Solar-Hydrogen Fuel Cell Residence to be Built on Grand Cayman

Renewable Energy International, Inc. (REI) in, a press release, revealed that it will design and install a renewable solar-hydrogen fuel cell energy system in a residential environment in the Cayman Islands – only the second such system in North America. The U.S. based company also developed the prototype solar-hydrogen system near Princeton, New Jersey, USA, which was dedicated in October 2006. This second installation in the Caymans will demonstrate the system's significant cost and environmental benefits in an island environment.

REI’s design for this installation will closely replicate the prototype system in New Jersey. It will include a photovoltaic array that will produce electricity to provide for the home’s primary electricity load, as well as enough excess electricity to run an electrolyzer which converts water into hydrogen. The hydrogen produced will be reserved in a storage tank until needed, at which point it will be converted back into electricity through means of a fuel cell. To increase energy efficiency, the system will be integrated with a geothermal system that will provide for the home’s total cooling needs, as well as its domestic hot water. Energy efficient appliances will also be installed at the home to reduce the overall electricity load. Heat, although available, will not be required due to the climate in the Cayman Islands.

This installation is expected to be significantly more cost effective and energy efficient than the first solar-hydrogen system due to the fact that it will be installed in a sunny island environment. As the Caymans receive an average of 345 days of sunlight annually, the system will require a much smaller solar array, as well as reduced hydrogen production and storage capability, bringing down system costs significantly. The system is expected to be completed for less than US $200,000.00, representing a cost reduction of 60% over the prototype system.

Mr. Jim Knapp, owner of the residence on Grand Cayman where the system will be installed, pointed out that “The environmental benefits are important, but not the only consideration. For me, this is a financial play. The numbers work right now to make this a smart move.”

Comments

[Calamity]

What's the overall efficiency of this system (when not directly powered by PV)? And what about maintenance? Reliability of the total system?

"The numbers work right now to make this a smart move.”

What's his energy bill? $20,000/year?

This is at best suitable for niche markets, at worst it's a pure PR stunt.

Niche markets aren't going to save the world. And neither will PR stunts ;)

[kim]

Calamity -- You seem well named. Don't you know that when a technology is new it's always way more expensive? It will come down if it works and more people want it.
But, beyond that, there are people in the world for whom money is not the most important factor. Really.
PR stunts may not save the world ALONE, but they may well be where it starts. Let it be.

[Beek]

Calamity - I think his electricity bill must be at least $20,000 to justify this toy. No wonder he lives in Cayman - no taxes.

Kim, I am sure for somebody who lives on Cayman and can afford this $100,000 toy, money is no factor. Why make things cheaper when there are suckers like this around?

[Calamity]

Kim: well, that 200K is after a 60% cost reduction, so it used to be like 500K. An impressive reduction. However:

"As the Caymans receive an average of 345 days of sunlight annually, the system will require a much smaller solar array, as well as reduced hydrogen production and storage capability, bringing down system costs significantly".

Not everyone lives on a sunny island. And yes, there are people for whom money isn't the most important factor. But how many? A tiny fraction of the world's population. What's the rest of the world going to do?

Perhaps another 50% cost reduction is a realistic goal for sunny climes; 90+% cost reduction is definately not realistic. If it ever happens, great. But don't hold your breath.

Converting perfectly good PV electricity into difficult to store, somewhat dangerous hydrogen (storing it in high pressure tanks doesn't help), then feeding it to an inherently inefficient GenCore fuel cell, only to produce electricity again? No thanks. Converting any form of physical energy (photons) into chemical energy (H2)and then back to physical energy again (electrons) is always going to be wasteful.
Besides, the fuel cell concept has been around since the 1830's. Not exactly a new technology.

I'm not against this concept in general though. The geothermal system sounds like an excellent idea. I just think it will be better to use an advanced battery system, for storing PV energy. Especially considering that these last 10 years or so we've seen massive development in battery technology. Things get really exciting when PV costs go down some more.

