Delphi’s approach, called gasoline-direct-injection compression ignition combines a collection of engine-operating strategies that make use of advanced fuel injection and air intake and exhaust controls, many of which are available on advanced engines today.

Delphi Fuel Injection Engine Lab Test Rig. Click image for the largest view.

The researchers found that if they injected the gasoline in three precisely timed bursts; they could avoid the too-rapid combustion that’s made some previous experimental engines too noisy. At the same time, they could burn the fuel faster than in conventional gasoline engines, which is necessary for getting the most out of the fuel.

In conventional gasoline-powered engines, a spark ignites a mixture of fuel and air. Diesel engines don’t use a spark; diesels compress air until it’s so hot that fuel injected into the combustion chamber soon ignites, instead. Several researchers have attempted to use diesel like compression ignition with gasoline, but it’s proved challenging to control such engines, especially under the wide range of loads put on them as a car idles, accelerates, and cruises at various speeds.

Delphi’s technology, which is called gasoline-direct-injection compression ignition, aims to overcome the problem with sophisticated injectors and injection control.  It seems considerable computer and sensor technology is getting put to work.

The Delphi team is using other strategies to help the engine perform well at the extreme range of loads. A common example is when the engine has just been started or is running at very low speeds.  The fuel mixture temperatures in the combustion chamber can be too low to achieve combustion ignition. Under these conditions, the researchers directed exhaust gases into the combustion chamber to warm it up and facilitate combustion.

The Delphi technology is the latest research attempt to combine the best qualities of diesel and gasoline engines. In the Kevin Bullis story at Technology Review the quote is diesel engines are 40 to 45 percent efficient in using the energy in fuel to propel a vehicle, compared to roughly 30 percent efficiency for gasoline engines, both quite high estimates.  Meanwhile, diesel engines burn a heavier fuel with an effluent that’s more rich in larger particles like soot that require expensive exhaust-treatment technology to meet emissions regulations.

The company has demonstrated the technology in a single-piston test engine under a wide range of operating conditions. It’s beginning tests on a multicylinder engine that will more closely approximate a production engine.  The fuel economy estimates suggest that engines based on the technology could be far more efficient than even diesel engines. Those estimates are based on simulations of how a midsized vehicle would perform with a multicylinder version of the new engine.

Researchers have decades invested in attempts to run diesel-like engines on gasoline to achieve high efficiency with low emissions. Such engines might be cheaper than hybrid technology, since they don’t require a large battery and electric motor.

Mark Sellnau, engineering manager of advanced powertrain technology at Delphi Powertrain, says the new engine could be paired with a battery pack and electric motor, as in hybrid cars, to improve efficiency still more, although he notes that it’s not clear whether doing that would be worth the added cost.

Both gasoline and diesel engines are going to get another efficiency boost from the development of fuel injection technology.  As computers, sensors and injection equipment improve and become more robust we’re sure to see better exploitation of the fuel inside engines.  Carburetors seems almost quaint today, throttle body injection a cheap route to better emissions and sequential injection the power and efficiency choice.

Engineering presses on solving the problems of very quick injection timing, now with three bursts per firing, higher pressures in common fuel delivery rails, and ever more precise injectors.

While the 50% improvement seems an outlandish projection, getting gasoline fueled engines working that well would offer many more engineering choices, its likely Delphi is there in the lab.

Keep it up Delphi.

The milestone could lead to tiny devices that harvest electrical energy from the vibrations of everyday tasks, something that could charge your phone as you walk for example.

Berkley Lab Viurs Electric Piezoelectric Energy Generator

The Berkeley Lab scientists describe their work in the May 13 advance online publication of the journal Nature Nanotechnology.

Seung-Wuk Lee, a faculty scientist in Berkeley Lab’s Physical Biosciences Division and a UC Berkeley associate professor of bioengineering and colleagues wondered if a virus studied in labs worldwide offered a better way. The M13 bacteriophage only attacks bacteria and is benign to people. Being a virus, it replicates itself by the millions within hours, so there’s always a steady supply. It’s easy to genetically engineer. And large numbers of the rod-shaped viruses naturally orient themselves into well-ordered films, much the way that chopsticks align themselves in a box.

These are the traits that scientists look for in a nano building block. But the Berkeley Lab researchers first had to determine if the M13 virus is piezoelectric. Lee turned to Ramamoorthy Ramesh, a scientist in Berkeley Lab’s Materials Sciences Division and a professor of materials sciences, engineering, and physics at UC Berkeley, an expert in studying the electrical properties of thin films at the nanoscale. They applied an electrical field to a film of M13 viruses and watched what happened using a special microscope. Helical proteins that coat the viruses twisted and turned in response – a sure sign of the piezoelectric effect at work.

