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.

ORNL’s Volker Urban and colleagues at Technical University Aachen in Germany noticed the reverse piezoelectric effect — defined as creating a mechanical strain by applying an electrical voltage — while conducting fundamental research on polymers.  At first they didn’t think about their observations in terms of classic piezoelectric materials, but then they became more curious.

Urban, a member of the Department of Energy lab’s Neutron Scattering Science Division said, “We thought about comparing the effects that we observed to more ‘classic’ piezoelectric materials and were surprised by how large the effects were by comparison. We observed this effect when two different polymer molecules like polystyrene and rubber are coupled as two blocks in a di-block copolymer.”

Piezoelectric Component Stack

This research shows up to 10 times the measured electro-active response as compared to the strongest known piezoelectric materials, typically crystals and ceramics.  Scientists have been thinking that non-polar polymers were not capable of exhibiting any piezoelectric effect, which has been occurring only in non-conductive materials.

Temperature-dependent studies of the molecular structure revealed an intricate balance of the repulsion between the unlike blocks and an elastic restoring force found in rubber. The electric field adds a third force that can shift the intricate balance, leading to the piezoelectric effect.

Urban lists a number of examples for use including sensors, actuators, energy storage devices, power sources and biomedical devices, “The extraordinarily large response could revolutionize the field of electro-active devices,” and also noted that additional potential uses are likely as word of this discovery gets out and additional research is performed. “Ultimately, we’re not sure where this finding will take us, but at the very least it provides a fundamentally new perspective in polymer science,” he said.

This is significant research and a new ground breaking result.  The paper has been published as the cover article in Advanced Materials. This is a paper that might be worth the outrageous price journals demand.

Piezoelectric Cover at Advanced Materials. Click image for more info..

Working with Urban, the other authors are Markus Ruppel and Jimmy Mays of ORNL and Kristin Schmidt of the University of California at Santa Barbara. Authors from Aachen University are Christian Pester, Heiko Schoberth, Clemens Liedel, Patrick van Rijn, Kerstin Schindler, Stephanie Hiltl, Thomas Czubak and Alexander Böker.

So far piezoelectric has been considered a very small generator with uses where very low power or charging would employ the technology.  The costs for a full working kit haven’t been competitive.  That may all be changed now.  A ten-fold increase – the first step in the new discovery bodes well for applications where the power demands are more substantial.

A cathode made with the best electrocatalyst from the team’s work, tested in H2O2, has a power density of 0.75 W cm−2 at 0.6 V, a meaningful voltage for polymer-electrolyte-membrane fuel cells operation, comparable with that of a commercial Pt-based cathode tested under identical conditions.

The alloy is iron-acetate/phenanthroline/zeolitic-imidazolate framework built into an electrocatalyst.  The zeolitic-imidazolate-framework serves as a microporous host for phenanthroline and ferrous acetate to form a precursor that is subsequently heat-treated. The new catalyst shows increased volumetric activity and enhanced mass-transport properties.

Iron Based Catalyst SEM Images. Image Credit: INRS. Click image for the larget view.

INRS has been at this a while having pioneered the development of the first high-performance iron-based catalyst for fuel cells.  The scientist’s second advance of a new and improved iron-based catalyst is capable of generating even more electric power.  The goal is to match or better platinum in fuel cells for transportation applications. So far only platinum-based catalysts have been able to produce adequate performance.

The new research findings are from the team of Professor Jean-Pol Dodelet.  Whose press release narrative runs, “With these new and promising results, we bolster the prospect of iron-based catalysts replacing platinum ones in the electrochemical reduction of oxygen, one of two reactions needed to activate the electric power generator we call a fuel cell. Platinum is rare and very costly, whereas iron is the second most abundant metal on earth and is inexpensive.”

The good professors optimism shows with, “Thanks to this breakthrough we are nearing the day when we will be able to drive electric-electric hybrid vehicles — i.e. battery and fuel cell powered — , which can potentially free us from our current dependence on oil to power our cars.”

Keep in mind, as French speaking folks, these Canadians are an interesting mix of North American car culture and European social connections.  The motivation – and opportunity – to make a major and adoptable contribution with worldwide implications is possible.

Working at the Énergie Matériaux Télécommunications Research Centre in Varennes, Québec, these INRS scientists are now focusing on the improvement of the long-term stability (at least 5,000 hours) of these promising new catalysts. “The next step is the most important because it will automatically lead to a high value commercial product, not only for car manufacturers but also for all industrial sectors that use electric power generators or manufacture their components,” explained Mr. Dodelet.