How many hydrogen fuel cells have you got lying around in your house? And how many batteries? How many hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are there in the world? How many battery vehicles? What's the total research budget for batteries? How does that compare to the total hydrogen fuel cell research budget?

Do I need to elaborate any further?

[fjh]

Chewonki foundation has a similar prototype.

"The design, installation and operation of a hydrogen energy system fueled by renewable energy. This system will provide four days backup power for critical activities at Chewonki’s Center for Environmental Education." see http://www.chewonkih2.org/

for more details goto the MAINE HYDROGEN CENTER at http://www.hydrogenenergycenter.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=108367&module_id=8611

[Davemcg]

Why so negative, be thankful people are making this investment from which we will all learn. In time it will spread costs drop as Kim says.

We are doing a similar project in Scotland in the Borders. Until we do these things we do not know how best to do this.

Please applaud all efforts to displace fossil hydrocarbons

"Why so negative, be thankful people are making this investment from which we will all learn. In time it will spread costs drop as Kim says".

No offense, but this statement is based on naivety rather than fact. The type of fuel cell that is used in the system is expensive as significant amounts of extremely rare metals such as platinum and/or palladium are being used as a catalyst. Even if more common, cheap materials could be used, there still is the issue of inefficiency. Which is related to physics, more than technology. An inefficient system means many more additional solar panels to cover up for these losses. Adding even more to the total cost. Also, wasting energy isn't my idea of sustainability.

I am not saying that the costs won't drop. I'm saying it won't drop enough to become mainstream.

"Please applaud all efforts to displace fossil hydrocarbons"

This is ignoring capital scarcity. Spend your money where it counts. That 200k would displace more fossil hydrocarbons elsewhere. But Mr. Jim Knapp doesn't want to displace fossil hydrocarbons as much as he wants electricity for his residence. I don't blame him and if he can afford it, great.

Swap the GenCore for an advanced battery and this system looks a lot more promising.
Still completely unaffordable of course. But less wasteful, and good for niche markets.

If I appear negative, it's only towards hydrogen fuel cells.

My laptop computer is powered by a battery for good reason...

[Buddy Ebsen]

Costs in Caymans are very high for energy. Gasoline is around $4 per gallon, and electricity is 55.58 per 200 kwh (here's a quote from a Caymans govt website - "On the other hand, the price index for utilities rose by 13.3 per cent in March 2006 compared to March 2005," ESO said, and added, "Electricity prices increased by 18.9 per cent to reach $55.58 per 200 kilowatt-hours in a month. Similarly, the price of cooking gas went up by 22.9 per cent from $61 to $75 per 100 pounds cylinder. These trends could be attributed to the direct impact of international oil prices on these items."

Remember this system displaces gasoline as well as electricity. The idea is to use the generated H2 for your car as well as your house. This could easily save $5000 per year for gas even on an island. Maybe it displaces cooking gas as well?

[Calamity]

Costs very high? S55.58/200kwh (not a logical number - is it sold per 200 kwh?) that's about 28 cents USD/kwh. Roughly the same as I'm paying right now, peak rate. And I usually buy peak. Cooking gas isn't cheap here either. But my total energy bill was less than $ 1500 last year. Not including gasoline, curent rate here is ~$7.50/gallon. And ~2/3 of that is taxes. (lol, taxes alone here are more than the total price @ the pump in the Caymans!)

I would seriously consider buying this system if it's <15k. If I had an EV or SPHEV then maybe I'd pay 25k or something. I don't see that price happening at all, especially since I live in a not-so-sunny area (345 days of sunlight per year, I wish!) which means more expensive PV panels.

What's important to understand is that hydrogen FC's charged by PV are essentially batteries charged by PV themselves - generating hydrogen equals charging the electrolyte, converting the H2 back to H2O in the FC equals discharging the battery.

What battery would you take? One that wastes more energy in the "charge-discharge cycle" than is actually delivered? Or one that has only marginal losses (less than 10% for most advanced batteries)?