Next, the scientists increased the virus’s piezoelectric strength. They used genetic engineering to add four negatively charged amino acid residues to one end of the helical proteins that coat the virus. These residues increase the charge difference between the proteins’ positive and negative ends, which boosts the voltage of the virus.

The scientists further enhanced the system by stacking films composed of single layers of the virus on top of each other. They found that a stack about 20 layers thick exhibited the strongest piezoelectric effect.

The only thing remaining to do was a demonstration test, so the scientists fabricated a virus-based piezoelectric energy generator. They created the conditions for genetically engineered viruses to spontaneously organize into a multilayered film that measures about one square centimeter. This film was then sandwiched between two gold-plated electrodes, which were connected by wires to a liquid-crystal display.

When pressure is applied to the generator, it produces up to six nanoamperes of current and 400 millivolts of potential. That’s enough current to flash the number “1″ on the display, and about a quarter the voltage of a triple A battery.

The scientists tested their approach by creating a larger generator that produces enough current to operate a small liquid-crystal display. It works by tapping a finger on a postage stamp-sized electrode coated with the specially engineered viruses. The viruses convert the force of the finger tap into an electric charge.

Their generator is the first to produce electricity by harnessing the piezoelectric properties of a biological material. Piezoelectricity is the accumulation of a charge in a solid in response to mechanical stress.

The research also points to a simpler and very important insight for making microelectronic devices. That’s because the viruses arrange themselves into an orderly film that enables the generator to work. Self-assembly is a much sought after goal in the finicky world of nanotechnology.

Lee said, “More research is needed, but our work is a promising first step toward the development of personal power generators, actuators for use in nano-devices, and other devices based on viral electronics. We’re now working on ways to improve on this proof-of-principle demonstration. Because the tools of biotechnology enable large-scale production of genetically modified viruses, piezoelectric materials based on viruses could offer a simple route to novel microelectronics in the future.”

The piezoelectric effect has a lot of potential, its been known since 1880.  The effect has turned up in crystals, ceramics, bone, proteins, and DNA. It’s already been put to use in simple personal devices like electric cigarette lighters and very high technology scanning probe microscopes that rely on the effect to function. There are more of these simple yet ultra reliable devices about than most folks realize.

Its great to see another route to piezoelectric power and to see the nasty nemesis of humanity, the virus, put to useful work for a change.  But the big clue maybe the potential of self assembly, where virus applications could further miniaturize devices and reduce their need for electric power.

Now if they’d just manage to engineer virus to defeat the viruses of the common cold, herpes and AIDS.

What sends the environmental crowd into joy is that a hydrogen fuel cell’s emission is water vapor.  A fuel cell power plant only emitting water would be the nirvana of portable and mobile power.  There is a huge “but” in the way.

A tiny amount of water will kill the reaction that drives a hydrogen fuel cell.  Moving the water out is a difficult and as yet unresolved, engineering issue.  Until it’s mastered reliably and at low cost, hydrogen fuel cells will remain a dead end.  Even more concerning is fuel cells are actually stacked up cells to get to voltage, and just one cell in a water error kills the whole stack.  Two decades of worrying away at ideas has brought no solution that can be mass-produced.

Fuel Cell Cross Section Graphic. Click image for more info.

The water forms up in the fuel cell’s porous transport layer (PTL), which is not much thicker than a coffee filter. That’s where all the byproducts of the fuel cell’s power-generating reaction meet up with a catalyst and react to form the water vapor.

Allen, the John F. and Joan M. Calder Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering at Michigan Tech points out it’s not easy to find out exactly what’s happening in the PTL. “Everything is compressed like crazy. You have to get the gases, hydrogen and air – to the catalyst, and you have to get the water away. Figuring out how to do this has largely been a matter of trial and error.”

Hope lies in the latest generation of hydrogen fuel-cell technologies that do an excellent job of managing water, but as new materials and designs enter the arena, the industry is again faced with a long, costly experimental process to determine the best configuration.

This is where Allen and his team with a new model come in.  “There’s a whole new class of catalysts coming out, and we want to make sure it doesn’t take another 20 years to optimize the materials set,” says Allen.

Optimizing those up-and-coming materials to get rid of water is especially difficult, because the movement of water in the PTL appears to be random. “But that’s what we’re trying to predict,” he says.

The Michigan Tech press release writer puts it this way: at high flow rates, water spreads out evenly. But when the flow rate is low, as it is in an operating fuel cell, it spreads out in irregular shapes like an amoeba, a process called “fingering.” Other factors come into play as well, including how saturated the PTL is.

