China no longer needs to worry about the U.S. as a serious green technology competitor because the U.S. just left the race. After a year-long impasse, Senate majority leader Harry Reid confirmed on July 22, 2010 that the Democrats would not be able to secure enough votes to pass the American Clean Energy and Security Act and, thus, would abandon any further efforts to do so.
But, in today's globalized economy, rising powers like China are willing and readily able to capitalize on America's missed opportunities. The climate change bill would have provided a coherent U.S. energy policy, directed investment to green technology and created much-needed American jobs. Instead, those investment and job opportunities will likely go to China. With China's rapid expansion into the clean technology sector, the U.S. is being left behind and leaving many to wonder--will it ever be able to catch up?
BACKGROUND
Although the U.S. debate on climate change dwells on the prevention of environmental damage, the Chinese government focuses on the economics of climate change, emphasizing the direct link between clean technology and China's energy security and economic competitiveness. Former Center for American Progress senior policy analyst Julian Wong explained in a recent testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission that China's emphasis on the economic upside of clean technology has imbued its energy policy with a greater sense of urgency, allowing the country to surpass the U.S. in many renewable energy industries.
With over 4,000 miles of track laid domestically, China is the leader in high-speed rail. It has pledged $300 billion to bring high-speed rail to many parts of the country and is exporting its expertise to Turkey, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and potentially, even California. Notoriously stingy at funding its rail system, the U.S., on the other hand, has pledged a relatively paltry $8 billion and has only one high-speed rail line. Instead of developing cleaner rail technology, the U.S. continues to develop carbon-intensive modes of transportation, investing in highways and air transit.
China has also become a global leader in the renewable energy sector. As the leading manufacturer of solar panels, China exports most of its solar panels overseas. As for wind, China installed the largest number of wind turbines in the world in 2009, expanding its wind capacity by 13 GW. By contrast, the U.S. only expanded its capacity by 10 GW in 2009. But, China's prowess in renewables should not come as a surprise. In 2009, China invested $34.6 billion in green technology, making it the leader in renewable energy funding; the U.S. came in second, investing $18.6 billion.
Some critics argue that the Chinese government has an unfair advantage because an authoritarian system can funnel money easily to industries it wants to promote. The largest commercial banks in China are state-owned and--at the insistence of the central government--have provided ample low-interest loans to green technology companies. The U.S. market economy, on the other hand, cannot require American banks to give out favorable loans. Furthermore, China has used protectionist policies, like its "indigenous innovation" policy, to promote home-grown companies at the expense of foreign ones.
ANALYSIS
While some of these arguments are reasonable and should be addressed in trade talks with the Chinese, their importance in explaining the U.S.' second-fiddle status is exaggerated. The criticisms serve only to obscure the real issue behind the U.S.' downfall in the green technology sector - the lack of a coherent national energy policy. In the U.S., the climate change debate too often ignores the important role of government in promoting emerging industries within the capitalist framework and cooperating with the private sector. Silicon Valley, for example, flourished because of government support and its close ties to government, particularly the defense agencies. To attribute China's competitive edge to its planned economy is to suggest that capitalism and free markets are what hinder the U.S. ability to be a viable competitor in the global green technology market. But, American history shows that government support bolsters innovation.
Capital will flow to where there is some level of certainty in investment. Venture capitalists are sinking their dollars into China's green technology because the Chinese government has a crystal-clear policy, which it has backed by huge investments in renewable energy--sure signs of a government's sincere commitment to promoting green tech. These investors are also receiving huge returns on their Chinese investments. China's richest person is now believed to be Wang Chuanfu, founder and chairman of BYD, a battery and electric car company in China.
Furthermore, it's not just Chinese capital that is flowing. This September, Chinese wind turbine manufacturer Mingyang Electric will seek to raise $500 million in an initial public offering in the U.S. If the U.S. wants that capital to remain within its borders, the federal government needs to make an equally strong commitment to renewable energy. Until Congress passes some sort of legislation signaling its commitments to certain industries, capital--even U.S. capital--will continue to flow to China and green technology innovation in the U.S. will remain at a standstill.