It’s still a long way to go.  The press release, while in French and translates easily and clearly, no offering of the fuel used is made. One assumes that hydrogen gas would be the first candidate, but real sales volume is going to need methane, methanol, plus ethanol fuel use capability. Relying on hydrogen gas for fuel in the face of the economic scale for natural gas and the alcohols isn’t thinking through to the market economics.

But using iron to cover half the reaction in a fuel cell at essentially the same performance of platinum is a breakthrough. The explanation of the construction of the catalyst isn’t noting just how it’s formed until the end, which offers quite a bit of speculation.  Lab work is just like that – but commercialization has to have much more solid answers.

The INRS is a young university.  A major research hit that goes commercial and really makes a difference including big investments, lots of jobs and sales in the millions is just what the school needs.

Almost there – we hope.

Now this is something serious to watch.  The UW-Madison Hybrid Vehicle Team has placed first in the U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Vehicle Competition six times in the past 20 years.  The new fueling idea is so good the team is taking a break from the competition to work on the new idea in conjunction with the UW-Madison Engine Research Center.

RCCI Engine Test Cell. Click image for more info.

The process is called reactivity-controlled compression ignition or RCCI.  The process involves two separate fuel injections: First, gasoline is swept into the engine with fresh air, with which it’s mixed uniformly. Then diesel fuel is injected, dispersed finely enough that it ignites under compression. It sounds completely normal, except that the RCCI engine can achieve efficiencies of between 20 and 35 percent better than standard diesel engines, which are themselves about 20 to 30 percent more efficient than gasoline engines.  This is a major fuel extender technology. Its also projected the engines will emit 75 percent fewer greenhouse gases.  It’s also strongly motivating.

RCCI Experimental Injection Setup. Click image for the largest view.

Mixing the two fuels allows combustion to take place at lower temperatures, which both reduces how much energy is required in just keeping the engine optimally warm and the amount lost overboard, and minimizes the production of nitric oxides, the chemical of smog, one of the biggest problems in vehicle-related air pollution.

The most interesting effect is the technology also reduces hard carbon emissions. Because the process involves pulling in fresh air, more so than standard combustion, the leftover carbon is more likely to react with oxygen to form carbon dioxide, rather than being expelled as hard soot.

Glenn Bower, a mechanical engineering faculty associate and UW vehicle team advisor said, “Everyone (atoms) finds a dancing partner, so we don’t get solid carbon coming out. The air coming out is as clean as the air in Wisconsin.”  This is very good news as soot is one of the most problematic human health effluents that engines release.

EPA emission standards for diesels have and will cause higher costs both in manufacture and operations.  Using RCCI, Bower estimates the team vehicles will emit 75 percent fewer greenhouse gases, surpassing the 2010 vehicle emission standards with minimal after treatment.  This is news to cheer up everyone with heavy duty diesel engines in their equipment inventory.

Bower also mentions RCCI engines can achieve efficiencies of between 20 and 35 percent better than with standard diesel engines, which are themselves about 20 to 30 percent more efficient than gasoline engines.  That’s closing in on about 40% efficiency.  This is about double a typical gasoline engine.  The mixed fuel automobile looks pretty attractive at a doubled mileage.

“Fundamentally you can’t get too much better than this,” Bower says. “You can’t eliminate friction, but we’re getting pretty close to the maximum amount of mechanical energy we can get from breaking a chemical bond.”

This is before going to biofuels.  Bower’s team is going to use ethanol instead of gasoline, and biodiesel instead of standard diesel.  It will be fascinating to see how that turns out.

The team is converting two of its former competition vehicles for tests. The first, a Saturn Vue called the eMOOve, will be a series hybrid, to be completed in 2012. A series hybrid is an electric vehicle with an on-board generator: the generator operates at one speed, and therefore requires calculating only one ideal fuel mixture.

By 2013, the team will also convert its Chevy Equinox, called MOOVADA, to be a parallel hybrid, in which the battery and the engine work together. This will take more work because the engine must operate smoothly across all different engine speeds and loads.

Bower notes that, “Rolf Reitz’s graduate student team is hectically converting and calibrating engines for RCCI. As the engines become available, the undergraduates in the Hybrid Vehicle Team will integrate them into functioning hybrid vehicles.”

Bower says he hopes incorporating the RCCI engine technology into a vehicle will encourage industry leaders to adapt it for vehicles and even stationary power generators.