This is also true for a hydrogen FC vehicle. It's basically an inefficient battery vehicle! Advanced batteries have far greater future potential and they're already better right now so why bother with hydrogen FC vehicles? It's just a waste of perfectly good PV electricity.

There is nothing a hydrogen FC can do that an advanced battery can't do better. Except wasting energy ;)

[Calamity]

And cooking with hydrogen? Sounds cool, but also dangerous as it's hard to tell if the flame is burning or not. So you'd need an enclosed system i.e. no open flame. You might as well get an electric cooking furnace, then you don't have to put expensive hydrogen pipelines in your house and it's probably more efficient too.

Pure electric beats hydrogen every time! Even in the cooking department

[fjh]

Natural gas is a 'fossil fuel' and the current reserves in the U.s. are measured in the trillions of ft3.

Gas is constantly being made as methane...whether mud flats or compost or decomposing manure.

Point is to stop obsessing about 'peak' oil and its disappearance, and start looking for a sustainable supply of natural gas.

[Davemcg]

I am astonished at peoples comments. I must ask from what knowledge base. I take my lead from experts, when 2,000 climatoligist tell me we face a risk of global warming I listen and take action. When the International Energy Agency tell me oil will peak and decline and I see net energy demand continuing to rise I take action, (I spnet 23 years in the oil and gas business and use the same data sources)

There is o obsession, no panic just an orderly investigation of all the options open to us. There is no magic fit all solution, it will need many many differing solutions and the mix will different from country to country.

We use hydrogen gas from (town gas 51 H2) for 150 before natural gas, we added odourants adding colour is easy. FC costs are coming down very year and more an more products appear. 5 years ago it would cost £10,000 for a plasma screen I could buy now for £800

On paltinum every 2nd manufactirer is fing way to get rid of platinum and expensive materials but a FC car will use at least 50-75% less total materials in the running gear

[Calamity]

"I take my lead from experts, when 2,000 climatoligist tell me we face a risk of global warming I listen and take action."

That is not a rational approach to any problem. You must look at the system itself. Then you will find that there are at least two variables which have not been accurately quantified. Solar insulation, and water vapor content of the atmosphere. These are critical variables. How many watts/sq meter of solar energy was reaching the earth's surface a 1000 years ago? 10.000 years? What was the water vapor content of the atmosphere at the time?

The answer is shocking -- we just don't know!

It's rather arrogant to assume you can comprehend a multi-billion year old system with less than a hundred years of accurate data measurements.

Back on topic: read my posts again. Hydrogen FC's powered by renewable electricity are horribly inefficient. What follows is, as Ulf Bossel put it, "Hydrogen cannot compete with it's own energy source".

Technology cannot solve the inefficiency problem, only take of the rough edges a bit.

"FC costs are coming down very year and more an more products appear. 5 years ago it would cost £10,000 for a plasma screen I could buy now for £800"

First, it's unfair to say because x technology has come down in price, that technology y will come down also.
But yes, fuel cell cost will indeed continue to come down. But they cannot be as efficient as advanced batteries. And what makes you think advanced batteries will not come down in price? Since you say everything becomes cheaper, why not batteries?

"There is o obsession, no panic just an orderly investigation of all the options open to us. There is no magic fit all solution, it will need many many differing solutions and the mix will different from country to country".

Hydrogen FC's are already investigated. They are inherently inefficient. Hydrogen fuel cells are batteries so it makes sense to compare them to other battery options. Pretty much every other battery tech is much more efficient than hydrogen FC's. Besides, keeping all options open is no solution to the problem at hand. With respect to physics, I cannot support anything that involves hydrogen energy generation.

The reason I'm hammering efficiency so much is that an ineffient systems requires additional generation installed. Sunlight is free, but solar panels are expensive and installing 2x or 3x the amount of solar panels just to cover up for losses... well that's what's astonishing me!