In his testimony, Julian Wong raised the crucial point that, although the U.S. still leads China in green technology research and development (R&D), eventually, those R&D dollars will want to move to China, too. By its nature, R&D needs to be geographically close to its manufacturing base, as well as to the end users of its products. In fact, some U.S. companies--including important players like Applied Materials, DuPont, and IBM--have already begun to move their green tech R&D to China.
China has clearly surpassed the U.S. in key green technology industries and has established the economic infrastructure to lead the green technology market. Instead of trying to stay on the offensive, Congress has defensively decried China's authoritarian government and indigenous innovation policies and aroused fear of China's threat to American economic dominance. Aside from rhetoric, it is unclear what substantive actions Congress is taking to make the U.S. green technology sector more competitive. If the U.S. followed China's example in passing green tech-friendly policies, it may be able to catch up. But, by ignoring that possibility and abandoning any hopes of climate change legislation, Congress has, instead, opted out of the green technology race. Unfortunately, the only losers in Congress' ill-fated decision are the American public and the millions of Americans still out of work.
On Thursday, the Danbury, Conn.-based company said that it sold two 300-kilowatt machines to Eastern Municipal Water District for use at a wastewater facility in Riverside County, Calif.
There, an anaerobic digester, using microorganisms and heat, will break down biosolids into methane gas, which will be piped into the fuel cells to make electricity. The heat from that process will supplement a gas boiler for the digester, making the overall system more efficient.
FuelCell Energy this week announced two deals through which its electricity-producing fuel cells will be powered by biogas from chicken waste and sewage.
The company, a competitor to the much-hyped Bloom Energy, has been making fuel cells for years aimed at commercial customers. The fuel cells produce electricity from different fuels, including methane made from organic material.
The same technology will be used to generate 1.4 megawatts of power at the Olivera Egg Ranch, a poultry ranch located in French Camp, Calif.
Chicken waste right now is stored in lagoons. But an anaerobic digester will be installed to convert that waste into methane, which will be used to run the fuel cell and produce enough power for the entire egg farm. Both systems are expected to go online by the middle of next year.
In addition to reducing waste, the fuel cells produce electricity without emitting smog-causing air pollutants. The Eastern Municipal Water District has been using another fuel cell and is pleased with its reliability, said board president Ron Sullivan in a statement. It also helps the facility meet state clean air and greenhouse gas regulations.
"This Perris Valley facility is a new wastewater treatment plant under construction that has been designed to be environmentally friendly and energy efficient. The ultra-clean power generation by the fuel cell power plant was an important aspect of our purchasing decision," he said.
FuelCell Energy Inc. has devised a way to extract megawatts from chicken droppings.
The Danbury-based maker of high-efficiency, ultra-clean electricity plants using renewable and other fuels recently sold a 1.4 megawatt fuel-cell power plant to G3 Power Systems Inc. that will convert chicken manure into usable energy. It is being installed at Olivera Egg Ranch LLC in French Camp, Calif.
The installation is the first of several initiatives by FuelCell to convert animal waste into clean energy, said R. Daniel Brdar, FuelCell Energy's chairman and chief executive officer.
"There's really an untapped source of waste material that can be turned into `green' power," he said.
The City of Turlock, Calif.'s Regional Water Quality Control facility is using a 1.2 megawatt DFC1500 fuel-cell power plant that is turning methane gas into fuel.
The Olivera Egg Ranch plant, expected to be in operation by mid-2011, will create methane gas as a waste by-product through the use of a large concrete dome called an anaerobic digester, and then use it as fuel to generate enough electricity to meet all of the ranch's power needs.
"This pioneering fuel-cell power plant project demonstrates my commitment to the environment, enabling me to convert the waste stream from my poultry operations into bio-gas, which in turn is processed into clean, `green' power," Ed Olivera, owner of Olivera Egg Ranch, said in a statement. "My waste disposal costs will decrease, as will my power bill, as the poultry operation will continually generate the fuel needed to create electricity, reducing the amount of electricity needed from the electrical grid."
Olivera Egg Ranch is a third-generation family farm producing about 14 million cartons of eggs a year for stores and restaurants in the San Francisco Bay area. Founded in 1949, the operation has three locations producing and distributing chicken, duck, quail and goose eggs.
