This is a time for bold innovative alternatives to rid U.S. dependence on fossil fuel. This is not a dream as some have claimed. This technology is available today and in some cases, as with Fuel Cell Energy’s DFC product line, no new infrastructure is needed to utilize the technology. H2 internally is produced by utilization of Natural Gas.

President Bush and many Senate and Congressional leaders are asking for the H2 economy to become a reality. Moreover, legislators in many states are elevating the alternative energy issue to assist in positioning their states in a more completive position for future energy development and production of products and services. Oil companies are seizing this opportunity to invest in many alternative energy companies also. The public is becoming more aware of escalating dependence on fossil fuel due in part to the situations associated with the war in Iraq. Therefore, Americans are requesting the accelerated use of alternative energy.

The fossil fuel industry will continue to play an important part of U.S. energy needs; however, alternatives should and will continue to alleviate the pressure on U.S. dependence on foreign sources of energy if America works together as a unified republic.

Mike Ellis Manteo, NC

Fuel cells will have a place in the energy future, but please don't promote them as the energy problem solution miracle. Fuel cells have been in existence for many years and have not been the cure all you seem to think they are.

Randy Fields, IL

Finally, what is the point of the article? It seems like banal cheerleading. Why not identify some real issues? How about some peer review?

It's interesting that stationary fuel cells are almost always fueled by natural gas. The user becomes a customer of a gas utility instead of an electricity utility - so the price of their power depends on the price of natural gas.

There are a few thousand stationary fuel cells that have accumulated several million hours of operation. They include a few hundred installations of 200 kilowatt fuel cells. Some of their advantages include two to three times the efficiency of internal combustion engines, very low emission and almost silent operation.

Another major application for fuel cells is in hybrid electric cars. As the manufacturers are saying, their experience with 42-volt electrical systems, battery electric vehicles, gasoline engine hybrid electrics, and diesel engine hybrid electrics, are all building on their experience and ability to build highly efficient cars that are incorporating more and more electrical functions.

Hybrid electric cars - including fuel cell hybrid electrics - will be pluggable. During a trip to the store, or when stuck in a traffic jam, hybrid electric cars run on battery power only. Then if you park where it's convenient to plug into an electrical socket, then you'll top up your battery from the wall. On longer trips, or if it's not convenient to plug into an electrical socket, then the on-board generator will supply all the power you need. Depending on the type of on-board generator, the fuel is gasoline, diesel, hydrogen or whatever is applicable.

The reason to top up your battery from the wall - instead of from the on-board generator, is that the power from any type of on-board generator can be 10 times more expensive than power from the wall.

There are demonstration numbers of fuel cell hybrid-electric cars, trucks and buses on the roads now. In 2010 they will be 0.5% of new cars. In 2020 they will be 10% of new cars. In 2050 they will be 50% of new cars.

World production of hydrogen is currently 50 million tons per year, with a large part of that being used by oil refineries to produce cleaner hydrocarbon fuels. A fuel cell car may use about 200 kg of hydrogen in a year (to drive 16,000 km).

The most efficient production of hydrogen is by a thermochemical process powered by nuclear power stations.

There is also the FutureGen clean coal power stations that produce hydrogen and electricity (and virtually all the carbon dioxide is sequestered).

By all means, use renewable energy as well, but renewables are forecast to provide only 15% of the world's energy requirement.

The major energy sources are nuclear, coal, oil, gas and hydro.

The hydrogen economy is the nuclear economy.

It's unfortunate that fuel cells and the so-called hydrogen economy have been so politicized. As Mr. Spock points out, this appears to be expressly done to divert attention from what really needs to be done, increase fuel efficiency of vehicles and increased energy efficiency in general.

But as I have said many times on these pages, the U.S. has 3 years of proven oil reserves if it used only its own and an 8 year gas supply. We are a lot closer to Japan in domestic energy supply problems than most people think. That’s why we import 70% of our oil now and are headed to be the largest importer of LNG in the world (currently a Japanese title).

But fortunately, we see the auto industry pushing hard to develop practical hybrid drives. In a couple of years, I expect to see battery packs as standard with these vehicles so that plugging in at night can reduce oil consumption. According to an EPRI study, 60% “well to wheels” oil and 37% smog pollutant reduction is possible if a hybrid drive has a 20-mile battery, and that doesn’t include any improved streamlining or special low-rolling resistance tires.

I believe the U.S. auto industry knows the score. If they don’t produce fuel-efficient hybrid vehicles, they will see their customers go to the folks who do.

