The Science Behind Fuel Cells - How They Powered Spacecraft, Cars And Sometimes Phones
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 เม.ย. 2020
- For the last 50 years every crewed mission to space launched by the US has been powered by fuel cells, these directly convert the fuel's chemical energy into electrical power without an intermediate mechanical step. So, let's try and explain how they work, and how there are many types of fuel cell technology which have their own advantages and disadvantages.
- วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
I have a 1.4kw hydrogen fuel cell I plan to use at ChickenHole Base. 😊
What fuel?
*hydrogen* fuel cell
@@KKdessu
I'll use my terrible eyesight as excuse.
you might be better of with solar and powerwall
@@jaroslavstava3704 Fair enough, done that myself too.
And in 15 minutes, Scott summarizes the thesis chapter that took me six months to write. :p
I had the exact same feeling.
@@edding8400 You guys are nicer judges than the thesis examiners
that reflects on the quality of thesises ;)
S C theses
I spent years working on these things and Scott did not leave anything out. Amazing video.
The lack of fuel cells on the Dragon isn't that surprising given that battery power density has increased dramatically in fifty years, that Elon Musk runs a company that makes batteries, and that the spacecraft doesn't use hydrogen for other purposes so incorporating it is not incremental in nature.
it's one hell of a smackdown from an engineering standpoint and such an Elon thing to do
With a side dose of "And solar trunk!" as generative capacity.
None of SpaceX's operational systems has a standalone operational timeframe of more than three weeks. The cycle life of stable Lithium ion chemistries is where the actual improvement has come in, but there are still quite a few mass tradeoffs against power density and energy density.
@@tehllama42 Go back to that chart at 5:55, you can see NASA was counting on batteries for less than a day, and for a much lower output. With the entire Crew Dragon running on batteries for three weeks it has taken over the entire useful range of fuel cells on that chart.
While Gemini, Apollo, and the Shuttle may have all used fuel cells the American modules on the ISS are powered by solar panels and batteries, as was Skylab previously. Fuel cells were only ever a niche product even in space, and the improvements in both solar panels and batteries have made them pretty much obsolete.
10:08
I work on KC-135 jet engines for a living.
Occassionally I see something that shocks me... In this case, all the hardware in this photo, such as the style of canon plugs, excessive amounts of safety wire, etc, looks insanely familiar... Because it's exactly the sort of stuff my jet's made out of. I occassionally get these sobering reminders just how OLD my jet it.
Similarly, I once saw videos of the interiors of B-17s and DC-4s... I swear to god, we use identical light fixtures and seat racks as these WW2 planes.
Modularity and component standardization for the win. I guess it's a lot easier to procure and stockpile spares that fit several generations of aircraft, compared to unique parts for each model.
@@johncrowerdoe5527 Better than GMC fixtures that are guaranteed to kill you in a crash, too.
@keith moore you put it much more elegantly then "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" 👍
@@johncrowerdoe5527 More importantly, they tested and been proven be reliable.
Mill spec is long to change. But if it works use it until there’s one that can replace it!
How many beers would Scott need to accurately recreate the landing of the “KABOOM CASE” in KSP?
Most shuttle missions in KSP recreate a kaboom case so I think he would be off to a good start!
@@benbaselet2026 me 2
I've got a kind of Pavlov response with automatic "it's gonna be a good video" when I hear "Hullo"
No, I have to hear the "... it's Scoot Muhnlay..." part. A proper Scotsman...
I always have to say "hullo" back. lol
"Astronaut badassery" must be a thick book.
AFAIK, the timid never go to space. Hopefully, this will change someday.
Honestly, it really does seem foolish. They pulled an all nighter to do some science. If they all died in the process they'd probably lose all the science on the flight, the ability to do any more science on that orbiter, the ability to do any science on any other orbiter for several years, oh, and we'd also lose some precious human lives.
I get that we like celebrating cowboys, but this is how accidents happen.
