Fuel cells

HoratioHB

HoratioHB

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 Oct 2006
Messages
895
Location
Near Plymouth
sowethereyet.blogspot.co.uk
Anyone know anything about marine fuel cells

http://www.plastimo.com/catalogue/index.php?LangID=1&catid=10

This a Plastimo device and runs on methanol and seems a much simpler alternative to a diesel generator especially as I only need something to back up solar panels. Questions:

How reliable?
Maintenance?
longevity?
Can you get Methanonl in the Caribbean or alternatively will it run on rum?? (or even can you drink Methanol when the rum runs out)
 
Going by the paranoia that surrounds gas on boats I am surprised that anyone would consider using methanol on a boat.Although methanol fires can be extinguished with water the flame from burning methanol is to all intents and purposes invisible. Methanol is corrosive to aluminium. Methanol is poisonous. Direct-methanol fuel cells are quite inefficient
 
There was a guy from the SW who did last year's Ostar (??) on a Contessa 32 and had one on board. I think the boat's name was Amelie of Dart. Seem to recall that he mentioned his thoughts on the unit on the log/blog on his website.
 
[ QUOTE ]
There are three types for sale on this site: http://www.aquastuff.net

[/ QUOTE ]

These are twice the price of the Plastimo ones and only a little more powerful.

As to poisonous/inflammable and the Saudis. Only poisonous if you drink it !! (the comment about rum was a joke). Yes will burn without a flame but flash point is much higher than petrol and most keep some of that on board for the outboard. Also as soon as it catches fire the smoke from the rest of the burining boat should be a clue! Not going to Saudi - going to the Caribbean.

My view is that it is silent, will always start, very cheap to run and hence a serious alternative to a noisy fuel guzzling generator. What I was hoping was that someone had actually used one and could temper the advertising with practical experience.

just had a look a the Contessa 32 web log and he fitted one and it appears to have failed - maybe thats a clue!!
 
IMHO the hydrogen fuel cell is a much more practical device - at least it will be when they have resolved the problem of reducing the size/weight/cost of the device needed to extract hydrogen from diesel fuel. (technology to do this exists, and MIT and others are actively pursueing this for use in cars. IMHO when that becomes available, the main propulsion will quickly change to electric.
 
[ QUOTE ]
... very cheap to run

[/ QUOTE ]Are you sure? I looked at the Plastimo ones at the LIBS 2005 and at first sight they look cheap to run. They stated the data in an odd way and when you took it back to kWh (or Ah, same thing, really) it was horrifically expensive and not at all powerful. I came to the conclusion that it might be good for the racing types who have plenty of money and are desperate for the lowest weight. You can't just use your own methanol, it seems, you need terribly pure methanol that has been chanted over by Mr Plastimo, or whoever /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I suppose you could find out how to source lab methanol or filter it with a really fine filter yourself but my comments are based on using Plastimo's own fuel, at about that time. I would be interested to hear how you get on with your investigation.
 
[ QUOTE ]

Would the fuel be confiscated if you visited an Islamic state ?

Seriously ! I have heard tales of the Saudis confiscating after-shave and pig-skin luggage from airline passengers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if it tastes nice and you told them what it was.
 
Looking at this again, from Plastimo's website, you get 100Ah per day max for 1.5l methanol. Some of the data is weird - they say you get 'power' of 340 Amp/h from 5l of methanol, which is basically babble. I think I know what they mean but it doesn't give you much confidence.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I got it as 16% efficient.

[/ QUOTE ] Can you talk me through that?
 
Re: Fuel cells - The problems

Think you need to double check this. All the ones I have seen have three disadvantages - cost, COST and EXPENSIVE!!

Seriouslly the unit price looks comparable to a genset although with a much lower output but the fuel is £50 - £100 per gallon it aint the stuff you run stoves on. Also the only ones I have seen have to be shipped to a service agent several times per year for a service costing seval hundred pounds. Last point is where do you get fuel - currently there is no distribution system you have to go back to the cell distributers. Even if thats plastimo no chandler will have it in stock so it will be special order delivered to your next port of call.... er, that'll work wont it!

It has potential but at the moment as someone said might be cood on an open sixty not for cruising. How soon these problems are fixed who knows but I would stick with solar/wind till they are. Same output, fraction of the cost and we know they work.
 
Could not find the source of the figures I used first time so I did it again and got 11%!

Seems the purity of the fuel makes a big difference.

I found one reference that had 64250BTU/gal and another 22MJ/kg and another 19MJ/kg. I used their continuous consumption figure of "1.2 litre methanol per KW/h"

If I got the maths wrong then will I get a detention?
 
[ QUOTE ]
If I got the maths wrong then will I get a detention?

[/ QUOTE ]

Detention? With a couple of posts like that you'll be lucky to be allowed back next term, let alone be let off with detention! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Seriously, though, I was surprised at the very low efficiency you quoted and have now done a bit of elementary research. The thing we are discussing is the Direct Methanol Fuel Cell or DMFC. These were developed as recently as the mid 1990s and are still at a very early stage of development (one good reason for yachtsmen to avoid for the time being). There are a couple of main types of I'll paste the following from a website that seems to be competent......

"Initially developed in the early 1990s, DMFCs were not embraced because of their low efficiency and power density, as well as other problems. Improvements in catalysts and other recent developments have increased power density 20-fold and the efficiency may eventually reach 40%"

So yes, efficiencies are very low, still. And, importantly, unlike solar and wind, they emit CO2, a greenhouse gas, so are not very 'green'. Less green than a diesel generator, maybe?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top