Here’s the glitch for growth – the fuel infrastructure, just as with ethanol mixes past the blend ratios that are done before the delivery to the gas station.  For blending at the station much more complex pumps are needed.  In order to fuel an RCCI engine, a gas station pump must be able to dispense both gasoline or ethanol, and diesel or biodiesel, simultaneously.  This is a major change – but doubling the efficiency of the gasoline engine would be worth it.

Bower explains it’s not such a terribly expensive proposition for many gas stations, “We do have diesel fuel and we usually have ethanol that’s fairly readily available. The idea of basically having a pump with dual nozzles filling both tanks simultaneously isn’t out of the question, because they already have the tanks.”

This team’s idea deserves serious attention, if only for a few decades use, the extension of biomass or petroleum fuels will reduce fuels cost share of the economy allowing investment into other fields.  There is good reason to think that overall vehicle costs would decline.  More manufacturing and construction would be needed.  The economy could use a growth shot.

If the team’s engines can pull a 30% efficient diesel up to 40% and drivability is as good or better than a gasoline engine, the value is very high.  Built small, used in a series hybrid, the fuel extension would be even greater.

GO! Wisconsin.

A room temperature operation seizes attention; formic acid makes for a set of questions.

Dr. Andrzej Borodziński at the Institute of Physical Chemistry of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw (IPC PAS) notes some worthwhile points.  The biggest obstacle to marketing of hydrogen fuels is the storage of hydrogen.  The obstacle remains extremely technologically challenging and still is waiting for satisfactory solutions.  Methanol, an alternative to fuel cells powered by pure hydrogen is toxic and the methanol powered fuel cells produce low power and are operated at a relatively high and so potentially hazardous temperatures at or beyond 90º C.  Neither produces power in a consumer friendly small appliance package of great desirability.

As the technology sits today the best present fuel cells, powered by hydrogen, reach up to 60% in scaleable operation. For comparison, the efficiency of low-compression engines is as low as 20%.

Fuel cells theoretical efficiency of converting chemical energy into electric power can reach even one hundred percent.  There is hardly a consumer portable electronics user who isn’t irritated by problems with power supply. The batteries run out quickly and require continuous replacements or take a long time charging.

The IPC PAS has a developed new catalyst they believe will enable a widespread use of fuel cells. Room temperature operation is a very good start.  They’re suggesting the new fuel cell will be cheap, durable, lightweight and environmentally friendly powered by formic acid.

The IPC PAS group is claiming the efficiency and power of their fuel cells are clearly higher than those powered by methanol.  To make it work the group has developed an efficient and durable catalyst.

Dr. Borodziński says, “The catalyst developed by us has initially lower activity then the existing catalysts made of pure palladium. However the difference disappears after two hours of operation. And further on it only gets better. Our catalyst is stable in operation, whereas the activity of a pure palladium-based catalyst decreases over time.”  That’s really new – a catalyst that improves over time.

Here’s another important plus, the new catalyst preserves its properties while operated in formic acid of low purity. Such formic acid can be easily produced in large quantities, also from biomass, so the fuel for new fuel cells would be very cheap.

One is starting to think the Pols are on to something.

Formic acid produced from biomass would be a fully environment friendly fuel. The reactions involving formic acid in the fuel cell generate the products of water and carbon dioxide. The CO2 is considered a greenhouse gas, but the biomass is obtained from plants which use carbon dioxide for their growth. As a result, formic acid produced from biomass and consumed in fuel cells would not change the content of carbon dioxide in atmospheric air, it’s just another CO2 step in the carbon cycle.

The risk of natural environment contamination by formic acid is also low.  Formic acid occurs naturally in small quantities and is degraded in the environment without being damaging.  A spill of low purity isn’t going to be a huge disaster.  Well, it will be a smelly mess.

But the potential is considerable.  The formic acid fuel cells could find homes in portable electronic devices – mobile phones, laptops or GPS-based devices. They could also be installed as power supply sources in vehicles, from wheelchairs through electric bicycles up to yachts.   High efficiency and power at low operating temperatures offer a much stronger consumer incentive.

At the IPC PAS the research is being undertaken first on battery substitutes based on formic acid fuel cells. The researchers expect that a prototype of a commercial device should be ready within a couple of years.