I worked for the company that made the Apollo and Shuttle fuel cells
You did an excellent job describing them
Sadly this small division was spun off after the grounding of the Shuttle and soon thereafter the new company went bankrupt
A foreign company now make stationary fuel cells at the factory
why do you people lie so much
@@carmichaelmoritz8662 how do you know?
1:48 - Note that this happens even without a load connected, because even dilute sulphuric acid corrodes lead and lead dioxide (albeit slowly), evolving hydrogen and oxygen in the process; this is why lead-acid batteries have such a short storage life.
We could have water powered fuel cell cars right now but just as Nikola Tesla learned the hard way. Cheap and Free are not things industrialists and governments want to hear. I feel for that inventor that could have turned the energy world on end that was poisoned at a Cracker Barrel after being offered a billion from OIl nations and he declined it.
Sean McDonough yep, that’s why it’s a good idea to dump the acid out of batteries you don’t plan on using for a while.
@@guidedmeditation2396 "water powered fuel cell" Figured the conspiracy theorists couldn't be far …
We covered fuel cells and batteries in last year's chemistry lesson on reduction/oxidation. Thank you for reminding me that I've already forgotten about its contents.
A battery is basically a fuel cell and a fuel tank sealed up together and intermingled. This is handy, concise, and pretty accurate. All the mechanical shenanigans, temperature optimization, fuel-purity requirements - all of it - is the effort to "grow" the fuel tank aspect *without* growing the (complex, expensive, heavy) electrode/electrolyte interface part. (Which is often amazing looking at how much extra gear that's taking!) The fussing with "what is the electrolyte" and "what is the anode/cathode" are all the precise same problems of batteries (although fuel cells often involve more dinking with gases).
More precisely, both are electrochemical cells, which vary by primary and secondary use cases, how sealed the cathode and anode sides are, and how much the inherent capacitance is used. For a hydrogen oxygen flowed cell using Pt/Ru catalysis to maximize power from making water, these PEM (often Nafion or other similar ionic liquids) fuel cell has huge value for space travel if you can haul H2 tanks. For a gas diffusion cathode you can use atmospheric oxygen for the same (ethanol and similar fuel cells, or the glucose oxidation and fungal laccase cathode versions I have lots of experience researching). Among reusable secondary cells, Lead-Acid all the way to the Lithium-Co/Mn chemistries used in Li-Ion and LIPO batteries can achieve very high energy or power density through repetitively intercalating/deintercalating lithium ions.
Grand scheme of things, depending on which variety of electrochemical cell you're using (and what power density, energy density, cycle count lifetime) you need, there are often a short list of viable options that make sense.
in resume, if you want to scale the capacity of a battery at certain power output, you need to buy more and more electrodes and electrolyte, meanwhile with a fuel cell, you just need to increase your fuel tank.
That is why fuel cells are more cost efficient (and light) to delivery power for longer periods.
so basically if i pump the right chemicals into a lead acid battery i would have a unlimited range power source .
Excellent video. I have worked on solid oxide fuel cells when I was doing by bachelors degree. The most common problem with the SOFC is the adherence of carbon on the anode surface.
Fuel cells are also used to power and heat homes using natural gas. At least in Europe and especially Asia they're commercially available. There are several types in use, like solid oxide fuel cells and proton-exchange membrane fuel cells.
Oh I just see that Wikipedia has an article about that: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_combined_heat_and_power
Always a pleasure to learn new things with you, Scott. Thanks! I didn't realize there were so many planned applications for fuel cells outside of aerospace!
Just did my Bachelor's thesis on Fuel Cells; I gotta say that you're spot on with your vid! :)
Always fun to log in to youtube and find a new Scott Manly Video Fresh off the Press!
Thanks for bringing these concepts down to a level most anyone can understand. Nice Job Scott!
"Hey, pull over to the next fuel station, please."
"Why? We have a full tank of gas."
"I have to refuel my phone."
I understood 0% of this video yet still enjoyed it.