Allen’s team incorporated those variables into a mathematical model with the aim of forecasting the movement of water. Then they tested it using four different types of PTL and found that they could predict how water would behave with a high degree of accuracy.

“We were really excited,” Allen says. “This is the first time anyone has validated a model in a real sample. We’re at the point where, by adjusting just one parameter, we are able to duplicate experimental results exactly.”

The team is taking the model further by incorporating temperature and evaporation into their model to make it an even better tool for fuel cell designers.

The publication of the findings took place back in December of 2011 with the press release just getting out last week.  The article, “Scaling Percolation in Thin Porous Layers,” published in the journal Physics of Fluids.

A polite reminder – hydrogen is a fuel not an energy source.  While one hopes the good professor and his team can drive to an economical and reliable fuel cell, the cost of the hydrogen is going to make or break the hydrogen economy.

So far the main sources of hydrogen are from natural gas with CO2 remaining, electrolysis of water which needs a electricity source that so far suggests 150% of the hydrogen energy store is needed to get to the 100% energy store in the hydrogen.

Plus hydrogen remains the devil to contain.  Hydrogen is the smallest atom and slips away almost at will.  No really convincing storage schemes seem practical yet.  And when it does escape, as it is highly reactive, the potential for accidents with serious personal injury and property damage is very high.

Still, Allen is leading to a good end.  Should the hydrogen formation and energy carrier of choice get sensible as suggested by using methanol or ammonia, then fuel cells could drive demand to mass production.

We wish Allen great success and hope the example he’s setting will transfer to the other side of the fuel cell where much safer, simpler and lower cost fuel stores such as methanol can become fuel cell fuels.  Then we should have some numbers on the cost to get hydrogen-energized work done.

The study published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society reports the key is adding gold to the catalyst formation process to yield a more uniform crystal structure and the new crystal removes carbon monoxide from the reaction.

That’s the news – getting the carbon monoxide away.  Platinum absorbs carbon monoxide in reactions involving fuel cells powered by organic materials like formic acid.  Palladium breaks down over time.  Both of these metals are very costly.

The Brown University created a triple-headed metallic nanoparticle that they say outperforms and outlasts all others at the anode end in formic-acid fuel-cell reactions. They report a 4-nanometer iron-platinum-gold nanoparticle (FePtAu), with a tetragonal crystal structure, generates higher current per unit of mass than any other nanoparticle catalyst tested.  Better yet, Brown’s triple metal nanoparticle performs nearly as well after 13 hours as it did at the start.

Gold Enhanced Fuel Cell Catalyst Crystal

That compares to another test built nanoparticle challenged under identical conditions that lost nearly 90% of its performance in just one-quarter of the time.

Shouheng Sun, chemistry professor at Brown and corresponding author on the paper said, “We’ve developed a formic acid fuel-cell catalyst that is the best to have been created and tested so far. It has good durability as well as good activity.”

The bit of gold starts the positive effect right at the beginning, when the crystals are built.  The gold acts as an atomic atom organizer of sorts, leading the iron and platinum atoms into neat, uniform layers within the nanoparticle.  Then the gold atoms then exit the interior and bind to the outer surface of the nanoparticle assembly.

Gold is effective at ordering the iron and platinum atoms because the gold atoms create extra space within the nanoparticle sphere at the outset. When the gold atoms diffuse from the space upon heating, they create more room for the iron and platinum atoms to assemble themselves. As a bonus the gold creates the crystallization chemists want in the nanoparticle assembly at a lower temperature.

Gold Enhanced Fuel Cell Catalyst Temperature Response. Image Credit: American Chemical Society.

In operation the gold also removes carbon monoxide (CO) from the reaction by catalyzing its oxidation. Otherwise the carbon monoxide, which binds well to iron and platinum atoms, would gum up the reaction. By essentially scrubbing it from the reaction, gold improves the performance of the combined iron-platinum catalyst.

The team decided to try gold after reading in the literature that gold nanoparticles were effective at oxidizing carbon monoxide – so effective, in fact, that gold nanoparticles had been incorporated into the helmets of Japanese firefighters. Indeed, the Brown team’s triple-headed metallic nanoparticles worked just as well at removing CO in the oxidation of formic acid, although it is unclear specifically why.

In the study paper the Brown team highlights the importance of creating an ordered crystal structure for the nanoparticle catalyst. The gold additive helps researchers get a crystal structure called a “face-centered-tetragonal,” a four-sided shape in which iron and platinum atoms essentially are forced to occupy specific positions in the structure, creating more order. By imposing atomic order, the iron and platinum layers bind more tightly in the structure, thus making the assembly more stable and durable, essential to better-performing and longer-lasting catalysts.