"We evaluated all of the power generation options available in the marketplace today and identified fuel-cell power plants as the best commercial technology available to meet baseload power needs in an efficient and environmentally friendly manner," Ray Brewer, president of Novato, Calif.-based G3 Power Systems Inc., said in a statement.
FuelCell is expected to develop numerous power plants for converting animal waste into power, said Peter Wright, an analyst with Tradition Equities who covers FuelCell.
"It's a fantastic return on investment for them because it requires minimal tweaking of their equipment," he said.
FuelCell will service the power plant under a five-year service agreement. The sale of this power plant represents the first order by G3 Power Systems under an agreement that provides non-exclusive distribution rights for FuelCell Energy's power plants, which are generating power at more than 50 locations worldwide. They have generated more than 500 million killowatt hours of power using fuels including wastewater gas, bio-gas from beer and food processing, as well as natural gas and other hydrocarbon fuels.
Shares for FuelCell fell two cents Wednesday to $1.24
Following an initial hour-long, battery-powered flight, AeroVironment’s Global Observer unmanned aircraft is beginning a test program planned to culminate in a week-long flight in the stratosphere using liquid-hydrogen fuel. The flight debuts an innovative approach to persistent surveillance and marks a dramatic departure for a company that dominates the market for small, hand-launched UAVs.
The Global Observer (GO) is flying from Edwards AFB, Calif., where it will undergo an operational utility assessment under a joint concept technology demonstration (JCTD) sponsored by several U.S. agencies and led by Special Operations Command. The initial GO-1 aircraft is designed to stay aloft for seven days at up to 65,000 ft. carrying a 400-lb. payload.
The aircraft reached almost 4,000 ft. on its Aug. 5 first flight and conducted a series of maneuvers, including climbs and turns. After battery-powered flights to expand the envelope, the Global Observer will begin using hydrogen fuel.
Unmanned platforms orbiting in the stratosphere for extended periods could allow operators to combine the capabilities of satellites with the flexibility of aircraft. But endurance measured in days not hours requires a different approach to design and propulsion.
After experimenting with solar power, AeroVironment selected hydrogen propulsion as the most practical solution for a high-altitude, long-endurance UAV that can be launched at short notice to maintain a continuous presence at low cost for persistent surveillance, communications relay, border security, remote sensing and other missions.
“In the same way that airplanes opened the lower atmosphere to practical use, and satellites did for space, we believe that the stratosphere can be opened for practical use by Global Observer,” says Chairman and CEO Tim Conver. Covering an area 600 mi. in diameter from the vantage point of the stratosphere with an affordable, persistent platform “translates into more coverage for fewer dollars,” he says.
“Compared to conventional aircraft, GO requires fewer takeoffs and landings, which translates into lower cost,” he says. “Compared to satellites, it will be easy to reposition GO, to upgrade technology and change out payloads.” The company calculates that the GO system requires up to two times fewer aircraft and eight times fewer takeoffs and landings to maintain year-round coverage compared with conventional UAVs.
AeroVironment is better known for its small unmanned aircraft, particularly the RQ-11 Raven, thousands of which have been produced. The hand-launched, battery-powered Raven weighs 4.2 lb. and flies for 90 min. The Wasp is even smaller, and the company is developing the Switchblade, a tube-launched lethal UAV, and the Shrike, a vertical-takeoff-and-landing “perch-and-stare” micro-UAV.
The Global Observer is a return to AeroVironment’s origins in designing large, lightweight aircraft. The company was founded by Paul MacCready, whose Gossamer Condor made the first sustained, controlled, human-powered flight in 1977. This led to the development of solar-powered aircraft—the Solar Challenger crossed the English Channel in 1981.
As part of NASA’s Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (Erast) program, AeroVironment then developed a series of high-altitude, solar-powered unmanned aircraft. The 100-ft.-span Pathfinder reached 71,500 ft. in 1977, the 120-ft. Pathfinder-Plus exceeded 80,000 ft. and the 247-ft. Helios reached 96,860 ft. in 2001. All these aircraft were flying wings sheathed with photovoltaic cells.
“By the end of the Erast program, we concluded that solar power would for many years be insufficient to support continuous operation beyond the tropics in the local winter,” says Kirk Flittie, Global Observer program manager. “Since most areas of interest are beyond the tropics, by 2000 we determined that something other than solar power would be required to enable long-endurance operation, most likely involving liquid hydrogen.”
