Samsung Says: Water-Powered Hydrogen Micro Fuel Cell on the Way, We Promise
by Collin Dunn, Corvallis, OR, USA on 10.13.07
The phrase "hydrogen fuel cell" seems to make about half of all TreeHuggers salivate with anticipation and the other half roll their eyes in pipe-dreamed disgust. This story has a little something for both sides: Samsung has announced that they have a micro fuel cell capable of powering cell phones for 10 hours with nothing more than a shot of water.
The fuel cell will fuel hydrogen cartridges that will need changing every four days or so, if you use the phone for four hours a day. Once they get the hang of that, Samsung plans to upgrade the design so all you'll need to do is put some water in your cellphone and talk, talk, talk. For the optimist, there's so pretty neat stuff to look forward to: finally, a small water-powered fuel cell that doesn't require methanol and isn't a clock or a calculator. For those of you rolling your eyes, we haven't forgotten you: there's a possibility that this technology won't make it to production, partially signifying all the broken promises of the hydrogen economy. Samsung says we'll have to wait until 2010 to figure out which group is right. ::Chosun via ::Gizmodo
Reminder: there is no free lunch. The water is simply a hydrogen donor. I'd have to guess they are using a powdered water-reactive metal or group of metals (alkali aor alkaline/earth) which takes the -OH from the water, liberating hydrogen. The manufacture of such metals involves mining and is typically quite energy and water intensive.
If they are indeed water reactive metals (think metallic sodium as an example) then I quite frankly see little hazard reduction benefit over methanol.
Probably the real reason for this is patent access to DMFC tecnology is limited.
I hate to throw water on this posting, but it leaves the impression water is the SOURCE of energy in the fuel cell. Remember, hydrogen is simply a way to store and ship energy, not a source of energy in itself (this is, it takes energy to make the hydrogen in the first place).
In this case, the "fuel cell" is really a battery. The water combines with an unspecified metal inside the cell, liberating hydrogen in the process, and oxidizing the metal. The hydrogen then runs the fuel cell. When the metal is exhausted, the battery stops working. A LOT of energy went into making the reactive metal- and the net energy value of this fuel cell is low.
Its advantage is convenience and a non-flamable electolyte- but is not a particularly green source of energy.
Does this mean that the phone won't go on the fritz if I drop it in the toilet? tee hee!
In all honesty, this makes no sense. A hydrogen fuel cell combines hydrogen with oxygen, while creating an electrical current, and puts out pure water as its waste product. Let me repeat: Water is the *WASTE PRODUCT* of a hydrogen fuel cell. How can this thing take in water as fuel then? Why not just use a continuous charge of water; take it in as fuel, use it, produce water as waste, reuse the waste. It would be a perpetual motion machine, which is impossible. (Even Steorn failed to overthrow this law of thermodynamics.)
Anyone have clarifications? How can this thing use water, the waste product of a fuel cell, as its input? Where does the energy come from?
Berkana,
A small electrical current applied to water causes electrolysis. This separates the H from the O, giving (generally) hydroxy gas... an extremely combustible substance. Burning this gas also has water as it's only waste product.
Perhaps Samsung has figured out the "over-unity" effect that so-called freaks have been reporting for years. (i.e. you get more energy out of the reaction than you use to instigate it) In this case, injecting water into a partially depleted cell could result in the leftover electricity being used to make more hydrogen from the water.... thus recharging the cell. This may or may not violate the laws of thermodynamics. Remember that there is inherent energy in the molecular bonds, and in the atomic structure of water. To put it simply, the electricity used in separating the water was not responsible for the energy contained in the hydrogen... in much the same way that the energy contained in gasoline is not connected to the energy used to dig it up out of the ground.
Berkana is correct. Hydrogen is just an energy storage medium- it TAKES ENERGY to create hydrogen from other sources.
In this case, the "fuel cell" is really more of a battery. It contains a very reactive metal, which in contact with water, oxidizes and releases hydrogen. The hydrogen then powers the fuel cell until the metal is completely exhausted.
Refining the metal takes energy, in fact, the NET energy efficiency is really quite poor. The advantage of the fuel cell is the activating chemical- water- is safe to carry on an airplane. And the battery lasts for a while. But hardly green or efficient.
My feeling is that the best hope for a hydrogen-fueled future is in the area of metals. Once scientists discover a metal to react with the oxygen in water that both frees the hydrogen atom and produces a recyclable oxygen-metal compound, we hydrogen advocates will wash down our last laugh with the clean water produced as waste from the process!
There is only one possible solution to this. Samsung has effectively come up with an advanced aluminum and/or sodium battery.
Pure aluminum has a very high oxidation potential and reacts violently with water, splitting it into O2 + and H-. The H can be siphoned off to run in a traditional PEM fuel cell.
The trick would be to figure out some way to coax the aluminum to "undo" its oxidation in the presence of an electrical current, the "recharging".
The energy storage comes in the form of Aluminum's oxidation potential. The water simply becomes the hydrogen donor and provides no actual energy. I REQUEST THAT THE AUTHOR EDIT THIS ARTICLE TO REFLECT THAT THE WATER DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY ENERGY.
Perfect for my jet ski!
I've read that hydrogen is around 40% efficient using the best technology available to us if money is no object. As this will be in cell phones, I doubt it will reach that number. Meanwhile, lithium ion gets about 75% efficiency. So, it keeps about twice as much charge. Considering the better battery life and presumably better reliability, I'd take the lithium ion method.
In terms of sustainability, I'm not sure what is better. Water wastes more electricity, but cell phones don't use that much power to begin with, as compared to a car where hydrogen really seems like a silly fuel. However, the lithium has to be mined and responsibly recycled (not everyone will do so).
I always love hearing about new developments like this - it moves us one step closer to moving towards a hydrogen based economy.
Recently, there has been so much attention highlighting hydrogen fuel cell research in the automotive industry that it is easy to forget how hydrogen is already being used in other applications. Hydrogen fuel cell technology used to power portable electronic devices is one of the many areas where there are commercial products available today, with research continually expanding.
The use of fuel cell technology is nothing foreign to the telecommunications industry. In fact, it was recently announced by Sprint, one Samsung’s clients, that they are researching renewable energy solutions, which includes hydrogen fuel cell technology. In fact, Sprint has already deployed over 200 hydrogen fuel cell back-up power systems at cell sites across the country to help maintain services during severe or extended power outages.
There are a lot of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies currently available for consumer purchase, take a look at the National Hydrogen Assocaition's Product Catalog at http://www.hydrogenassociation.org/general/productsSearch.asp, there are a lot of good things going on out there.
It isn't gonna work-why did they waste their time?