I am SO glad you mentioned the Bloom Box! I remember the 60 Minutes episode like 10 years ago that told everyone how it would change the world. If i remember correct it converted natural gas into electricity and didnt require any rare elements. Also its only byproduct was oxygen and could nearly power an entire home with a device the size of a microwave.
Ive continued to check for updates over the past decade on any news on it, only to find practically nothing. This technology should be in nearly every household in the world by now if the tv segment was correct. In all honesty I was begining to believe the company and patent were bought by some big oil or electricity corp to bury it.
Scott Manley can you or anyone please explain why this tech hasn't recived any notoriety and become a standard houshold appliance?
Nobody??
Major tech companies invested in Bloom, got some stainless steel boxes and their greenwash, while Bloom promoted themselves with the list of users. They were a source of many (automated) fire department calls from an installation at our company. The calls stopped when the boxes were taken off line. The idea that houses would be powered by Bloom Boxes was laughable; costs are extreme and natural gas distribution wouldn't keep up. Technology charlatans.
Back when I used to use the Orbiter Spaceflight Simulator there was an addon vehicle called the "Dragonfly" that was basically a tug for moving cargo and other modules around a space station. Whoever created it had built into it a detailed model of fuel cells, and I remember that operating the vehicle was complicated due to the complex sequence you had to go through the start up and manage the fuel cells.
I remember that game. Great for learning orbital stuff
I very much appreciate you rigorously going through the details of technology. Thank you!
Many years ago now I was a chemist doing research into solid oxide fuel cells, I've never heard such a concise and well put together overview of fuel cells as presented here, good job.
I am learning about fuel cells and all the hydrogen technologies in the past 5 years, and yeah.. he made a really good general overview.. I am impressed.
Seriously, the quality on these Scott... Can we like a video more than once?
I love the insight this video brought to fuel cells, at least for this guy.
Thanks man! :)
Scott thanks for the great vid.Love to do a interview on my fuel cell experience .This is a big subject.The people need to Know.
Thank you for the overview and explanation. You honestly have a gift on explaining somewhat complicated subjects so clearly. The fact that I understood what you were saying, ding, ding, you done good! ;-)
Very interresting, could you explain again...please. 🤔 i lost you after "hello, scot manley here....."
I know right lol
I know you're joking, but just rewind the video. I watched it twice and rewound a few parts more often than that. It gets easier because you remember a little bit more each time.
haha, yeah, fuel cells is a complex subject, I was trying to learn about them on these last 5 years, I am very impressed with the resume that Scott has achieved taking into account that is not his main field.
Thank you for this video! I love it when you explain stuff, and this is a really interesting subject that I don't know much about. So your video was awesome.
I'm very interested in this chart 5:44 anywhere I can get a better breakdown/ higher res image?
I know, right? I saw that and thought "Ok, there's someone's doctoral dissertation". Wow. A lot of information and history and engineering in that one graph.
Start with "electric output and duration of fuel cells" images if you want that specific image take a screenshot and search with key words. I recommend duckduck for better results with less algorithmic interference.
@@brunos6599 duck the duck!
It's likely the graph (and a lot of the other source material) came from the NTRS (NASA Technical Reports Server). I found a higher quality version of the same graph in document 19690014038, "Study of multiple reserve electrochemical power source Final report, 11 Jun. - 15 Dec. 1968" on page 18 in the PDF. The graph is called "Traditional Trade-off Analysis for Space Power Systems". It's not exactly the same one Scott used, but it appears to be the same data.
@@brunos6599 duckduck.. is GO!
Wow! I now know what fuel cell are and how they work!
Thank you so much!
