Fuel Cells: Top Engine of Change

With an eye toward history, Ferdinand Panik presented his Canadian host with a small gift--a model of Carl Benz’s 1886 Patent Motorwagen, the first vehicle powered by an internal combustion engine.

In return, the senior vice president of Germany’s Daimler-Benz was presented with a more forward-looking memento: a miniature fuel cell.

In the automotive world, the two souvenirs might serve as bookends for the 20th century. Panik was here in April to make sure that Daimler-Benz--parent firm of Mercedes Benz--stays ahead of the curve in the 21st.

Like that of most other auto makers, the company’s attention has become riveted on the fuel cell--an elegantly simple technology that manages to produce electricity from hydrogen without combustion or emitting anything more troublesome than water vapor. Recent advances have pushed fuel cells from dark horse to prospective front-runner in the rush to supplant the internal combustion engine.

In just the past nine months, most of the world’s leading auto makers, including Daimler, Toyota and the Big Three U.S. firms, have announced major fuel-cell projects or developments. Daimler is the most aggressive of all, pouring $450 million into fuel-cell development and vowing to mass produce 100,000 fuel-cell vehicles a year by 2005. The first ones could hit California freeways in 2003.

Toward that end, the company in April acquired 25% of Ballard Power Systems, a small Vancouver, British Columbia, firm that has become the technological pace-setter and boasts fuel-cell contracts with nine of the world’s 16 largest auto makers.

Based on a 158-year-old technology, fuel cells have been used in the U.S. space program for decades. But their high cost and bulky size had always made them impractical for commercial use. Just five years ago, an automotive fuel-cell system cost 1,000 times more than a conventional engine.

Today it is just 10 times as much, and falling rapidly. The size and weight are shrinking just as dramatically.

The search for an alternative to gas-guzzling engines is driven by the desire to eliminate smog-producing pollutants, concern about global warming and the need to reduce dependence on foreign oil.

Like electric cars powered by batteries, fuel cells rely on electricity to drive the wheels. But fuel cells could leapfrog battery-powered electrics because they have greater range and are more easily fueled. They promise performance equal to gas-powered vehicles--without the noxious emissions.

“Fuel cells have all the elements to replace the internal combustion engine,” said Larry Berg, a former chairman of the South Coast Air Quality Management District and a Ballard board member. “They could replace the century of smoke with the century of water vapor.”

Fuel-cell improvements have come so quickly that even the California Air Resources Board, which prides itself on its alternative-fuel vehicle expertise, was caught off-guard.

“They have become a true wild card in the zero-emissions race,” said chairman John Dunlap, adding the technology was barely discussed when the ARB decided last year to push the zero-emissions mandate back five years.

The board in June named a task force to assess fuel-cell technology. The findings could reshape California’s automotive emissions policy early in the next century.

California Sales Targeted for 2003

Mercedes will begin road tests of a fuel cell-powered subcompact as early as next year. Sources say the company plans to begin selling the vehicle in California by 2003 when the state’s zero-emission mandate takes effect.

“There are no fundamental scientific or technical constraints on this,” said Robert Williams, a senior research scientist at Princeton University’s Center for Energy and Environmental Studies.

That may be, but replacing the internal combustion engine will not be easy. It has a century of history behind it and continues to improve, both in efficiency and environmental compatibility. Besides, the automotive landscape is littered with “can’t-miss” technologies that never hit the mark.

Despite the impressive advances of the past few years, the cost of bringing fuel cells to market could prove enormous. The biggest obstacle: How will the hydrogen be produced, stored and distributed?

“It’s a trillion-dollar question mark,” said Pandit Patil, head of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Automotive Advanced Technologies.

He means that literally. Fuel cells need hydrogen, but it is difficult to store on-board and there is no distribution network for the gas. And it would cost anywhere from $500 billion to $1 trillion to build a complete system of refineries, pipelines and service stations dedicated to hydrogen in the United States alone.

So the first fuel-cell vehicles to hit the road will most likely use methanol or gasoline to produce hydrogen on-board. This summer, Ballard signed a pact with Methanex, the world’s largest methanol producer, to work on commercialization of methanol fuel cells. This approach likely will get fuel cells on the road sooner but it also increases design complexity and produces some emissions.

And if you build it, will they buy it?

“You have to keep asking, ‘Why would customers want to buy it?”’ asks John Wallace, director of Ford’s alternative fuels program. “Does it go faster? Is is cheaper? What it does offer is fuel economy. But that has not been a driver in North America in my lifetime.”

Still, some experts believe that fuel cells will surpass battery-powered electrics even before that market has a chance to rev up. Despite outlays of billions of state, federal and private dollars in recent years, battery technology is advancing at a snail’s pace compared to fuel cells. Battery-powered cars are limited by low range and high cost, with little short-term prospect for improvement.

Uses Beyond Cars Seen for Fuel Cells

The case for fuel cells is further aided by their potential application beyond cars, trucks and buses. Fuel cells could power locomotives, submarines and portable computers. More important, fuel cells can create electricity for power plants or power distributed to homes, offices and remote locations.

Fuel cells were invented in 1839 by British scientist Sir William Grove, who found that combining hydrogen and oxygen in the presence of an electrolyte produced electricity and water. The reaction is the reverse of electrolysis.

There was little practical use for them until the 1960s, when fuel cells provided on-board power for the Gemini and Apollo space capsules.

Even then it was clear fuel cells had the potential to outperform batteries and internal combustion engines. But they were far too expensive for commercial use.