The Brown team’s tests are extraordinary.  The paper reports experiments showing the FePtAu catalyst reached 2809.9 mA/mg Pt (mass-activity, or current generated per milligram of platinum), “which is the highest among all NP (nanoparticle) catalysts ever reported.”. After 13 hours, the FePtAu nanoparticle has a mass activity of 2600mA/mg Pt, or 93% of its original performance value. The Brown team pointed out in comparison, the well-received platinum-bismuth nanoparticle has a mass activity of about 1720mA/mg Pt under identical experiments, and is four times less active when measured for durability.

The team also notes that other metals may be substituted for gold in the nanoparticle catalyst to improve the catalyst’s performance and durability.  The team says in the study “This communication presents a new structure-control strategy to tune and optimize nanoparticle catalysis for fuel oxidations.”

This work is a breakthrough concept in crystal catalyst design.  The ideas explored are going to have significant impact as the concept finds application across the catalyst field.  The matter of scale will come up, but right out of the gate the team is addressing life expectancy with great results.

Who’s on the team?  Inquiring headhunters will want to know.

Sen Zhang, a third-year graduate student in Sun’s lab, helped with the nanoparticle design and synthesis. Shaojun Guo, a postdoctoral fellow in Sun’s lab performed electrochemical oxidation experiments. Huiyuan Zhu, a second-year graduate student in Sun’s lab, synthesized the FePt nanoparticles and ran control experiments. The other contributing author is Dong Su from the Center for Functional Nanomaterials at Brookhaven National Laboratory, who analyzed the structure of the nanoparticle catalyst using the advanced electron microscopy facilities there.

Hold on – the funding was from ExxonMobil and the U.S. Department of Energy.

May the tech spread far and wide.  Congratulations!

IHI Compact Gas Turbine Generator Set Layout in a Suitcase.

All by itself, running on propane the unit autonomously generates electricity.  IHI is saying this is the first time in the world that a portable gas turbine generator has been used to autonomously generate electricity.  So be it.  It’s also incredibly small.

The IHI gas turbine generator used for the unit is approximately 80mm (3.15”) in diameter and 120mm (4.75”) in length. It starts up and stops by using push button switches. Rated power generation gets going about 30 seconds after the starting operation. It comes to a complete stop about two minutes and 30 seconds after the shutdown signal is sent.  There must be a top quality bearing set inside.

IHI Compact Gas Turbine Power Unit.

There is one sign of the unit’s efficiency; the exhaust gas temperature is 70°C or 158ºF.  While that would scald skin, its hundreds of degrees lower than a first thought would suggest.  That low temperature implies the unit is exceptionally efficient at combustion energy conversion to rotating mass.

Propane, or LPG isn’t the only fuel the unit can handle.  The company confirmed to Tech-On that the gas turbine generator unit supports a variety of fuels such as kerosene and light oil.

IHI has been at this sort of thing awhile.  Some readers might realize that IHI is a world significant turbocharger manufacturer with serious skills.  The company also has aerospace experience with Japan’s space program.  The engineering skill set seems to be very proficient at the micro level.  The company has used the skills in the research and development of the portable gas turbine generators based on its experience in ultrahigh-speed rotating machinery technology developed for its jet engine and turbocharger businesses.  It looks like a natural follow on business.

The Tech-On writer notes that IHI suggests that by taking advantage of the light weight and high output power of a compact gas turbine, it might be possible to realize a power density (maximum output per unit mass) and energy density (continuous operation time per unit mass) that are much higher than those of reciprocating engines and fuel cells.

IHI expects that the gas turbine generator unit will be used as a charger for personal and mobile devices as well as a power source for a robot.  Future plans are to further reduce the size and weight of the unit and increase the output power plus develop technologies to comply with specifications required for various applications.

So far as your humble writer knows, IHI is the first with a prototype gas turbine connected to a generator as a kit.  Both the U.S. and the UK have entrepreneurial firms working at similar goals.  So it’s with great pleasure to see one get to a working prototype.  When the other firms send their news I’ll be happy to spread it out too.

Turbines are external combustion and can offer more thermal efficiency than internal combustion such as piston and cylinder engines. The problem has been both size and heat dissipation that parallel requirements for exotic materials and manufacturing processes.  That is balanced by fuel efficiency and very long life.

That 70ºC exhaust temp is very intriguing.  No mention is made at Tech-On of the rated electrical power out, yet that and the projected pricing are very interesting facts we’ll keep an eye out for.  Lets hope that the miniaturization has a beneficial impact on manufacturing costs.

