PEM Fuel Cell Catalysts: Cost, Performance, and Durability

Oberoi

Intl J of Energy Research

2021

Summary This paper addresses the effects of critical parameters that affect the performance and lifespan of proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells. Amongst all, control of excess water content and dehydration in PEM fuel cells is the major issue under various operating conditions. Therefore, their effects on cathode, anode, gas diffusion layer (GDL), catalyst layer (CL), and flow channels are summarized in the initial part of this paper. Various active cooling strategies such as air cooling, liquid cooling, and phase change method to extract the waste heat from the stack are represented. The lateral part of this paper throws light on the role of heat pipes, working fluid, and the effect of the addition of nanofluid with pertinent filling ratio (FR) in cooling of PEM fuel cells. This work is intended to aid the selection of cooling methods for PEM fuel cells through the consideration of the variety of affecting parameters preceding major expenditure for wide‐scale production. In future, cost comparison associated with the cooling techniques of the fuel cell would be evaluated.

At Anode : H_{2} \to 2 H^{+} goodbreak+ 2 e^{-},

At Cathode : \frac{true}{1} O_{2} goodbreak+ 2 H^{+} goodbreak+ 2 e^{-} \to 2 H_{2} normalO,

Overall Reaction : H_{2} goodbreak+ \frac{true}{1} O_{2} \to H_{2} normalO .

…”

Section: Hydrogen Fuel Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hydrogen Fuel Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing the performance of PEM fuel cells: A review on performance parameters, water management, and cooling techniques

Oberoi

Intl J of Energy Research

2021

“…The method of hydrogen storage is assumed to be with the use of an adsorbent. It is important to note that the capital costs of this storage method used here are from the USDOE FreedomCAR targets [15]. The 2010 target is $133 per kg of hydrogen, the 2017 target is $67 per kg of hydrogen, and the cost used to calculate the capital cost for this paper was $100 per kg hydrogen.…”

Section: Journal Of Advanced Chemical Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Capital Costs of a Vanadium Redox-Flow Battery and a Regenerative Hydrogen-Vanadium Fuel Cell

2015

J Adv Chem Eng

The capital costs of a Regenerative Hydrogen-Vanadium Fuel Cell and a Vanadium Redox-Flow Battery are compared for grid level energy storage. The bulk of the capital costs for a Vanadium Redox-Flow Battery lie in the costs of the vanadium electrolyte, while the Regenerative Hydrogen-Vanadium Fuel Cell presents a potential for savings by eliminating the need for half of the vanadium electrolyte required by a Vanadium Redox-Flow Battery. It was found that the Regenerative Hydrogen-Vanadium Fuel Cell would cost $57 less per kWh than the Vanadium Redox-Flow Battery, with savings garnered from the elimination of half of the electrolyte somewhat mitigated by the costs of the catalyst and air compressor required. If the capital costs are annualized through straight line depreciation, and the operation costs are included, the Vanadium Redox-Flow Battery is $5 per kWh less per year than the Regenerative Hydrogen-Vanadium Fuel Cell.

“…Among various types of FCs, the proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) technology is one of the most promising approaches for energy conversion in automotive applications [ 2 ]. Despite the use of expensive noble metal electrocatalysts [ 3 , 4 ], the sluggish kinetics of the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) in acid media, and formation of the undesirable hydrogen peroxide intermediate are still the main drawbacks, on top of the stability problems, when it comes to the widespread commercialization of PEMFC devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancement of Activity and Development of Low Pt Content Electrocatalysts for Oxygen Reduction Reaction in Acid Media

et al. 2021

Platinum is a main catalyst for the electroreduction of oxygen, a reaction of primary importance to the technology of low-temperature fuel cells. Due to the high cost of platinum, there is a need to significantly lower its loadings at interfaces. However, then O2-reduction often proceeds at a less positive potential, and produces higher amounts of undesirable H2O2-intermediate. Hybrid supports, which utilize metal oxides (e.g., CeO2, WO3, Ta2O5, Nb2O5, and ZrO2), stabilize Pt and carbon nanostructures and diminish their corrosion while exhibiting high activity toward the four-electron (most efficient) reduction in oxygen. Porosity of carbon supports facilitates dispersion and stability of Pt nanoparticles. Alternatively, the Pt-based bi- and multi-metallic catalysts, including PtM alloys or M-core/Pt-shell nanostructures, where M stands for certain transition metals (e.g., Au, Co, Cu, Ni, and Fe), can be considered. The catalytic efficiency depends on geometric (decrease in Pt–Pt bond distances) and electronic (increase in d-electron vacancy in Pt) factors, in addition to possible metal–support interactions and interfacial structural changes affecting adsorption and activation of O2-molecules. Despite the stabilization of carbons, doping with heteroatoms, such as sulfur, nitrogen, phosphorus, and boron results in the formation of catalytically active centers. Thus, the useful catalysts are likely to be multi-component and multi-functional.