Fuel cells also intrigued Geoffrey Ballard, a dual U.S.-Canadian citizen whose father had worked on the Manhattan Project. The Harvard-educated Ballard did military and energy research for the U.S. government for a decade, including a stint in 1974 as director of research for the Office of Energy Conservation.

In 1976 he formed Ballard Research, which initially specialized in lithium batteries, then did fuel-cell research with funding from the Canadian government.

Ballard and his team of 40 scientists, using new materials and techniques, recorded a dramatic four-fold increase in fuel-cell power output. The firm has made continual improvements since then, and auto makers took notice.

Ballard has two fuel-cell-powered buses undergoing road tests and soon will deliver three fuel-cell transit buses to the Chicago Transit Authority for a two-year test program. If successful, Chicago has vowed to convert its entire fleet of 2,000 diesel buses.

At its U.S. operations in Poway, near San Diego, Ballard is working on a methanol-based fuel-cell bus system.

Despite its big-name auto partners, tiny Ballard faces about half a dozen formidable competitors in the automotive field, including Allied Signal and Germany’s Siemens. Still more firms are developing fuel cells for other purposes.

Proponents argue that fuel cells combine the best attributes of batteries and internal combustion engines without the problems of either.

Vastly More Efficient Than Today’s Engines

Conventional engines burn fuel, which results in much wasted energy as well as tailpipe emissions. A fuel cell creates energy electrochemically. There are no noxious emissions, and tests show that a fuel cell is up to three times more efficient than today’s car engines.

Batteries also operate electrochemically, but they only store a limited amount of energy, thus limiting their range. Recharging can take hours. A fuel cell, however, is more like a conventional car with fuel pumped quickly through a hose into an on-board storage tank. Range exceeds 250 miles between refuelings.

Like battery-powered electric vehicles, fuel-cell cars are quiet and have fewer moving parts, increasing reliability and durability. They can go from 0 to 60 mph in 10 to 12 seconds, similar to average gasoline-powered vehicles.

Ballard, which has never made money even as its stock has soared on news of partnerships and contracts, says costs will continue to fall as technology improves, manufacturing processes are developed and mass production begins.

“We are within the envelope on cost,” says Firoz Rasul, president and chief executive officer.

But the cost to produce them remains a big obstacle.

Even the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental advocacy group, estimated last year that the first fuel-cell vehicles could carry a $4,000 to $7,000 premium. With large volume production, that could be cut to $1,000 to $3,000, and perhaps eliminated with government subsidies.

Auto makers, chastened by experience--such as the sluggish sales of GM’s EV1 electric car--say any premium is unacceptable.

“We have learned one lesson--environmental friendliness will not be paid for by the market,” said Panik of Daimler.

Then there is the problem of getting the hydrogen to the car.

Though it is ubiquitous--hydrogen is a flammable, colorless, odorless gas and the lightest of all known substances--it must be extracted from compounds such as natural gas. There is no major infrastructure in the United States to supply or distribute it. It can be stored as a compressed gas or liquefied at low temperatures, but requires bulky storage tanks.

“The pace of commercialization will be determined by the fuel,” said Andy Burke, a researcher at UC Davis’ Institute for Transportation Studies.

Another concern is safety. Remember the Hindenberg? Hydrogen is both flammable and potentially explosive. One worry: a leak in an enclosed area such as a garage where a spark might set off a blast.

But experts note that hydrogen is a light, buoyant gas that dissipates quickly, and say the dangers of leaks can be avoided with proper ventilation. “The hazards of hydrogen are generally overstated,” said Williams of Princeton. “They are different but not greater than conventional fuels.”

Toyota, Chrysler, Ford Enter Battle

Even as these issues are worked out, auto makers are pushing forward. Since last year, Toyota, Chrysler and Ford have all announced fuel-cell projects.

But these developments were overshadowed by Daimler’s $450-million outlay and alliance with Ballard.

Daimler has reduced the size of the fuel-cell engine from one that took up the entire cargo bay of a 7,000-pound van to one the size of a suitcase.

Daimler is expected to show an even more dramatic vehicle in October at the Tokyo Auto Show--a Mercedes A-Class subcompact with a fuel cell and a methanol reformer.

The smaller it gets, of course, the greater its potential.

“The fuel cell has the potential to have as big an impact as the microprocessor,” says Rasul, stroking his bushy, snow-white mustache. “It could be as ubiquitous in 20, 30, 40 or 50 years.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Auto Fuel Cells

Ballard specializes in proton-exchange membrane, or PEM, fuel cells, regarded as the best for automotive uses. They are compact, operate at low temperatures and use no toxic liquids like some other fuel cells.

*

A single fuel cell consists of two electrodes--an anode and a cathode--separated by a solid polymer membrane. The electrodes are coated with a platinum catalyst on one side.

*

1. As hydrogen is fed to the anode, the catalyst promotes its separation into free electrons and protons.

2. The electrons cannot pass through the membrane and are conducted as electrical current through an external circuit to an electric motor. The motor turns the wheels as the electrons are routed to the cathode.

3. The protons, meanwhile, migrate through the plastic membrane to the cathode.

4. There the catalyst prompts a reaction with oxygen from the air and the electrons to form water vapor.

*

Individual fuel cells are bound together in a stack to provide greater output, much like batteries in a flashlight.

(Please see newspaper for full chart information)

Sources: Ballard Power Systems

*

* JAMES FLANIGAN: California poised for leap in pollution-control business. D1