New Generation of Hydrogen Fuel Cells Powers Up

An anonymous reader writes "A safer and more practical way of storing and releasing hydrogen, discovered by two Arizona State University researchers, could lead to a new type of fuel cell capable of packing 10 times more energy. The key is apparently using the alkaline compound borohydride — 'a 30% solution of borohydride in water actually contains one-third more hydrogen than the same volume of liquid hydrogen.'"

Re:Carbon

[gurps_npc]

You mean like the billions of dollars each year paid for by oil companies?

Well for one thing, Sodium borohydride the fuel we are discussing has a HIGHER energy capacity then hydrogen-carbon compounds and has a HIGHER stability - less likely to burn).

It is in most cases a far better fuel than hydrogen-carbon compounds like gasoline.

The only reason we use gasoline is that oil is, despite new issues, still very plentiful. As we use it up, that will change.

Not New

[gfordham]

Look up (MCEL) Millenium Cell, They've been doing this for awhile. I believe the chemistry for this has been around a while too lazy to look it up tho. Platinum Catylitic mesh, and Borohydride The fuelcellstore has a nice little generator [fuelcellstore.com] --G

Chemical info on Chlorophyll.

[Anonymous Coward]

"The down side to either hydrogen-boride or ammonia is that they're not energy sources in themselves, but function (like a battery) as a convenient way to store energy."

The same could be said for all indirect energy sources.*

*Except for geothermal.

Re:Chemical info on Borohydride

[Anonymous Coward]

The only energy source there is for our planet is the sun. All other fuels are essentially batteries there is only a difference as to when it was charged.

Energy density

[j1m+5n0w]

In the article, they state the energy density of this new fuel is 600 watt hours / litre, with the goal of eventually getting it up to 2200.

According to wikipedia, gasoline has an energy density of 32 megajoules per litre, which if I did the conversion right, comes out to about 8890 watt hours / litre. This sounds like a big difference until you consider that gas engines are typically somewhere around %20-30 efficient. It appears they may some day make a fuel that's roughly equivalent to gasoline.

Hmmm ...

[Shadowlore]

It uses ruthenium. Ruthenium runs about 175 USD/ounce. Ruthenium is a member the cateogry called "precious metals". It's a rather limited supply item. Given it's other uses I wouldn't expect to see these things be inexpensive. Also menas it will be unlikely to be viable for larger scale applications such as automotive, residential, or commercial power requirements. Still, it is kinda cool.

There is also the question of lifespan and cycling. While the liter of fluid requirement can be worked around, long term issues such as cleanliness of the proces with regards to catalyst maintenance. I'd be cautios about using the phrase "halfway there" just becuase they are using half the percentage of solution they are looking for. While they are at 15% vs 30%, they are also at 600Wh versus the 2200 claimed in the article. Granted, that's theortical maximum, but the effective use of 30% solution is also theoretical.

Re:Energy density

[TubeSteak]

You know, hydrogen injection does wonderful things for diesel motors.

Instead of going 100% hydrogen or 100% [fossil fuel], you get more power & lower emission by running a combination.

Right now there is at least one company that sells a kit for large diesels which electrolyzes hydrogen (from water) on the spot & injects it along with the diesel fuel.

That system provides relatively small amounts of hydrogen, but this researcher [abc.net.au] claims 60:40 hydrogen:diesel hits the sweet spot..