MEETING REPORT

Year 2002 Fuel Cell Seminar
Palm Springs, California
November 18-21, 2002

By Donald MacArthur

CHEMAC International
Sterling Heights, MI

This meeting has been held every two years since its inception in the mid 1980s. Primarily organized by the Department of Energy (DOE), it is the largest and most comprehensive meeting held on the subject of fuel cells. Ten years ago, in 1992, about 500 people, mostly scientists, attended; this year’s attendance, greater than 2,500, comprised developers, engineers, managers, organizers, and promoters. The stated policies were then, as they are now, reduce dependence on foreign oil, conserve energy, and promote a hydrogen economy. That’s the political position; developers are looking for a way to make money.

As one approaches Palm Springs by road the windmill farms are an unforgettable image. There is no better place for discussions of fuel cells than Palm Springs where residents are interested in energy conservation and clean air and the SunLine Transit Authority is a leader in providing good bus service using the most advanced technologies available (and winter conditions are not encountered). For a few attendees who signed up early, SunLine provided a tour of their facility where their two fuel cell-powered buses were maintained and where the beginnings of a hydrogen economy could be observed. They call it their clean fuels mall. There were solar arrays (40kW) and a water electrolyzer (5kW, 70% efficiency, high pressure H2), hydrogen and hythane (a mixture of about 20% hydrogen and 80% natural gas, lower emissions than NG alone) fueling stations, and “tube” trailers for storage of hydrogen (3600 psi). Most SunLine buses run on natural gas but a few small buses are using hythane. A turbine generating station running on natural gas was generating electricity not only for their facility but feeding electricity back into the grid.

Over the years, the focus of the meeting has changed. In 1996 engineers and systems developers were more numerous than scientists; by 1998, people unfamiliar with fuel cells were in attendance seeking to understand business opportunities. The 2000 meeting reached a peak in hoopla. It seemed that government and quasi-government promoters were out in full force and a large number of engineers/analysts from energy utility companies were there to learn more about the prospects for their industry. The question at the meeting two years ago was, “Are the 1,900 attendees being misled or are they, in fact, leaders in a brand new industry?” The answer was not found – some left believing the promised land to be in sight; others left feeling that solutions to many problems are well into the future.

In 2000, I wrote that “many new firms have appeared to test the market and at least a half dozen have test units in the field, but the market cannot support all the wannabes. Although there are many low volume specialty markets and a potential military market of about $10-20 million per year, which are not very sensitive to cost issues and can support several small companies, the two big markets, residential and transportation, pose difficult cost issues. The residential unit has potential in the off-grid market (which is not as large as proponents think) but the business case for on-grid markets looks very weak. The automotive propulsion unit is farther away than most admit and the auto companies are already turning attention to auxiliary power units. Targets simply are not being met. Truck transportable units for utility companies widely mentioned in 1998 are nowhere in sight. Operating points have not changed in years, about 0.5W/cm2 for PEM hydrogen fueled and 0.15W/cm2 for direct methanol PEM fuel cells.”

This year’s meeting, back in the familiar Palm Springs setting after 2000’s show in Portland, Oregon, was a bit more subdued as the reality of the task has become more apparent. Some frustration was evident as realizations have not met expectations, but overall it was still a high energy environment with thousands of people attending and more than 100 exhibitors. There were two parallel sessions most of the time over the three days. The PEMFC, SOFC and DMFC were well addressed in overview talks, but much of the technical content was in the 220 or so poster papers. Poster sessions were crowded. Fortunately, this meeting had all the papers on CD (paper copies were available as a rather heavy book) so one could peruse the material at leisure. Disk or book may be ordered at www.gofuelcell.com

The exhibitors were a varied lot. I counted 23 fuel cell developers, 24 component suppliers, 18 material suppliers, 7 test equipment manufacturers and 16 government/trade agencies. IdaTech and Avista Labs had real fuel cells on display. There were at least six MEA suppliers present (3M, DuPont, Ion Power, Johnson Matthey, Superior MicroPowders, W.L. Gore) and four bipolar plate suppliers (Bulk Molding, Microponents, Mitisubishi, Schunk Kohlenstofftechnik). Other exhibitors of components were showing pumps, fittings, sensors, etc. Material suppliers were offering ceramic powders, carbons, foamed metals, etc. Test equipment ranged from passive loads to dynamic profile loads for exercising fuel cells.

It has been a bit of a problem to measure state-of-health (SOH) of a fuel cell. A few years ago we heard that fuel cells never fail. It is only in the past year that we have been hearing that fuel cells really do fail. Anyone with experience in electrochemical devices knows how difficult these things are. Almost all measures of durability have depended on open circuit voltage or voltage under load measurements. That is hardly adequate. Only recently have battery engineers used impedance measurements to detect failing cells. This technique could be useful with fuel cells. Measurements of crossover currents, polarization curves, current-voltage profiles can also be useful. There is likely much more to be learned about how fuel cells are failing. (See discussion later of membrane decomposition.)