Performance investigation of a micro-tubular flame-assisted fuel cell stack with 3,000 rapid thermal cycles

Milcarek, Ryan J.; Garrett, Michael; Welles, Thomas S.; Ahn, Jeongmin

doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.05.060

Cited by 35 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fuel utilization efficiencies reached during the experiment are significantly higher than those found in literature for FFCs [16,24,42,46]. For example, a fuel utilization of 75% at Φ of 1.2 and 63% at Φ of 2.8 is obtained at an operating voltage of 0.6 V. Low flow rates and the controlled experiment in the furnace are the primary reasons for the high fuel utilization observed.…”

Section: Fuel Cell Performancecontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…The gases were all mixed and sent to the FFC subsystem inside a furnace at 1073 K. Previous experiments have shown that the ionic and electronic conductivity of the electrodes and the ionic conductivity of the electrolyte are high at a temperature of 1073 K and above [16]. Furthermore, carbon deposition due to the carbon monoxide disproportionation reaction ( 2CO → C + CO 2 ) is less favorable at operating temperatures of 1073 K and higher [16]. Thus, a temperature of 1073 K was chosen for the experiments.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After the fuel cell, the remaining fuel passes into the fuel-lean combustion chamber to generate more thermal energy for transfer to the sCO 2 stream via an indirect heat exchanger. Equation (16) shows the fuel-lean combustion reaction. In Equation ( 16), the stoichiometric coefficients a 2 , b 2 , and γ 2 depend on stoichiometry a and b from Equation (3) and on the η fu .…”

Section: P F C = −mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fuel reformers or catalysts address coking but increase complexity and cost. DC-SOFC also have low thermal endurance leading to sealant failure and performance reduction under cycling load [16,17], so they are not a good candidate for long-term practical applications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Hybrid Fuel Cell—Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle for CO2 Sequestration-Ready Combined Heat and Power

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The low prices and its relatively low carbon intensity of natural gas have encouraged the coal replacement with natural gas power generation. Such a replacement reduces greenhouse gases and other emissions. To address the significant energy penalty of carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration in gas turbine systems, a novel high efficiency concept is proposed and analyzed, which integrates a flame-assisted fuel cell (FFC) with a supercritical CO2 (sCO2) Brayton cycle air separation. The air separation enables the exhaust from the system to be CO2 sequestration-ready. The FFC provides the heat required for the sCO2 cycle. Heat rejected from the sCO2 cycle provides the heat required for adsorption-desorption pumping to isolate oxygen via air separation. The maximum electrical efficiency of the FFC sCO2 turbine hybrid (FFCTH) without being CO2 sequestration-ready is 60%, with the maximum penalty being 0.68% at a fuel-rich equivalence ratio (Φ) of 2.8, where Φ is proportional to fuel-air ratio. This electrical efficiency is higher than the standard sCO2 cycle by 6.85%. The maximum power-to-heat ratio of the sequestration-ready FFCTH is 233 at a Φ = 2.8. Even after including the air separation penalty, the electrical efficiency is higher than in previous studies.

show abstract

Section: Fuel Cell Performancecontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: P F C = −mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Hybrid Fuel Cell—Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle for CO2 Sequestration-Ready Combined Heat and Power

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…H 2 S is a concern for fuel cells, as anode poisoning is common and requires cleaning equipment for the biogas to ensure the longevity of the fuel cells [75]. PEM fuel cells have limited fuel flexibility and rapid startup capabilities [68], while SOFCs a have high fuel flexibility, but a slow startup due to stringent sealant constraints [76].…”

Section: High and Low Temperature Fuel Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techno-Economic Assessment of CHP Systems in Wastewater Treatment Plants

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) utilization of combined heat and power (CHP) systems allows for the efficient use of on-site biogas production, as well as increased annual savings in utility costs. In this paper, a review of biogas energy recovery options, CHP prime mover technologies, and the costs associated with biogas cleaning give a broad summary of the current state of CHP technology in WWTPs. Even though there are six different prime mover technologies, the main ones currently being implemented in WWTPs are micro turbines, fuel cells and reciprocating engines. Different prime movers offer varying efficiencies, installation costs, and biogas impurity (H2S, siloxanes, HCl) tolerances. To evaluate the long-term savings capabilities, a techno-economic assessment of a CHP installation at a case study WWTP shows the payback, annual savings, and initial costs associated with the installation of a CHP system. In this case, a study a payback of 5.7 years and a net present value of USD 709,000 can be achieved when the WWTP generates over 2,000,000 m3 of biogas per year and utilizes over 36,000 GJ of natural gas per year.

show abstract