us?
http://www.navy.mil/submit/dis...
Which seems a more fitting description for s puny 50kW installation.
Speaking of this sort of thing what happened to Lockheed compact fusion reactor?
It was announced to have a model within a year and a prototype running within five years.
That was three years ago? So shouldn't we hear something?
> 50 kw per hour [...]
Gaah. For once, the summary got it right (yep, I'm more and more becoming again a fan of /.) and then this.
I think you mean 50 kw-hour per hour. Er -- 50 kw-fortnight per fortnight. Uh... scratch it.
PEOPLE, LEARN YER UNITS! (at least before spouting out).
117 words. 2 mistakes.
If you can't do your job as an editor, don't post. I'd prefer to get a post a day later than have to sit there staring at why 50MW may scale to 400kW and figure out what "stores until power" is supposed to mean.
Where did Boeing, or anyone, claim 100% efficiency? A system like this might manage 30% efficiency.
That's why solar-electric is a nice supplemental energy source for the sunny hours on sunny days - there's no practical way to store city-scale amounts of power. You always waste 70%-80% of it and/or require hundreds of square miles of land or something else ridiculous.
And here we see the point of green power .... to move money to the slimy contractors.
This is really interesting technology, but the article is a little light on the details.
What is the efficiency of this system?
What is was the price?
Is the water coming out of the system potable?
What are the "Unused Gases" coming out of the system?
Where does the salt from the salt water go?
As I recall compressing and storing hydrogen is a very expensive process. One problem is that hydrogen likes to destroy most metals. Any piping, compressor, or container must be made of expensive metals or lined with glass or something.
I recall reading several articles over the years about the Navy working on a process to turn hydrogen and CO2 into hydrocarbon based fuels. The hydrogen would be from cracking water. The CO2 that is dissolved in the water would be extracted for the process. If this fuel cell technology can improve on the process of producing hydrogen from water then the seawater to jet fuel process could be more viable.
I might be mistaken but hydrocarbon liquids can store hydrogen in a much smaller space than any compressed gas. I recall that not even liquid hydrogen can not beat fuel oil on hydrogen per volume. If this is true then it would seem that storing the hydrogen as a fuel oil might be more viable than compressing into heavy and expensive tanks. There's a few bonuses for storing the hydrogen as a hydrocarbon, even if it means cracking the hydrogen off again to run the fuel cell to produce electricity. A liquid hydrocarbon can fuel cooking stoves, trucks, battle tanks, helicopters, and even generators. Hydrogen can only really be used in a fuel cell.
It's interesting that this can store energy as a hydrogen gas but how does this compare in cost, weight, and volume to more traditional systems like lead-acid batteries? The military might have needs that make this viable for them but in a non-military environment this does not seem practical at all. The government is willing to spend a lot of money to save on things like time, space, and weight, but they have their limits. Unless they can make a case for civil uses I doubt this will go far in the military.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
A good description of the technology and it history can be found at https://csiropedia.csiro.au/ce...
A house with 240V, 200A service (quite common) has a ~50kW supply.
The in the story has a typo. It is not 50MW as stated, but 50KW.
Also the diagram on the page the link points to has the Anode emitting electrons (to go through the load) which are then collected by the Cathode.
I thought that it was the Cathode that emitted the electrons, which were then collected by the Anode.