Just what is that formic acid? Formic acid, aka methanoic acid, is the simplest carboxylic acid, a family of chemicals with a carbon component.  Formic acid is HCO2H, or two hydrogen atoms, with a CO2 segment.  Formic acid has been known for a long time, is colorless, gives off fumes of an unpleasant scent, and mixes well with water.  As it is not flammable when the concentration is below 85% its safety could be desirable.  It can be used as a kind of food additive as a preservative at very low concentration.

On the hand formic acid isn’t pleasant to be around and in high concentrations can damage the skin and eyes.  Animals, including people metabolize and eliminate formic acid easily, but an overdose of formic acid and the formaldehyde made as it metabolizes can damage optic nerves.

But highly concentrated formic acid just decomposes into CO2 and water.  The material is an irritant, corrosive, and could be ignited in pure enough form.  But on the whole, and the reality, the stuff being around all the time anyway, it’s a pretty kindly material which if used as a fuel would be quite a handy thing.  Just don’t spill it – but that applies to virtually everything in the fuels field.

Keep that research going – this idea, as unusual as it seems, has great potential.

This is very good news.  A much smaller methanol fuel cell is on the market in Japan, but the JPL fuel cell puts out a worthwhile 300 watts, or 2.5 amps at the customary U.S. 120 volts.  That’s enough to run a room’s lights, or a mid range PC, or a fairly good sized LCD TV.  Now we’re getting somewhere.

JPLs Direct Methanol Fuel Cell Prototype. Click image for the largest view.

The JPL’s novel fuel cell technology uses liquid methanol as a fuel to produce electrical energy, and does not require any fuel processing. The consumer value in methanol is it’s a simple liquid that doesn’t evaporate off quickly and can be safely handled much like gasoline, except that it’s much harder to ignite.  These points cut way down on the accessory kit to the fuel cell for fuel storage and handling.  Compared to the complexity of storing gaseous hydrogen, methanol is simple and very cheap.  Methanol use can be as simple as putting the nozzle in the tank.

Pure water and carbon dioxide are the only byproducts of the JPL fuel cell, and no pollutants are emitted. Direct Methanol Fuel Cells offer several advantages over other current fuel cell systems, especially with regard to simplicity of design and higher energy density.

Methanol is a very good store of hydrogen with four hydrogen atoms per carbon and oxygen atom in each molecule. It stores in common metal and plastic containers without pressure.  If not spilled and ignited, it’s quite safe with existing common sense.  It’s a fuel Joe and Jane everyone can cope with without a new learning curve.

JPL Power Technology Program Manager Rao Surampudi in explaining said that USC worked with JPL in the development and advancement of this technology for defense and commercial applications, “JPL invented the Direct Methanol Fuel Cell concept and also made significant contributions to all the facets of the technology. These contributions include: development of advanced catalyst materials, high-performance fuel cell membrane electrode assemblies, compact fuel cell stacks, and system designs.”

Over the years, those applications have expanded from the original defense applications to include such uses as battery chargers for consumer electronics, electric vehicles, stand-alone power systems, and uninterrupted/emergency power supplies.  From 1989 to 1998, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) funded JPL and USC to develop direct methanol fuel cells for future defense applications. Inventors on the JPL team include Surampudi, Sri. R. Narayanan, Harvey Frank, Thomas Valdez, Andrew Kindler, Eugene Vamos and Gerald Halpert. The USC inventor team includes G.K. Surya Prakash, Marshall Smart and Nobel Laureate George Olah.

Erik Brandon, current Electrochemical Technologies group supervisor at JPL said, “We are looking forward to working closely with the fuel cell industry to further develop this technology to meet future market needs.”

Gerald Halpert, former Electrochemical Technologies group supervisor at JPL believes, “This fuel cell may well become the power source of choice for energy-efficient, non-polluting military and consumer applications.”  Pure water and carbon dioxide are the only byproducts of a Direct Methanol Fuel Cell, and no pollutants are emitted.

The press release is not exactly packed with technical data – its rather absent, instead.  We’re looking for fuel efficiency, which one would expect to be high, but how high?

The photo about suggests the prototype fits within a briefcase to medium size luggage compartment, which is very good and the photo is of a prototype as well.

In any case, a deal for U.S technology is done at a wattage that is significant using a fuel that most folks could make at home like any moonshiner.  Methanol production isn’t quite the task the ethanol presents, nor so choosy about what raw bio materials can be used.

Uprating, downsizing and powering scooters or electric bicycles looks to be an imminent idea.  It’s a ways off to powering an automobile, but the attraction seems irresistible.  But the U.S. market seed has now been set.  When and where can I buy one?