A bit over 15 years ago, i worked on a research project that was run by Reliant Resources, (and of course funded by the DOE) that was intended to be distributed power generation fuelled by natural gas that was steam cracked and fed to a PEM fuel cell array. Thisxwas intended to be a device aboutvthe size of a large outdoor AC condensing unit consisting of a cracking unit, PEM array, and inverters. Each subsystem was contracted out to different suppliers, our group was in charge of the PEM array, as well as final integration. The cracker was a majorcstumbling block, i do not believe the contractor had any intention of delivering a functional product, mercaptans were a problem as the sulphur poisoned the Nafion PEM membranes. Water was necessary to keep the Nafion membranes moist at all times and water purity was an issue. The cells had a limited lifetime (but we were working on that, it was a materials issue that i was working with the metallurgists to help solve due to my background with high performance ceramics and plastic seals) we were able to generate 21KW out of 6 PEM cells, and that was with 30% inverter losses. But the cracker delays as well as the political issues of the time ended up killing the project.
I heard the Nafion PEM membranes were prone to drying and being consumed as fuel ,destroying the fuel cell. Stan any idea of maximum cell life in hours.
7:00 chef boyardee cooking up a spicy fuel cell
I saw a chef preparing a wedding cake.
Kids love positive ions!
imma try something real spicy this time
Electric Videos are dominating my screen! thanks for the great video MR. Manley!
Who else have you watched? I'm interested in increasing my coverage
This is a fine topic!
Great work with this video
Very good lecture!
Thanks Scott...!
Interesting, thanks
Love how scott slipped and fell back into the queens English and said Gemini (Gem-in-eye) btw its the right way.
Nice.!
Many KSP players have never heard of them. Even in manned spacecraft, it's either Solar or (hidden) RTG spam and nothing in between.
Which always reminds of the scene in the Martian where he digs the RTG back out or those of Apollo, where the safety concerns were such that the seperate Plutonium cask was build to survive a Saturn V explosion, re-entry, decades of deep sea water (A13) and even Pete Conrad's hammer.
Using Bacon's Law, how many degrees of separation are there between Tom Bacon and Kevin Bacon?
Minimum of four if you count graduating from the same college as Eddie Redmayne who worked with Helena Bonham Carter on Les Mis who worked with Kevin Bacon on Novacaine.
Probably three or four if you go Richard Nixon (who he met in the 70s) -> Ronald Reagan -> either Kevin Bacon directly if they met or some other actor who met Reagan.
Though it also would not surprise me of there was some other obscure connection that got it down to two.
This quarantine is killing me.
Funniest comment I read all week
@@TheGreatPurpleFerret I think I've gotten it down to two. Tom Bacon -> Bacon -> Kevin Bacon...
Don't know, but this configuration 4:41 became known as the "Bacon Sandwich". For obscure reasons...
About 3 Francis's and 2 Rojers.
Love this stuff
You rock Scott!
Wow very interesting!
11:01 - "In the 2010s, the Bush administration spent..."
The Bush administration ended in January 2009. I assume this was the Obama administration?
I think it was the Bush administration, and he meant in the 2000s.
Perhaps he meant the 2000s. The graphic at 11:15 shows car models from 1996 - 2014, straddling the 2000s.
It was Bush in 2003. www.wired.com/2003/02/bush-promotes-hydrogen-fuel-cells/
Yep, I knew what I meant to say, but my mouth said something else.
@@scottmanley
You had a Joe Biden moment.
Hey Scott quick question. When we saw the shuttle land they would have a thermal camera as well. You always see puffing come out the top of the orbiter and I believe you can also hear some puffing. Is that the apu? And could that effect the orbiters trajectory while in orbit?
Hello! Great video about fuel cells on spacecraft.
About fuel cells on vehicles another issue, aside refueling stations, is fuel cost. FCH2 is more expensive than electricity even when produced from cheap natural gas. To be competitive you would need almost free electricity from off-peak nuclear or wind or so much solar than middle day becomes off-peak. We are still many years to that situation I'm afraid.
We have electricity that goes wasted from wind ,solar and nukes that big batteries are helping with ,but not seasonal giga watt storage ,fuel cells can do that.
Bless u Scotty Be healthy brother!
I did my dissertation on the topic of SOFCs. I think this is the first time I heard SOFCs mentioned in popular media. :)
I feel happy that i’m now ‘popular media’.