I'm all for replacing fossil fuels. Hydrogen is not a good way to do it. I can see a future with more and more powerful EV's and SPHEV on the road. Doing a large scale hydrogen economy is an environmental insult, energetically irresponsible and probably not economically viable anyway.

Here's some work from Ulf Bossel. There's a lot more floating around on the internet. Do some research, and listen to arguments not to experts...

[Davemcg]

Calamity, you are well named. I marvel at your expertise. What do you work at. I work with fuel cells faiy and have done for th past 7 years. Ulf Bossel is widley aclaimed in the industry as being blinkered, biased and frankly stupid.

"I'm all for replacing fossil fuels.

"Hydrogen is not a good way to do it. I can see a future with more and more powerful EV's and SPHEV on the road. Doing a large scale hydrogen economy is an environmental insult, energetically irresponsible and probably not economically viable anyway."

You show ignorance, stupidty, inflexibility and god forbid we are ever led by fools like you. Follow your own advice "Do some research, and listen to arguments" but listen to people who know what they are talking about, have done it, doing it. Consider all angles and determine what works best where, how and why. Be prepared to concede that on occasions you may be wrong, judging from your comments to date get used to this idea. I presume you know better than your doctor when you are ill in after all he is an expert.

Get real, envorinmnetal impacts are appearing, economic impacts are being felt now they are going to get worse, far worse

[Calamity]

Davemcg: No need to be snide. You are being rather patriarchal yet do not use logical arguments to rebute my claims.

You don't need a Master's degree in physics (or whatever) to know that this hydrogen energy generation scheme cannot be energy efficient.

Electrolyser x fuel cell =
max 70% x max 65 % = 45,5% efficient.

This is just the "charge-discharge" cycle, and you've already lost more energy than you'll end up using. Completely ignoring other parasitic losses and auxilliary systems and using very favorable, even unrealistic figures (especially for a home generation system).
Even the thermodynamic limits are not very good compared to modern advanced batteries.
How efficient could hydrogen FC's ever get? 80% perhaps in reality (83% thermodynamic)? Not likely at all, but let's say they get that efficient. And electrolyser efficiency? 85% perhaps one day? Still not as good as 90+% efficient batteries that we already have right now and they can be at least as reliable as hydrogen FC's and also inherently safe.

The electrical efficiency of these systems must be high as electricity has high exergy and the low grade heat produced by the fuel cell has very low exergy. And, inefficiency means installing more (insert favorite renewable) to cover up for losses. Which is very expensive.

Do you work with hydrogen FC's? That would make sense as it's your job it doesn't matter if it's an inferiour technology. If you work with non-hydrogen FC's then I wish you luck, e.g. SOFC's seem very promising.

"You show ignorance, stupidty, inflexibility and god forbid we are ever led by fools like you"

Ignorance? Stupidity? It would be ignorant to dismiss basic physics and stupid to think hydrogen FC's and electrolysers can break thermodynamics.
And inflexibility? Many major automakers are stobbornly clinging on to hydrogen FC's. Do you think that's flexible?

And most of the people who lead you actually think a "hydrogen economy" will ever be a more rational choice than an "electron ecnomomy".

Which is based on wishful thinking and is also proof of ignorance, stupidity and inflexibility.

"Get real, envorinmnetal impacts are appearing, economic impacts are being felt now they are going to get worse, far worse"

Does that mean we should not look at the BEST alternatives, and abandon the ones that are inferiour?

Let's not mix emotions with facts.
So please tell me, what do hydrogen FC's have that batteries can't do better? Right now, and in the future?

If I am wrong about this please tell me why.

[Calamity]

Everything else on this site is also highly recommended for some comprehensive, but essential energy basics.

Make sure you read the hydrogen section.

[A]

Dear Calamity, Could not find your e-mail id to write directly to you. However your arguements are well presented. How are you responding to the peak oil scenario ? Are their any technologies in sight to fuel the industrial economy ? Other than nuclear that is.