Environment & Energy

OKIsItJustMe

(19,938 posts)

14. Here are results from a 2012 study for the Navy

Thu Mar 28, 2013, 06:18 PM

Mar 2013

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA562618

…

1.2 Background
Navy underwater vehicle platforms (UUV, ASDS, SWCS, etc.) are demanding larger and larger energy storage capacities to accommodate longer underwater missions and increased platform power requirements. New energy storage devices with high volumetric energy density for underwater vehicles, both manned and unmanned, are therefore needed, such as regenerative fuel cell (RFC) systems based on proton exchange membrane (PEM) technology. An RFC consists of a fuel cell powerplant, an electrolysis system for recharging the reactants, and reactant storage. These water-based energy storage systems have been shown to perform substantially better than traditional battery systems in areas such as rechargeability, specific energy density, and reliability. Advanced membrane and catalyst materials will enable higher efficiency electrolysis, substantially improving the practical energy density for regenerative fuel cell applications.

…

…

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Discovery opens door to efficiently storing and reusing renewable energy (electrolyzing water) [View all] OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 OP

More from the article. GiveMeFreedom Mar 2013 #1

Don’t worry about it “being bought out and forgotten.” OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #3

No, work on electrolyzers continues Yo_Mama Mar 2013 #7

See post 6 kristopher Mar 2013 #8

That is a very significant development Yo_Mama Mar 2013 #2

You’re welcome! OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #5

They expect large units for sale in 2014, and prototype home units in 2015 bananas Mar 2013 #4

A question for OKSensei kristopher Mar 2013 #6

(Who is OKSensei?) OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #9

When it comes to fuel cells you are, of course. kristopher Mar 2013 #10

It's a different technology! Yo_Mama Mar 2013 #12

The primary objection to using hydrogen for energy storage is cost OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #13

This level of analysis doesn't account for costs associated with developing infrastructure kristopher Mar 2013 #17

You mean you don’t want it to be meaningful OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #20

This version of the chart spells it out better OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #21

Here are results from a 2012 study for the Navy OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #14

So what is the answer to the question? kristopher Mar 2013 #16

Really!? OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #19

Direct cost of platinum is only ONE problem associated with a hydrogen SYSTEM kristopher Mar 2013 #22

I’m not saying any of those things OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #23

Actually you are very carefully saying nothing - you STILL haven't answered the question. kristopher Mar 2013 #24

Fatally flawed math OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #25

Yes, it is an obviously contrived example kristopher Mar 2013 #26

I love that “exceeds 90%” (it sounds so much better than 91%) OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #27

That's a different technology Yo_Mama Mar 2013 #11

The amount of energy lost in the storage process is a key element of cost. kristopher Mar 2013 #15

fuel cells tend to wear out quadrature Mar 2013 #18

Batteries also tend to wear out OKIsItJustMe Mar 2013 #28