Nice👍
7:50 Nice diagram! Do you have a link?
On the gas in the drinking water. I saw an image from Apollo of an astronaut holding a bag of water with a big gas bubble in it. I think it was hydrogen and that they were getting flatulent from drinking the water.
A video on examples of astronaut badassery would be awesome!
Science Manly !! Science safe! : )
Hey Scott, this will probably get buried, but you mentioned how fuel cells couldn't be restarted due to the heat requirement. In that case, how did the CSM operate during Skylab if it had to sit dormant at the station for up to nearly 3 months? Did they use the station's solar power to heat up the fuel cells before they undocked? And how did they keep LOX and LH2 in the fuel tanks to last that long? Thanks!
'Astronaut badassery in history'...I want that on a t-shirt!
I use fuel cells a lot in my Kerbal Skylab Workshop Station
You didn't mention it in this video but one of the more exciting uses of fuel cells right now is in trains. Trains by their nature can easily carry very heavy loads. Fuel cell trains could be an amazing solution to the problem of extending electricity coverage to branch lines. It would mean that diesels could be eliminated for smaller less busy lines and a rail network could be fully electrified in an economic way. Battery powered trains are another possibility for this but both are very exciting technologies and will be integral to green reform.
I'd like to know the advantages of differing weights between fuel cells, batteries, solar panels as it depends on mission length.
This is a very good summary of fuel cells. I think the methanol-water fuel cell and the solid oxide natural gas fuel cell both convert the fuels to hydrogen then the hydrogen does the work.
A big part of that billion dollar fuel cell expense was spent near me in west Sacramento where there was a big fuel cell research building. I would see fuel cell cars around but haven't seen any lately. There is a hydrogen dispenser where I fuel my trucks. Doesn't look like it gets much use anymore.
Hey Scott Manley, could you make a million more videos on rocket engines plz :) ? I'm helping run a liquid bipropellant rocket engineering club and your vids are perfect for member education, which is a big hurdle.
God you are just brilliant you constantly provide genuinely useful and fact packed universally brilliant content. Thanks Man,ley
Epic tales to be told.
Sweet
Hey Scott, there are bloom fuel cells behind the parking structure at the Ikea in Emeryville. I was really surprised when I discovered them. Not sure why Ikea needs them but hey still pretty cool.
The break even cost is about 8 years, not to mention the reliability bonus.
They aren't even open now! A non essential business needing high reliability...hmm, well in an emergency you wouldn't want those automatic doors to stop working so I guess it makes sense. They may have done it to get a green building certification or to help with that, or perhaps they wanted to support a local business Bloom being based in San Jose. I'll post a short video of them when I ride by later today.
One of the earliest vehicles developed to run on fuel cells was a tractor. Allis-Chalmers built 10 fuel cell powered tractors in 1959. I haven't been able to find specifics on the type of cell, but it seems to use atmospheric air and hydrogen.
I remember it . It was acid based .a big stack ,low power output .It had carbon plates with groves milled for the gases
Scott, Do you think the SpaceX rocket that goes to Mars will run on a combination of a mini nuclear reactor, batteries and solar. I would assume the only viable option to avoid massive solar farms on the surface of Mars would be to have a couple of mini nuclear reactors on the surface of Mars once they build a permanent base there.
Can you do a video on all the things invented for space flight that we use in our every day lives?
I'm working on project that requires a lot of electricity in a small volume. I want to use a fuel cell for my energy solution. My question is, what limits or states the amount and rate of electricity that can output from the system? Can I just run the fuel cell really hot and fast resulting in a very fast conversion rate in a small volume. Thats basically what I'm asking. Thank you.
2:02 i used the exact same image in my school presentation on Fuel cells
Isn't it probable thatTom's hush hush nickel electrodes would have been developed for Tube Alloys? As by 1946 the Mcmanon act had shafted the British and the UK had only what had been developed under the Tube Alloys project and what was in the heads of the British Contingent. After all an obscure power generation project wouldn't be worth possibly revealing that Britain had access to a nuclear wepons technology unless the US knew we already had it.