In the meantime, the Pathfinder-Plus had demonstrated cellular communications relay and high-definition television transmissions from the stratosphere, validating the concept of using a high-altitude UAV for persistent communications.
The initial design of the Global Observer was developed in 2004, a conventional layout with fuselage, tail and high-mounted wing. The requirement was to maximize endurance at 55,000-65,000 ft. while providing 2.8 kilowatt-hours of power to a 380-lb. payload. Hydrogen was chosen because its specific energy is three times that of conventional fuel.
This presented a number of design hurdles. “Storing liquid hydrogen without heavy tanks is a significant challenge,” says Flittie, and critical to achieving light weight and long endurance. “[AeroVironment] developed a unique containment technology to enable storage vessels that are significantly lighter than conventional solutions.”
The Global Observer is powered by an internal-combustion engine modified to burn hydrogen. This drives a generator that produces electricity to power the four propellers and payload and charge batteries. “Continuous internal combustion in the stratosphere, where the oxygen content is approximately one-sixteenth that of sea level, is a challenge that was addressed through a unique compression solution,” says Flittie.
Compared with the alternative of burning the hydrogen in internal-combustion engines that drive the propellers directly, the company says its all-electric power network of generator, motors and batteries provides advantages in flexibility, reliability and redundancy.
AeroVironment’s Efficient Energy Systems (ESS) electric-vehicle business developed the starter/generator, which produces about 60 kw. of electricity, of which 2.8 kw. is available to the payload. “GO is made possible, in part, by the unique capabilities within our EES business that enable this solution,” says Conver. “Without these capabilities, it would be very difficult to develop and demonstrate GO successfully.” The company declines to give details of the hydrogen containment, compression solution or power system.
To demonstrate liquid hydrogen could be used safely and efficiently, AeroVironment flew a subscale prototype in 2005. The 50-ft. wing-span, 175-lb. “GO-0” was powered by a hydrogen fuel cell and flew at low altitude. Although it switched to internal combustion for GO-1, the company believes that, as their reliability increases and costs decrease, fuel cells could be a viable power source in the future.
Despite a wing span of 175 ft., the GO-1 weighs less than 10,000 lb. The airframe is composite, drawing on the company’s experience building lightweight solar-powered UAVs. “Working with our suppliers, we developed our own process for fabricating the composite wings with a very small number of layers,” says Flittie. The airframe is also modular, to allow the Global Observer to be transported by cargo aircraft.
Global Observer is designed to orbit a target for extended periods. “Launch, climb, descent and landing would typically be remotely piloted, while loiter could be conducted via autopilot following pre-designated GPS waypoints,” says Flittie. “A human pilot would be available at all times, even in autopilot mode.”
Three GO-1s are being built under the JCTD. Initial flights will use battery power to validate the aircraft’s handling and performance. Payload test flights will use hydrogen propulsion. The second air vehicle is expected to fly late this year and operate alongside the first to demonstrate persistent coverage in an operational utility assessment. The third is a backup. Payloads include a communications relay suite and remote-observation package.
Once the JCTD is completed, the air vehicles and ground equipment will be available for additional operational assessments and mission support. How the Global Observer could transition to development and operation, as well as potential uses for the residual hardware, have yet to be disclosed by the JCTD sponsors, says Flittie.
AeroVironment, meanwhile, has a plan to launch production of the Global Observer. Conver says manufacture of the initial systems has established a supply chain and infrastructure for low-rate production of up to five aircraft a year. Blueprints for larger-scale output have been developed “and we have plans to start up that facility as demand exceeds our existing capacity,” he says. A larger GO-2 has been proposed—a 250-ft.-span aircraft able to carry a 1,000-lb. payload—but the company says its focus is on the current configuration.
Although the Global Observer would seem a world away from small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), Conver says there are common technologies and customers. As its small UAS business has grown, the company has developed a parallel Global Observer program organization with its own design, development, integration, production and support capabilities. “The result is that we are ready for GO production transition now,” he says.
