So the information is out now and data sheets are posted on their web site. I think it is pretty clear now this is yester-years fuel cell technology with a bold new helping of fluff and PR. I say that tongue in cheek because there have been some new improvements but nothing above incremental.
They post the efficiency of their box as 50% conversion efficiency, based on lower heating value of fuel vs electrons out. That's pretty low by 10 yr ago standards for fuel cells. There is also no ability to capture waste heat further handicapping them against other SOFC/Phos Acid, and even some of the high temp PEM systems. They claim twice the efficiency as grid power but we all know combined cycle plants running on nat gas are above 50%. They are using the same old distributed generation model to justify the great increase in efficiency. Are they taking into account the huge transmission losses incurred in piping large amounts of nat gas to everyone's home? How much energy per cu-ft of nat gas will be consumed pumping it all over the place? The cost of the enormous compressors at the gas substations. The power to run those. I bet that is not taken into account in any of their calc's. If you were trying to move energy from one place to another which would you prefer, wires and their electrical resistance or pumping it through a pipe and all the compression/flow resistances associated with it? This is where distributed generation models always have and still do fall apart. You want electrons at your house and the fuel comes from somewhere else. 'Wellhead to light bulb' efficiency calculations which are a dirty secret never discussed show that distributed generation does not fare well.
On closer inspection you also see that their pricing curves (stating that they are competitive with grid power) are based on huge federal subsidies piled on top of California subsidies for their technology. Perhaps this is the beginning of corporately sponsored cap and trade, sprouting up right in front of us.
The hype on this is incredible and the media comments, and especially the comments left by the 'average people' on the different forums are laughable. They have done a good job of making people think this is the next big thing. Not one critical question has been asked nor answered.
If you run the math you will see that yes, Google may have saved $100k in electric bills due to the unit providing electricity. I think what is not mentioned is that their natural gas bill probably went up by $90k. Funny how that is omitted.
I chuckle about the $3000 price for the home unit. When we were trying to make a similar unit we had Deloit & Touche do a bunch of market research for us. They kept telling us it would have to cost $3k. Tell people it will cost $3k, that's what the entry price point has to be.
Perry