Could a machine similar to particle accelerator be used as a source of propulsion? If some matter (I won't say what because I don't know a whole lot of anything... Yet :D) was accelerated so much that when it hits something it breaks into quarks or something, would it produce thrust? If so, how much? And how big would the machine need to be?
Great way to explain fuel cells and the difference with a battery. But I don't understand why the the fuel in launch/transfer stages isn't used as a battery instead of consuming it. That would save mass?
My guess is the mass saved would be very small, keep in mind a Kg of H2 has near the same energy of 3 Kg of gasoline and fuel cells are about twice as efficient than an internal combustion engine. Doubt the extra complexity in piping is worth it.
In the ion exchange fuel cell at 10:50 shouldn't the cathode be the negative pole? That's where the reduction reaction is happening due to the income of electrons.
7:45 Hehe, "kiliwatts"
THIS IS THE KABOOM CASE
i mean, it boggles the mind that NASA SCIENTISTS were arguing about the safety of an uncontrolled hydrogen/oxygen reaction, as if they didnt just spend 40 years building rocket engines out of it.
Thanks for the overview Mr. Manley. One day we will pour gasoline into a fuel cell generator and get the same 3 KW of a 100 cc one-cylinder engine. Maybe.
Scott Manley as consultant for Kerbal Space Program 2.
I hope... but the same than movie producers, they usually think they have a better idea on how to provide fun to the audience, but just because they project their own ignorance in others.
11:41
Wow. I never actually knew that the core of San Francisco was on a little peninsular like that. And I thought it was a much more modest bay, not an enormous area like that.
I have never heard about it before, but the water produced by these fuel cells would be extremely pure. Pure to the point of not actually being potable water anymore. Did they add electrolytes and minerals back to the water to make it drinkable again?
Pure water is potable, you'll just need to make sure you take your vitamins.
"Where's the kaboom? There was supposed to be a shuttle shattering kaboom!"
Quote Wernher von Kerman ^^
@@TwinPeaksIndustries Or Marvin the Dunation.
What kind of battery they are using? AA battery or some custom made fancy lithium battery? Can you also talk about the pros and cons on the electron rocket which use motor and battery to feed the fuel to engine?
I did fuel cell research in the late 70's-80's with help from NASA teck briefs (not much direct fuel cell information), later I talked to people at the national labs and they side there was a lot of work going on . I did a lot of library, patent searches and help from dad (research engineer).Talked to a guy at the state energy library about the lack of information and he said the utilities were having secret meeting on the fuel cell threat(mid80's).
Work was going on in the EU with alkaline fuel cells ,triple o rings sealing for 50 to 75 year life.
Alkaline cells have very high power,long life ,high efficiency(alkaline has less resistance then acid( PEM ) and can use raney nickel and silver.
Water splitting supplies the submarines with O2 very well developed . 50% to 100% efficiency depending on design .One test showed over 100% which was though to be doe to the elevated temp we live at (400 above absolute 0). Pressure and temp.assist in cracking the water bond.So could waste heat and letting the pressure build give free compression and added efficiency ?
Liquidifing H2 and O2 NASA Teck Briefs had a contact on magnetic refrigeration. They side that they had a 65% eff. H2 liquidifer on a 4X8 desktop @4 liters/hour. LH2 weighs about 1/2 pound/gallon so very little heat in that gallon
went by the fuel cell partnership grand opening, so I stopped in .I said I don't have a invitation but have studied them for a long time. They were very welcoming plus free food and beer and people from all over the world VW,Ford ,GM', Toyota ,etc.
The smallest alkaline fuel cell company in the world ,as they called themselves.They made working model cars. I met them years before at a energy conference when they were making PEM cells and were having problems with them. I had suggested they use alkaline cells and they switched over.
The VW guys had done work with liquid H2 with great success and said they burned LH2 on the grass and afterwards the grass was not burnt .