California has led the nation in solar development on many fronts for a number of years, but there is one area where California has lagged significantly – the implementation of tradable renewable energy certificates (or TRECs).
As of this writing, there are five regional renewable energy tracking systems operating in North America, one national registry and three state systems. As early as June 2007, the California Energy Commission launched the Western Renewable Energy Generation Information System (WREGIS), which was designed to track renewable energy generation and create and track renewable energy certificates (RECs) for that generation. TRECs are an important tool for utilities in other states striving to meet their renewable portfolio standard (RPS) goals and help developers finance renewable energy projects in other parts of the country where TRECs are available. So why not in California?
The Basics
In California RECs are not yet tradable – all electric utility renewable energy purchases are “bundled” transactions. That is, the environmental attributes (e.g., RECs) are tied to, or bundled with, the energy itself. Therefore, the only way for utilities to comply with RPS requirements is to purchase renewable energy in bundled transactions from a qualifying renewable energy facility.
In States with unbundled or tradable RECs, electric utilities have two ways to meet with RPS goals: purchase renewable energy in bundled transactions (like in California) or purchase RECs on the open market. In States with TRECs the REC has been “striped” from the energy and is traded separately. The energy is sold separately and is still supplied to the grid. The utility purchasing the REC may be and likely is completely different that the purchaser of the energy. Only the REC purchaser can count that energy toward its RPS goals.
Proponents of tradable RECs point out that the scheme will assist the State in achieving its RPS goal by balancing out geographical and transmission constraint differences from utility to utility. In California, for example, the State as a whole has considerable renewable resources, from geothermal to wind to solar - but these resources are not evenly distributed geographically throughout the State. Further, some areas with strong renewable resources have significant transmission constraints, making grid connection prohibitively expensive. A tradable REC regime would allow resources to be developed where cost and fit are most appropriate, and allow the environmental attributes (the RECs) to be traded among the utilities (and through intermediaries) to balance out these geographical and transmission constraint issues. As stated in the April 2006 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Staff White Paper: “Importantly, under an unbundled and/or tradable REC framework, [a utility] can purchase RECs from renewable facilities largely irrespective of where those facilities are located or where the energy is ultimately delivered.”
From the energy developer’s perspective, RECs can provide an advantage for developing renewable energy sources. The ability to sell RECs in an unbundled transaction would mean that a developer would be able to negotiate with any utility or other buyer of RECs, rather than negotiating with only one utility in a bundled transaction. In states with TREC developers contract with one utility to provide energy at a relatively low cost and then sell the RECs to another utility or other buyer to enable his project to be economically viable. Where the developers must sell the energy and the REC to the same utility, the price of the energy might be too low to justify development. For this reason, tradable RECs can be a way to speed the development of renewable generation.
The California Log Jam
California has been taking slow, halting strides in the direction of permitting tradable RECs. In 2006 the California legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 107, which gave the CPUC express authority to allow the use of tradable RECs for RPS compliance.
Three and half years later on March 11 2010 the CPUC issued a decision authorizing TRECs for RPS compliance in California (Decision10-030-021). The proposed scheme had a number of limitations but appeared to be a workable model. Most notable of the limitations was a maximum cap for IOUs of 25% of RPS compliance targets that could be met with TRECs. This limitation was to last only until the end of 2011 and was intended as a way to monitor the program before allowing unfettered use of TRECs. The other significant limitation was a price cap of $50 per REC. Again, this limitation was scheduled to expire at the end of 2011 unless the CPUC determined to extend the cap at that time based on further market studies.
The CPUC decision was made after conducting numerous workshops and receiving comments from interested parties. However, the entities that would have been most impacted by the Decision were not at all happy with the final outcome. Notably, the State’s IOUs and the Independent Energy Producers Association (IEP), whose members make up most of the merchant power producers in the State, filed objections and forceful motions to stay the decision. Prior to its implementation on May 6, only a few weeks after issuing the Decision, the CPUC granted an indefinite stay of Decision 10-03-021. This stay in still in effect.
The reasons for the stay, and the larger implications, are not at all clear. On its face, the stay was implemented in order to resolve objections raised by the IOUs and the IEP. Neither party liked the 25% limitation on use of TRECs to meet RPS requirements. Further, the IOUs, in particular, argued that the CPUC’s definition of a REC-only transaction would limit access to most out-of-state renewable resources, making implementation the TREC scheme unworkable.