The past decade has seen ingenious devices described in the literature to accomplish the goal.  Methods for converting chemical or mechanical energy are either present in, or generated by living organisms for generating electricity, and are expected to open exciting new prospects for the development of autonomous ways to produce power.

The Case Reserve team’s work is another in a growing list from universities across the country that could bring the creation of insect cyborgs out of science fiction and into reality.

What stands out this time is the power supply, while small, doesn’t rely on movement, light or batteries, just normal insect feeding. Enter the formidable cockroach.

Biocell Implantation Into a Cockroach. Click image for the largest view.

The research paper is available with only a free registration at the Journal of the American Chemical society.

Daniel Scherson, chemistry professor at Case Western Reserve and senior author of the paper explains, “It is virtually impossible to start from scratch and make something that works like an insect. Using an insect is likely to prove far easier. For that, you need electrical energy to power sensors or to excite the neurons to make the insect do as you want, by generating enough power out of the insect itself.”

So Scherson organized a team with graduate student Michelle Rasmussen, Biology Professor Roy E. Ritzmann, Chemistry Professor Irene Lee and Biology Research Assistant Alan J. Pollack to develop an implantable biofuel cell to provide usable power – inside the insect.

The principle the team exploits is converting the insect’s own chemical energy using enzymes in a series of steps at the anode.  The first enzyme breaks the sugar, trehalose, which a cockroach constantly produces from its food, into two simpler sugars, called monosaccharides.  The second enzyme oxidizes the monosaccharides, releasing electrons.

Biocell in Insect Enzyme Based Schematic. Click image for more info.

The current flows as electrons are drawn to the cathode, where oxygen from the air takes up the electrons and is in turn reduced to water.   After testing the system design using trehalose solutions, prototype electrodes were inserted in a blood sinus in the abdomen of a female cockroach, away from critical internal organs.

Ritzmann takes up the explanation; “Insects have an open circulatory system so the blood is not under much pressure. So, unlike say a vertebrate, where if you pushed a probe into a vein or worse an artery (which is very high pressure) -blood does not come out at any pressure. So, basically, this is really pretty benign. In fact, it is not unusual for the insect to right itself and walk or run away afterward.”  The researchers found the cockroaches suffered no long-term damage, which bodes well for long-term use.

That out of the way, how much power?  To determine the output of the fuel cell, the group used an instrument called a potentiostat. Maximum power density reached nearly 100 microwatts per square centimeter at 0.2 volts. Maximum current density was about 450 microamps per square centimeter.

Doing this is much harder than it seems.  The research has been ongoing for 5 years, and trehalase – the first enzyme used in the series was quite difficult to manage stalling progress for nearly a year.

So Professor Lee suggested they have the trehalase gene chemically synthesized to generate an expression plasmid, which is a DNA molecule separate from chromosomal DNA, to allow the production of large quantities of purified enzyme from Escherichia coli.  Michelle Rasmussen then set about “collecting enzyme that proved to have much higher specific activities than those obtained from commercial sources,” Lee said. “The new enzyme led to success.”

The Case Western team is now taking several steps to move the technology forward: miniaturizing the fuel cell so that it can be fully implanted and allow an insect to run or fly normally; investigating materials that would last a long time inside of an insect, and working with other researchers to build a signal transmitter that can run on little energy plus adding a lightweight rechargeable battery.

All that might make one feel a little compassion for the insect – but we’re looking at cockroaches for now.

For those with a challenge to imagine a first adopter use, Professor Scherson said, “It’s possible the system could be used intermittently. An insect equipped with a sensor could measure the amount of noxious gas in a room, broadcast the finding, shut down and recharge for an hour, then take a new measurement and broadcast again.”

The overarching news is a biocell can in fact convert trehalose contained within an insect and oxygen from the air into electricity that, in principle, could be collected and stored and subsequently used to power a variety of microdevices.  That’s a clue for other ideas, too.

The future will see more miniaturization, now it seems all the way down to the lowly, but formidable and resilient cockroach. It’s about time those creatures came up with something useful to be doing.  Imagine the resiliency of the cockroach and humanities’ ingenuity bonded together . . .

Apple has gone so far as to file patent applications named “Fuel Cell System to Power a Portable Computing Device” and “Fuel Cell System Coupled to a Portable Computing Device” – ideas not to be taken lightly.

It not a great surprise to close Apple watchers, Apple has filed other patent applications for light weight hydrogen fuel cells. Those patents, which were brought to light this past October, described a building process where multiple fuel cells are connected by a power bus in a parallel pattern, and a voltage-multiplying circuit is added for additional voltage from the stack.

