Bloom Energy on 60 Minutes

Page 2 of 6  

ransley wrote:

The previously quoted $750K isn't what I'd call "inexpensive"...
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

-snip-
If I remember all these numbers more or less correctly, and have done my math right- ebay? 5 units at $750K = $3750K Saved $100K /month. Payback 3 years.
Might have been 'saved $100K in 3 months' - even at that a 9 year payback is pretty good. [better than what I've seen for wind & solar]
Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Elbrecht wrote:

i think it was 100k in 9 months
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
chaniarts wrote:

That was the number ransley posted, anyway...perhaps commercially-produced units can have a payback, hard to guess from essentially no hard facts. And, of course, there's still the question of just what is the material balance of the process. If it's using NG, the C has to go somewhere. Is there air involved? If so, that's NOx also one would presume. And, again, imo, using NG for stationary power generation in large quantities is simply an asinine waste of it in comparison to its value as chemical feedstock, etc., etc., going into the future.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Its used all the time for "peaker power plants" here in Midwest.
Have two friends who work at one. Several jet turbines powered by NG
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@privacy.net wrote:

Yes but that doesn't mean it's wise usage of NG. Expedient in short term, yes; given difficulties raised in the alternatives has often been essentially only alternative left... :(
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It could just as easily be an awesome use of NG. maybe the thing uses very little gas efficiently to produce a lot of power.
Supposedly there are vast untapped reserves of NG under the U.S.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

"Maybe" and "supposedly" are key words here...
_IF_ (that's the proverbial "big if") this thing were to turn out to be very efficient that's a possibility, granted. It certainly hasn't been demonstrated to be so yet. Cold fusion was apparently great until it was attempted to be replicated elsewhere and shown to be an experimental error at best or hoax at worst. Jury is still out on this...
I continue to think NG is definitely not a judicious choice for extensive stationary generation in present form of either gas turbines or in gas-fired boilers compared to the alternatives.
--


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Unlike cold fusion, they already have working examples in real applications. Bloom has a new version of a fuel cell, and is claiming it has some new advantages, but fuel cells in general are already proven technology, and have been around for a long time. Fuel cells work. That's already been established beyond any reasonable doubt.
Bloom just has to prove his can be made smaller and cheaper for the same output, to compete with many other fuel cells ALREADY AVAILABLE ON THE MARKET.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

I'd say Bloom has far more than "just" that to demonstrate...and there's a lot of things to make "just that" happen.
Power to 'em if they can; I'm not holding breath just yet.
--


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Your objections have been pretty much along the lines that fuel cells couldn't work. Reality seems to disagree with you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote: ...

My objection is simply that there's much hype and little fact.
Fuel cells _do_ work; they aren't magic.
These are some novel concept that hasn't been documented as to how; what is the energy and/or material balance, etc., etc., etc., ... The previous NASA-supported work from which these apparently evolved also work; they're known but don't have anything close to the performance claimed on this innovation.
Simply no solid data from which to judge just what level of innovation is really present inside those unlabeled black boxes.
When that revelation of reproducible data occurs, _then_ they'll have something (or not)...
--


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hydrogen Fuel cells are CURRENTLY installed and working successfully in many places. Sure seems like there is plenty of reproducable data.
Do some simple intenet searches for terms suchs as "Hydrogen Fuel Cells" and there are MILLIONS of hits.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/24/2010 10:40 AM, snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

Of course there is and there is a very good reason why current fuel cells are typically used on space craft etc and not much more. But this thread is about magical fuel cells using unstated and unreviewed technology.
The only thing we know about their "magic fuel cells" at this point is marketing hype. There is exactly nothing to form any sort of conclusion. As soon as they produce data that can be peer reviewed they are in the same class as the magic weight reduction pills or super oil additive or whatever other "magical" thing is being hyped.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Baloney. They are being used at public schools in Connecticut among other places. Fuel Cells have been around for well over 100 years.
Even Sprint (among others) is aggressively working to develop hydrogen fuel cells for CELL PHONES.

Do some simple intenet searches for terms suchs as "Hydrogen Fuel Cells" and there are MILLIONS of hits.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/24/2010 11:37 AM, snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

Sure, been around for a long time and whats your point? But sorry, they are not in common usage for very practical reasons. The CT school thing is nothing practical and is just throw a bunch of tax dollars at something to feel good.
*AND* you missed the point of my reply entirely. We know nothing about the "magical fuel cells" which are the topic of this thread.

Do they have them yet?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Good Grief!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did you really expect 60 minutes to bore their audience with technical details?
http://tinyurl.com/BloomPatents shows Bloom Energy's current patent applications. That should give you a starting point for technical details. I'm sure there is a lot they are holding as trade secrets right now. I would.
-- Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I don't trust 60 Minutes to give an honest story. They have lost their credibility.(Bush memos and Dan Rather...)
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't completely trust any news organization, by itself, to give an honest story. Not CBS, NBC, Fox, or whoever. I've been personally involved in a number of incidents that later made the news. More often than not, I wasn't sure they were talking about the same thing.
But on the other hand, just because someone has said something false, it does not mean everything they say is false. If it is something important, check it with other sources. In the case of the Bloom story, it appears to be fairly accurate, even if told with a bit of wide-eyed awe.
-- Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.