Commissioner Grueneich’s Dissent
Commissioner Dian M. Grueneich filed a dissent to the stay that may shed some light on what is really going on. Commissioner Grueneich focused on the motion by the IOUs and claimed that the modifications urged by the IOUs would cause the “outsourcing of California’s renewable economy.” She points out that nothing had changed in the 60 days or so between the Decision and the Stay other than “the relentless lobbying by the utilities at this Commission and in Sacramento to overturn a decision they dislike.”
She continues:
“Since the RPS mandate was first signed into law, one message that has been repeated again and again from developers, from investors and from members of this Commission itself, is that market players need certainty and consistency in decision making in … order to make long term investments in California. This decision will disrupt renewable energy markets, threaten financing for existing and future projects, and compromise the careful work of the Governor’s office to ensure that renewable energy projects obtain their CEC permits and break ground expediently.”
Conclusion
Perhaps this is the (cynical) goal of the IOUs: to entangle the entire RPS movement in delay and uncertainty so that their own foot-dragging can be explained away and excused. Without clear guidance on a TREC program, the argument might go, how can they be expected to meet the State’s aggressive RPS goals? The IOUs have a long way to go to even comply with the 2010 RPS requirement of 25% renewable generation. In 2009, the IOUs collectively served 15.4% of their load with renewable energy. The CPUC estimates that the IOUs are expected to be at about 18% in 2010 and 21% in 2011 – assuming that existing contracts can be converted into operating facilities within that time-frame.
Or it may just be a bureaucratic quagmire that still requires time to work out. After all, the IOU’s fundamental argument in support of the stay, that out of state bundled transactions should not be defined as REC-only transactions and counted toward the 25% cap, makes sense.
California needs to get this right. Whatever system gets developed in California will be followed by other states, especially those in the WREGIS System, so a region-wide system must be supported by the final CPUC decision. We need a workable final decision soon so that we can move forward on the larger goal of lowering greenhouse gas emissions and building a truly sustainable energy infrastructure.
David Niebauer is a corporate and transaction attorney, located in San Francisco, whose practice is focused on clean energy and environmental technologies. www.niebauer.net.
You can't squeeze blood from a turnip, and apparently you can't wring water from moon rocks, either. A new analysis of samples returned by the Apollo astronauts suggests that there is virtually no chance that water ever existed beneath the lunar surface.
Scientists have been arguing for decades about whether the moon contains significant quantities of water. Theoretically, it should because the moon was once part of Earth. (It was created by a catastrophic collision between our planet and a Mars-size body over 4 billion years ago.) Yet initial chemical analyses of rocks brought back by the Apollo missions in the 1970s and '80s turned up virtually no evidence of lunar water. More recently, using improved equipment to examine the molecular constituents of the rocks, researchers have found minute quantities of hydrogen—an indicator of water. (The LCROSS spacecraft, which slammed into a perpetually shaded lunar crater last fall, turned up evidence of water ice on the surface, but that ice was presumably deposited by an ancient comet impact.) It's an important riddle to solve, as researchers would like to use lunar water to manufacture rocket fuel for future deep-space missions.
Now, a team has attempted to solve the mystery by comparing the ratio of two isotopes, or forms, of chlorine in lunar and terrestrial rocks. The scientists had performed similar analyses on Earth rocks and on meteorites, so they decided to duplicate the research on the lunar samples. The researchers reported online 5 August in Science that based on the difference in chlorine ratios, the moon has basically zero subsurface water.
Geochemist and lead author Zachary Sharp of the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, explains that the chlorine isotope ratio is a highly reliable indicator of the amount of hydrogen a planetary body contains. On Earth, primordial volcanic eruptions brought up lava containing huge amounts of volatile substances such as carbon dioxide, sulfur, water vapor, and chlorine. As the lava cooled, those gases leaked into the atmosphere—but they also interacted, and they left behind traces of that interaction, in the form of isotope ratios, which betray their relative quantities. On Earth's surface, the chlorine isotope ratio is uniform because the element interacts so readily with hydrogen. But on the moon, there's a wide variety in that ratio—what Sharp calls "scatter"—something that could not have happened if the moon contained significant amounts of hydrogen.