Also, forget the hydrogen economy for now. Research $ should be going to the far more practical technological combinations that are possible, and that can really solve our energy problems, like hybrid drives and cost-effective battery packs, for example

The commercialization of hybrid-electric cars by Toyota and Honda is now ramping up through 100,000 cars a year - with the numbers climbing through half a million hybrid-electric cars being built in 2005.

Hybrid-electric cars are past the stage of needing research dollars. The introduction of most automotive innovations is a twenty-year process. Examples include 4-valves per cylinder, disk brakes, 4-speed automatic transmissions and many other automotive technologies. The implementation of hybrid-electric technology has already begun.

The steps now being taken are to establish the hydrogen fuel infrastructure - for hydrogen vehicles with hybrid-electric drive. This is the technology that will be implemented in large numbers from 2020.

We're probably on the right track--what about anti-gravity?

1) For residential houses, if the house is off-grid it must own a generator (fuel cell) capable of supplying its PEAK ELECTRIC LOAD. Whereas if it is on-grid the utility is obligated to supply a much lower amount of generation -- based on my work with an electric utility, a factor of threefold is realistic.

2) GE used to promote fuel cells for residential houses and had a very informative cost calculator. It estimated an operating around 6 cents/kwh for my region, at a time when utility power costs around 9 cents/kwh. However wholesale power costs at the time could be well under 6 cents/kwh. I attempted to estimate the realistic budget needed to purchase the fuel cell unit, provide maintenance and amortize its cost over 20 years. The conclusion was the GE fuel cell unit would cost at least twice the cost of utility power at retail prices. The product could be attractive to people who could not connect to the grid, it could not possibly be economical compared to utility electric power from the grid.

3) All machines break once in awhile and you need a plan for backup. Grid connection is the obvious cheap alternative for backup power even if you choose to self generate.

4) My conclusion is that if fuel cells are such a worthy technology, the major benefits can be obtained by some form of collective ownership and use, which is very likely to be the electric utility. However other technologies will not stand still while fuel cells are being perfected, and fuel cells must be compared with advanced gas turbines and other promising generating technologies.

Hope this helps understand the problems some. -- M. Johnson

Having worked directly with fuel cells some 28 years ago, I am still of the opinion that it takes either a tank full of hydrogen or a natural gas supply line to fuel a fuel cell. I recall a tank of pure hydrogen is fairly explosive.

A natural gas supply is dependent on natural gas pricing, transmission, and distribution. Natural gas prices have risen over the past few years, primarily due to the use of natural gas as the fuel of choice for new power plant construction. Depleting gas supplies at the current rate will buy us a few years before a shortages develop.

Alternative energy sources such as solar and wind are highly desirable, but limited as to the overall percentage of power they can produce. Hybrid, electric, and fuel cell transportation vehicles would all reduce our dependance on foreign oil.

It seems to me the only viable energy source is nuclear. The nuclear industry has been stagnant in the US for the last 25 years. Perhaps it is time to invest in research in this area to produce a power source that does not have the long term waste handling problems that our current reactors exhibit. I for one would like to see the US totally independent of foreign energy.

Fuel cells require a great deal more economic sense before they can be a significant part of any energy solution.

Fuel Cells are indeed very impressive, clean, efficient, highly technical. But disconnected from the grid? Are they reliable enough to compare to utility power? Less than 40 minutes per year, including scheduled maintenance and unscheduled outages?

If a fuel cell is installed so the grid can provide peak power and backup power, the interconnection costs will not be minor compared to a $5000 installation. And installing the fuel cell to also operate as an emergency generator, if the utility power goes out would out of the range of $3000 to $5000 per installation.

Keep in mind that a fuel cell does not have enough waste heat to heat a house; a home heating system will still be needed. A fuel cell that is 85% efficient has insufficient waste heat to heat a house without being electrically oversized. So the savings of a home heating bill cannot be attributed to the decision to install a fuel cell. The recovered heat could not justify the heat recovery equipment which would be no more than a thousand dollars.

The builder of a new house faces the choice between installing a service drop with its electric bills or installing a fuel cell and its gas bills. (We shall ascribe the cost of the gas service to the cost of the house’s heating system.).

The fuel cell would be operating at a 5% to 10% load factor, which is a home’s usual electric load factor. A 10,000 kWh/year house will require a 10 to 15 kW fuel cell without storage and without grid connection. 10kW at $3000 would require fuel cells to be installed at $300/kW, comparable to a current diesel engine. Unlikely. Fuel Cells are expensive, even when the price comes down.