Apple hopes to utilize these lighter, more efficient fuel cells in its mobile products in an effort to promote renewable energy sources and offer devices with the ability to run for days or even weeks without refueling, according to the patent applications. The devices will also be lighter and less bulky due to the lack of traditional batteries.

The interesting thing and idea to watch is Apple wants to integrate fuel cells right into their electronics.  No fuel cartridge needed.  But Apple allows creating a hydrogen fuel cell system that is cost-effective is a challenge.

The puzzle remains how hydrogen gas storage costs are going to make fuel cells economically viable, hydrogen is very difficult to store.  The smallest atom making the smallest molecule in H2 form needs compressed or exotic materials to keep it in one place.

The more interesting fuel cells rely on low cost stores of hydrogen in methanol or ethanol, liquids that have very high hydrogen density and only need plastic tanks at atmospheric pressure.

Apple’s patent application isn’t clear on their choice of fuels, either hydrogen or a hydrocarbon.  Apple states that alternative fuel cells may correspond to solid oxide fuel cells, molten carbonate fuel cells, direct methanol fuel cells, alkaline fuel cells, and/or other types of fuel cells.

Another part of the appeal is regulating a fuel cell’s operating parameter by directly charging an external battery with the fuel cell allowing the control process to be highly reliable.

Direct Methanol Fuel Cell by NASA. Click image for the largest view.

Meanwhile the U.S. Department of Defense, with the world’s largest fuel bill and likely the largest buyer of batteries is hard at the Direct Methanol Fuel Cell.  The U.S. Army is especially interested in hydrogen based fuel cell technology, says Maj. Mark Owens, which drastically reduces the amount of batteries that soldiers carry on dismounted missions. Owens’ shop, the PM Soldier Warrior, studied one three-day mission with a company-sized element and found that the fuel cell reduced the amount of batteries they carried by 600 pounds.  The test was the 1st Battalion of the 1st Infantry Division deployed to Afghanistan in 2011 with their rucksacks full of experimental renewable energy equipment.

The fuels cells are powered by reformed methanol – meaning it’s slightly watered-down – and “get lighter as time goes on,” as the fuel is used Owens says, “and the case weighs almost nothing.” Still, the rucksack-packable fuel-cell generator weighs 36 lb., according to Army documents. “Obviously, we want to get the weight down as much as possible,” Owens says. Also under evaluation is a 4.6-lb. wearable fuel cell that generates 50 watts of continuous power for 10 hours.

The problem is the money – all the fuel cells from simple hydrogen to those reacting heavy petrochemicals like kerosene all rely in expensive and rare elements like platinum, palladium and even rhodium.  And they run hot, 100s of degrees centigrade.  While the Finns have come up with a much less costly way to use the metals platinum and palladium, the investment will still be very substantial and the growth of the industry will simply push the metal prices higher.

Still, there are glimmers of research looking for ways to build fuel cells without the precious metal component.  One small break, in an industry building and selling fuel cells in specialized uses with great regularity, offers hope that mass markets can be addressed.

Bloom Energy can build fuel cells reacting with natural gas, or methane fuel for sensible prices.  Bloom and many others can be expected to be looking for ways to downsize and use liquid fuels. There is intense interest and cash on the line for the market right now.

2012 might be the year a fuel cell comes out that runs under the temperature of boiling water, and runs on cheap, energy dense and abundant, natural gas, ethanol or methanol.

So far details are rare, but you can be sure there will news coming soon.

With no great surprise, price sensitivity about buying a plug in type of vehicle remains a significant issue.  Survey participants’ willingness to pay for a vehicle purchase is much lower than the prices currently planned by automakers.  That’s a certain klaxon kind of wake up call.  Electric vehicles would sell well and range is not the first concern, it’s the battery cost.

All is not lost, survey respondents indicated strong fundamental interest in PEVs, with 40% of participants stating that they would be “extremely” or “very” interested in a plug-in hybrid or all-electric vehicle with a range of 40 to 100 miles and an electricity cost equivalent of $0.75 per gallon.  That price metric on energy is a strong indicator of the sensitivity of gasoline prices.

The Pike research isn’t some slap happy poll, the Pike Research price sensitivity analysis, utilizes the Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity Meter methodology, a widely-used market technique for determining consumer price preferences, introduced in 1976 by Dutch economist Peter van Westendorp.  The Westendrop methodology indicates that for a traditional gasoline internal combustion engine vehicle that would ordinarily cost $20,000, the optimal price point for consumers of a comparable PEV would be $23,750, a significant price premium of 18.75%, meaning about a sixth more cash would come to the table.