The ratio variability was a "completely unexpected and initially quite bewildering" result, Sharp says. The bottom line, he says, is that "the only process we are aware of that could cause such large isotope scatter is if the hydrogen content of the moon is 10,000 to 100,000 times less than [on] Earth."
On its face, the paper presents a strong argument for a water-free moon, says planetary scientist David Stevenson of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. "But years of observation of geochemistry have taught me that caution is wise," he says, "whether it be for the earlier claims on water or this latest work on chlorine isotopes."
Research on polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells (PEMFC) has significantly increased due to the advantage of high energy efficiency combined with no carbon dioxide emissions. The key component of these fuel cells is the proton exchange membrane, which acts as electrolyte to transport protons from anode to cathode. The most common proton conducting polymers are sulfonated perfluoropolymers, such as Nafion, however, the usage of these polymers suffers from high production costs and low operating temperatures. To overcome this drawback, aromatic polymers having sulfonic acid groups have been extensively studied because of their high thermal stability. Like the perfluoroalkyl sulfonic acid systems, these aromatic polymers employ the sulfonic acid moiety as a proton-conducting group.
The authors introduced the squaric acid group into the aromatic polymers by the reaction of lithiated aromatic polymers and diisopropoxy squarate followed by subsequent treatment with hydrochloric acid. The polyphenylsulfone membrane comprising squaric acid functional groups (PPSf-SQ, IEC = 4.1 meq•g-1) showed a proton conductivity of 1.0 × 10-1 S•cm-1 at 80°C under 95% relative humidity, which indicates that the semisquaric acid has the potential to become an alternative proton-conducting group for PEMs.
Further research may address the introduction of a spacer moiety between the polymer backbone and the semisquaric acid to enhance the mobility, the prove of concept in a fuel cell application and the chemical stability to further evaluate the merit of the semisquaric acid as proton conducting group in proton exchange membranes.
Johannesburg — THE Department of Science and Technology, Anglo Platinum and US fuel cell company Altergy Systems have established a new company to manufacture fuel cells for the sub-Saharan African market.
A fuel cell is a device that converts the chemical energy of a fuel such as hydrogen and an oxidant into electricity. It generates electricity inside the cell through reactions between a fuel and an oxidant.
Most fuel cells use platinum group metals as a catalyst for the conversion of hydrogen into electricity. With 75% of the world's platinum group metals in SA, the country stands a chance to play an active role in the so-called hydrogen economy, in which hydrogen is used to produce electricity.
The establishment of the company will develop the platinum group metals market and promote local beneficiation, says Angloplat's head of market development and research, Anthea Bath.
Beneficiation, which is also known as value-added processing, involves the transformation of a primary material - produced by mining and extraction processes - into a more processed product, which has a higher export sales value. Beneficiation is critical if SA's mining sector is to change from being a predominantly primary commodity exporter to becoming a world exporter of processed minerals.
The department, through its Technology Innovation Agency, Angloplat, through its Platinum Group Metals Development Fund, and Altergy would set up the new company, Clean Energy, under a licence agreement.
The department and Angloplat will each have a 40% interest in Clean Energy, with Altergy holding the other 20%.
Science and Technology Minister Naledi Pandor said yesterday: "This initiative is in line with the Department of Science and Technology's goal of promoting SA as a source of world-class, high technology transfer and infrastructure opportunities ."
In a statement yesterday, the department said the new company's immediate objectives included marketing and setting up a distribution network for Altergy products in sub-Saharan Africa.
"Thereafter, following the successful development of the market, Clean Energy will look to establish a manufacturing and assembly plant in SA which will ultimately supply the sub-Saharan and (global) markets with high quality fuel cell products," the department said.
The department said the agreement was in line with the objectives of the national hydrogen and fuel cells research, development and innovation strategy.
This strategy is a government initiative aimed at enabling SA to extract value from the beneficiation of its natural resources.
(PhysOrg.com) -- Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles promise faster refueling and the ability to travel longer distances before refueling than battery-powered cars, but they are susceptible to poisoning by carbon monoxide (CO). Now, scientists in the US and Japan have created new nanoparticles catalysts that enable hydrogen fuel cells to resist CO poisoning.