If the fuel cell is interconnected with the grid, then it could be sized at 2kW and feed excess power at night to the grid (at low prices) and accept peak power from the grid during the day (at higher prices). The electric bill including interconnection equipment and net metering charges would add probably $250 per year to the installation

An Electric bill for a 10,000 kWh/year house is perhaps $1000. More then half of the residences in this country use fewer than 6,000 kWhs/year. A $5000 fuel cell installation (equipment, labor, site preparation and electrical equipment) will finance at perhaps $1200 per year. There is a maintenance visit each year at $120, and there is the gas to buy, perhaps another $200. This assumes that there is no interconnection and backup power provided by the grid.

So which part of these calculations is going to change enough to be persuasive to 10% or 20% of all residences? to be more than a niche application? If the $5000 installation were half as large, the choice would be a horse race. If it were a third as large fuel cell would be viable.

Have any of you heard of Millennium Cell (MCEL). Their fuel cell is going into both Ford and Daimler/Chrysler and another automakers vehicle. NYC is testing one out. And I understand that there are a lot of busses are being powered by FC’s, both in the US, Europe and elsewhere.

This technology solves a number of problems. Reforming H2 is one of them, since there system releases the H2 on demand—no pressurized tank is needed. The fuel components include borax and water (we have plenty of both) and the by-product can be recycled to use again. Existing gas stations could provide both with less need for regulation and who’s going to care if a water tank leaks fresh water. The range of the vehicle is comparable to existing IC fueled vehicles. I also understand that Millennium Cells FC’s don’t require as much maintenance because they don’t use hydrocarbons.

So we have an abundant supply of raw materials here in the good old USA and we’ve got the distribution infrastructure in place.

We're going to run out of gas sooner than later--better to fix the problem sooner. What we need to get this off the ground is a massive project (the equivalent of a depression era WPA, WWII Manhattan Project or the national Interstate roads system project initiated by Eisenhower) and utility executives that think outside the box. Partner with the FC industry, ramp up manufacturing and distribution and then lease a fuel cell to every home owner for current rates (maybe less). We don’t need the oil guys (except for some of their money if they don’t want to become the next buggy whip).

This isn’t brain surgery anymore. The problems are political not technological. Money rules.

And back to MCEL, you might even want get a few shares while the price is down with the rest of the market, I did (wish I could afford more).

I have no doubt fuel cells will play a role in distributed power generation, but not before another 10 years at the very best, assuming some key breakthrough are achieved in the automative industy. (Only large volume can pull prices down)

As said by many above, fuel cells are running on hydrogen or eventually natural gas for the largest ones. Hydrogen is not available on this planet as a commodity. It shall be "manufactured". When this is taken into account from an entropic stand point, the overall efficiency is much lower than anticipated primarily.

Nicolas DELATTRE

India's electricity production is 75% coal, 18% hydro, 4% nuclear, 3% other.

Nuclear is 2,500 MW from 14 power stations. 8 new civil power reactors are being built to increase nuclear power output to 10,000 MW. Output in 2020 is planned to be 20,000 MW.

India's oil imports are for transportation fuel. 97% of transportation is powered by oil products.

When you say that "Large-scale employment of fuel cells would insulate [India] from such [oil price] fluctuations", what energy source do you think can replace oil? Are you referring to fuel cells for vehciles, or stationary fuel cells?

The fuel for vehicles is most likely to be hydrogen (that, as everyone says, has to be produced).

The fuel for stationary fuel cells is in most cases natural gas. (The off-shore Bombay gas field could supply the fuel).

Brandon Ebeling Your post was mostly about Millennium Cell, Inc (MCEL). They don't actually build or develop fuel cells. The product they are working to commercialize a tank of sodium borohydride that is a fuel tank that can be used on a vehicle. Hydrogen is chemically locked into sodium borohydride. The chemical is fed past a catalyst to unlock the hydrogen. The vehicle is fitted with a twin tank setup. One tank for the chemical before the hydrogen is extracted, and another tank to hold the spent chemical. At the proposed filling station, a double function hose is planned to fill the first tank with fresh chemical at the same time as the second tank is being emptied. The spent chemical is then reprocessed somewhere to turn it back into sodium borohydride. The energy required is the energy value that was removed plus 40%. The concept may have niche applications.

Compressed hydrogen fuel systems are more common in current hydrogen vehicles. The companies involved include the industrial gas companies such as Air Products, and Praxair, and system and hardware companies like Dynatek and Quantum Technologies.