That premium isn’t enough to buy today’s battery sets.  The gap between actual pricing and consumer willingness to pay will be a problem for creating demand for PEVs.

There is still more education to do.  A 500-gallon year gasoline buyer might have a better idea of value comparing an annual $1,750 fuel bill vs. a $375 charging bill. It would be better to compare $145.83 for gasoline each month vs. $31.25 to charge up, freeing $114.58 back to disposable income.  $110 will usually buy more than a $3,750 upgrade.

The inside of the survey offers some curious details.  Of the 1,051 respondents interviewed, 4% currently own or lease a hybrid, a figure higher than the current overall hybrid market share in the US.  81% of respondents stated that improved fuel efficiency would be an important factor when purchasing their next vehicle.

Pike noted that consumers under age 30 are somewhat more likely to demonstrate interest in PEVs, as are people with higher levels of education.  But the level of interest in PEVs is not dramatically different between demographic segments such as age, gender, income, and level of education.  That observation leads Pike to conclude that PEVs should have solid mass-market appeal.

Now for the shock. When asked which vehicle brands they would consider for an EV, respondents were most likely to choose Toyota (51%) and Ford (46%), two automakers that did not have PEVs on the market at the time of the survey. Chevrolet (42%) and Nissan (33%), the two manufacturers that launched models in North America in 2010, ranked fourth and fifth, respectively.  Its not looking like advertising is getting the job done.

In the broader view when asked to choose between five different plugin hybrid EV and straight plug in EV range/price options, respondents did not state a clear preference for any one configuration. Of the choices offered, the electric-only model with a 100-mile range had the greatest number of respondents showing interest with 24%.  Another 25% of respondents stated that they would not purchase any of the options provided.

Still with those 25 % not making a choice, 80% indicated that they would be “extremely” or “very” interested in upgrading to a residential “fast-charging” EV charging unit that would utilize the same amount of electricity but reduce charging times from 8 to 12 hours to 2 to 4 hours.  It looks like people have thought this out.

Again the money comes up.  The results also indicate that pricing is once again an issue with fast-charging equipment. Pike’s analysis suggests that the first generation of residential fast-charging equipment will cost between $500 and $800, but only 28% of panelists stated that they would be willing to pay $500 or more for this capability. The average price consumers were willing to pay was $408.  $400 should buy an impressive battery charger, and people know it.  Fast charge doesn’t look like an exploitable idea, it better be standard equipment.

Here’s a sound bit of insight to wind up.  Those respondents likely to get in the market expressed strong interest in workplace, private, and public charging stations. The most popular choices for charging stations were the workplace (74%) and roadside charging stations (82%).

Pike does a great job of looking into things.  While the pricing points for Pike studies are astronomical for regular folks, the press releases and interview tidbits are well worth the attention.

Electric vehicles have a good foundation for massive growth.  A lot could be done to nurse them along, but in the end, it’s the price that will matter.  That $3,750 noted might be a goal for a 400-mile range battery set.  Get to anywhere close and your batteries could not be built fast enough.

That’s the gauntlet, who will get to pick it up first?

For a comparison, the common quote for the amount of iron mined in history is a cubic mile or 147,197,952,000 cubic feet.  Now platinum is more rare, the oft-heard quote is mining over history has turned out 25 cubic feet, a block 5 feet on each side, about 1/15 the amount of gold.  That’s a massive difference.

Curiously with the world economy slowed down the price of platinum is lower than gold, a situation that will not last when the economy does pick up either by demand or a drop in gold’s price from an increase in confidence.  The main industrial use is catalytic converters for automobiles – and increasing global automobile demand in emerging markets with an interest in pollution control will likely move prices higher.

Meanwhile palladium may become harder than platinum to acquire.  Russia produces 50% of palladium’s annual supply and Russia has been selling off strategic stockpiles.  In simple terms, the use of Russian palladium stockpiles for current use will turn up later as reductions of the amount available to the market.

Gold Platinum & Palladium Nuggets Shown Left to Right. Click image for the largest view.

For now these are “cheap” as platinum trades 31% below its February 2008 high of $2,273 and palladium is trading 38% below its all-time high of almost $1,100 in January 2001.  That brings us to:

An Aalto University in Finland research team has developed a new and significantly cheaper method of manufacturing fuel cells by preparing nanoparticle metal catalysts for fuel cells by using atomic layer deposition (ALD).  The ALD method requires 60% less of the noble metals than current methods.

Docent Tanja Kallio at Aalto said, “This is a significant discovery, because researchers have not been able to achieve savings of this magnitude before with materials that are commercially available.”