Hydrogen fuel cells use platinum electrocatalysts to combine hydrogen and oxygen to produce water and generate electricity. The problem is that the hydrogen is produced from sources such as gasoline, natural gas, or ethanol, and the process often introduces carbon monoxide into the gas. Even miniscule amounts of carbon monoxide in the hydrogen are sufficient to bind to the platinum catalysts and prevent them working. Scientists at Brookhaven National Lab in New York have recently found a platinum/ruthenium catalystthat blocks CO poisoning, but since this catalyst is extremely expensive, researchers have been seeing an alternative.
The new catalyst was developed by Professor Héctor Abruña and colleagues from Cornell University, the National Institute for Materials Science in Ibaraki, Japan, and the University of Pennsylvania. They began with the knowledge that tungsten alloys resist CO poisoning. Tungsten is not used in fuel cellelectrodes because it is a poor electrical conductor, so Abruña and the team added tungsten to nanoparticles of titanium dioxide, which is a good electrical conductor. The result was titanium tungsten oxide nanoparticles, which they coated with platinum to make an electrode.
The researchers tested their nanoparticles catalysts with hydrogen contaminated with two percent carbon monoxide, and found performance was reduced by only five percent compared to 30 percent for ordinary catalysts.
Abruña said he is not sure how the new catalyst works, and much more testing is required, but he thinks a likely mechanism is that hydroxide (OH-) groups bind during the reaction to the titanium tungsten oxide near to the platinum, where they are close enough to the CO molecules to react and form CO2.
If the tests prove successful and the new catalyst can be made economically, it could spark renewed interest in using liquid fuels such as gasoline in carsto make the hydrogen required to power fuel cells. This in turn could enable fuel cells cars to have a longer range than those using gaseous hydrogen and those using gasoline conventionally.
The research paper was published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society.
More information: Highly Stable and CO-Tolerant Pt/Ti0.7W0.3O2 Electrocatalyst for Proton-Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells, J. Am. Chem. Soc., Article ASAP, Publication Date (Web): July 12, 2010.http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja102931d
ST. LOUIS, July 12, 2010 -- The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] today unveiled the hydrogen-powered Phantom Eye unmanned airborne system, a demonstrator that will stay aloft at 65,000 feet for up to four days.
"Phantom Eye is the first of its kind and could open up a whole new market in collecting data and communications," Darryl Davis, president of Boeing Phantom Works, said today at the unveiling ceremony in St. Louis. "It is a perfect example of turning an idea into a reality. It defines our rapid prototyping efforts and will demonstrate the art-of-the-possible when it comes to persistent intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. The capabilities inherent in Phantom Eye's design will offer game-changing opportunities for our military, civil and commercial customers."
Later this summer, Phantom Eye will be shipped to NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., to begin a series of ground and taxi tests in preparation for its first flight in early 2011. That debut flight is expected to last between four and eight hours.
"The program is moving quickly, and it’s exciting to be part of such a unique aircraft," said Drew Mallow, Phantom Eye program manager for Boeing. "The hydrogen propulsion system will be the key to Phantom Eye's success. It is very efficient and offers great fuel economy, and its only byproduct is water, so it's also a 'green' aircraft."
Phantom Eye is powered by two 2.3-liter, four-cylinder engines that provide 150 horsepower each. It has a 150-foot wingspan, will cruise at approximately 150 knots and can carry up to a 450-pound payload.
Key Phantom Eye suppliers and partners include Ford Motor Company (engines); Aurora Flight Sciences (wing); Mahle Powertrain (propulsion controls); Ball Aerospace (fuel tanks); Turbosolutions Engineering (turbochargers); the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; and NASA.
A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is one of the world's largest defense, space and security businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions, and the world's largest and most versatile manufacturer of military aircraft. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a $34 billion business with 68,000 employees worldwide.
Contact: Chris Haddox Boeing Phantom Works Office: 314-234-6447 Mobile: 314-707-8891 chris.d.haddox@boeing.com Deborah VanNierop Boeing Phantom Works Mobile: 210-454-2656 deborah.a.vannierop@boeing.com
The company, a competitor to the 