I saw the 1966 GM alkaline liquid H2 liquid O2 fuel cell van which was parked in the back,very few saw it. strange!
I talked to the people that ran the fuel cell partnership .And said I though it was a fraud to kill ev's and the alkaline fuel cell
they said "it could be"
"THIS IS THE KABOOM CASE" is my favorite new phrase.
Why can't Scott be my Online School Teacher , he explained a full chapter of chemistry in 15 mins while it took my teachers 3 weeks.
That's like comparing apples to oranges. They're not trying to achieve the same thing
You wrote "lead suphate" instead of lead sulphate on the left battery plate in the lead acid battery picture.
How about doing a video about BP-1227, the Apollo boilerplate capsule that was fished out or the ocean by a Russian trawler and then returned to a US coastguard vessel in Murmansk?
I know nuclear is popular right now for NASA with kilopower being suggested for lunar and martian bases, but it seems like fuel cells might be just as good of an idea for a polar lunar base with all the water ice there.
Scott you need to make a video about the new ULA upperstage fuel cell. I think its ACES.
The IFV on ACES is going to use internal combustion from waist cryogenic boil off and is not a fuel cell.
@@Orandu thx for the info
This may be a stupid question, but is it possible to somehow break down the hydrocarbons in gasoline and diesel to produce hydrogen on site at gas stations?
If we used better materials in solid oxide fuel cells like carbon nanotubes and graphene boronitride, Do you think they could be viable for aircraft?
Even if we had better pressure vessels and hydrogen fuel cells, do you think they can make an impact in aircraft, or do you think cryonics will always be in the de facto way it has to be?
Very informative video, you make it sound simple.
This makes me wonder, why don't we combine several types of energy devices in our lives, say our cars, power plants and so. I mean, actual combustions, fuel cells, batteries, even solid state devices like super capacitors, they all have their pros and cons for different purposes, but just like cache, ram, hdd in our computers, you could combine different energy sources to take advantage of their use-cases
No mention of the Baghdad battery thought it would have been worth a mention considering the topic ?
11:40 why hello there, I see my city :) smack in the middle of SF and sac
Solid state lithium batteries could be the final nail in the coffin for fuel cells
*will be, they're definitely happening, the question is when, not if
Prototypes are already being successfully developed by Samsung themselves.
Will this have greater energy density than LH2/LOX tanks? By mass?
There is no such thing as "the final nail in the coffin" as tech keeps developing and tides swing back and forth.
There are advantages for fuel cells that play out in certain applications. There are even advantages for combustion engines, that make them competitive, even if renewable fuels are used.
Not likely. Find a workable catalyst to replace the platinum electrodes and hydrogen fuel cells become much more competitive in many use cases, cars included.
Even if HFC don't become popular for use in vehicles, they will continue to have applications. Li ion batteries(even if solid state) are mostly best for portable applications(cars and laptops and the like). If the conversation were about grid scale power storage(not just balancing the grid like the tesla plant in Australia), Li ion isn't really on the table I would argue. Other battery technologies would fit the bill better(vanadium flow batteries, etc) and scale much more economically. Although it is less efficient as a whole, an energy storage infrastructure based around HFC technology scales better. You need more grid capacity? Put up a new storage tank.
This is all to say that one size doesn't fit all, Li ion, even as a solid state cell has its use cases, other technologies have their own. Our clean energy future will be diverse in the technologies used.
When you get an hour long iPhone ad 😐 good video though Scott
What is efficiency of a full cell powered by methanol compared to a ICE+generator powered by methanol? Full cells surely have advantages like lower temperature, no noise, less moving parts, no nitrogen oxides, no carbon monoxide, it makes it suitable to even run indoors (with co2 vented out), etc, but still I would be interested in knowing efficiency. I am assuming use of atmospheric air as a source of oxygen, and standard pressure, any extra can be done but would impact efficiency probably.
I used to work in a plant that made parts for Bloom.