The most commonly used fuel cells cover the anode with expensive noble metal powder, which reacts well with the fuel.  The Aalto study’s ALD method can cover the anode much thinner and more evenly than current production methods, which lowers costs and increases quality.

Palladium Preparation for ALD. Image Credit: Adolfo Vera, Aalto University. Click image for the largest view.

The Finn’s idea is to develop better alcohol fuel cells using methanol or ethanol as their fuel. It’s easier to handle and store alcohols than trying to use hydrogen. In alcohol fuel cells, it is also possible to use palladium as a catalyst.

As we noted above, for now platinum is about twice as expensive as palladium.  This means that alcohol fuel cells using palladium would offer a more economical product to the market.

Fuel cells are very efficient and can create electricity that produces very little or even no pollution, making more energy and requiring less fuel than other devices of equal size. They are also quiet and require low maintenance, because there are no moving parts.

When catalyst breakthroughs come and production costs can be lowered, fuel cells are expected to power electric vehicles and replace batteries, along with other jobs. Despite their current high price, fuel cells have already been used for a long time to produce energy in isolated environments, such as spacecraft.

The Aalto team’s results, published in the Journal of Physical Chemistry C. are based on preliminary testing with fuel cell anodes using a palladium catalyst. The Aalto team believes commercial production could start in 5-10 years.

Now if someone would find a huge palladium and platinum supply this would go big.

The energy losses from converting alternating current (AC) of the grid to DC can be up to 45 percent. Most small electronic devices run on, or with converted DC converted by those power blocks and unseen internal power supplies.  Most of the heat lost from that computer is from the conversion of the grid AC to the DC the computer needs.

The list is long, televisions, computers and laptops, the phones, the cell phone charger, and all those power blocks all deliver DC.  Plus add in the compact fluorescents and the coming LED lights.  It would be far simpler, cheaper and sensible if the home had a DC circuit set installed.

Better still would be if there was an international standard so all those power blocks wouldn’t be needed to buy and dispose of when the device or appliance quits or becomes obsolete.

Last week, Moixa Technology of the UK unveiled its Smart DC network, which uses solar panels and off-peak grid electricity stored in batteries to power electronic devices in the home such as televisions, laptops, mobile phones and LED lighting and converts the DC generated by the solar panels into AC to sell back on the grid.  Step one has arrived at last.

The Moixa network is made up with solar panels, DC sockets, an electric vehicle-quality Li-Fe battery that could power LED lights in a typical house during a power cut for a day, and a “hub” device that takes information from a smart meter.

Moixa DC Plugs in Model BMS 250250. Please visit the Moixa Webiste linked above for more info.

The hub manages the flow of electricity according to how much energy it predicts the house will need, how much is available from the solar panels and battery and how much grid power costs according to whether it is a peak or off-peak period.  Moixa has designed the network with solar power in mind.  But even without the solar panels the network has strong appeal.

A substantial backup battery and a DC wired home could get along for days in a power outage and quality engineering could extend the life of the home’s electronics should a whole house converting power supply be installed.  Even more appealing is a single power supply is going to be cheaper and should offer very high efficiency.

Simon Daniel, chief executive officer of Moixa, told the UK’s magazine The Engineer,“People just want cheap and efficient energy. Too much information is annoying but people will take good advice if it is specific to their situation.”

Here’s some attractive numbers on applying DC, users could save between 10 and 30 percent on their electricity bills, suggests Daniel.  Then an additional 15 to 20 percent can be saved on the gas bills by adding an electronic boiler monitor that predicts gas usage and turns off the heating when it’s not needed.

Moixa plans to follow a business model similar to that of Sky of the UK, making the technology easy to install by local contractors and offering gradual upgrades than can be added easily.

Moixa also plans to make the system available for between £1,000 and £3,000 per home. Daniel estimated this cost could be recouped in three to five years through savings on energy bills.   Lucky folks in the UK.  YO!  Mr. Daniel!  We here across the pond get the idea too!

Those upgrades to the network will use data on the changing price of solar panels and LED lighting decreases to tell the homeowner when it becomes cost-effective for them to install more of these products.  You don’t have to buy what isn’t practical or until you’re ready for it.

The firm expects the system to be of particular interest to those who work from home and operate electronic devices throughout peak hours, as well as to hotels and student accommodation.  The potential of this idea is much further reaching than anyone is thinking just yet.

There are many good reasons why DC should be the current of choice in the last 50 meters of the electric supply system.  Much of what is used today is already DC and more is coming.  Having a power supply converter for every single one is a huge economic cost that makes little sense.  Many devices have more expensive power converters than the device itself.

Lets encourage Moixa.  Its an idea that is overdue, needed and offers great benefits.