System design for vehicle applications:<scp>GM</scp>/opel

Masten, David; Bosco, Andrew

doi:10.1002/9780470974001.f303059

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…was instead referred to the model developed by Dai and Lastoskie (2014), which was then based on Carlson et al (2005) and Masten et al (2010). S15 shows an improvement of the environmental impact of the BOP for all the impact categories compared to the baseline, although the total weight considered in Scenario S15 is 55 kg for the BOP, compared to 35 kg in the Baseline Scenario.…”

Section: Manufacturing: Sensitivity Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle assessment of a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell system for passenger vehicles

Evangelisti

Tagliaferri

Brett

et al. 2017

Journal of Cleaner Production

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In moving towards a more sustainable society, hydrogen fueled polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) fuel cell technology is seen as a great opportunity to reduce the environmental impact of the transport sector.However, decision makers have the challenge of understanding the real environmental consequences of producing fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) compared to alternative green cars, such as battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and more conventional internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs). In this work, we presented a comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) of a FCV focused on its manufacturing phase and compared with the production of a BEV and an ICEV. For the manufacturing phase, the FCV inventories started from the catalyst layer to the glider, including the hydrogen tank. A sensitivity analysis on some of the key components of the fuel cell stack and the FC system (such as balance-of-plant and hydrogen tank) was carried out to account for different assumptions on materials and inventory models. The production process of the fuel cell vehicle showed a higher environmental impact compared to the production of the other two vehicles power sources. This is mainly due to the hydrogen tank and the fuel cell stack. However, by combining the results of the sensitivity analysis for each component -a best-case scenario showed that there is the potential for a 25% reduction in the climate change impact category for the FCV compared to a baseline FCV scenario. Reducing the environmental impact associated with the manufacture of fuel cell vehicles represents an important challenge. The entire life cycle has also been considered and the manufacturing, use and disposal of FCV, electric vehicle and conventional diesel vehicle were compared. Overall, the ICEV showed the highest GWP and this was mainly due to the use phase and the fossil carbon emissions associated to the use of diesel.

show abstract

Section: Manufacturing: Sensitivity Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle assessment of a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell system for passenger vehicles

Evangelisti

Tagliaferri

Brett

et al. 2017

Journal of Cleaner Production

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These two technologies are intrinsically different and have very different efficiency-power characteristics. While an internal combustion engine has its maximum efficiency at or near its maximum power [21], a fuel cell system has its maximum efficiency at partial load [22] (Figure 2.7). Because of this, the efficiency of a hydrogen fueled fuel cell propulsion system in a typical driving schedule, where an automobile engine operates most of the time at partial load, can be about twice that of an internal combustion engine [23][24][25].…”

Section: Automotive Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Water cannot be completely eliminated from the system, because water is essential for the membrane ionic conductivity. Comparison of the efficiency of fuel cells and internal combustion engines [2] a) fuel cell system operating at low pressure and low temperature b) fuel cell system operating at high pressure and high temperature c) fuel cell system with an on-board fuel processor d) compression ignition internal combustion engine (diesel) e) spark ignition internal combustion engine (gasoline) (compiled from [21] and [22])…”

Section: Automotive Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fuel cell heat rejecting equipment (radiator and/or condenser) must be sized for heat rejection in extremely hot weather (typically from 32 to 40°C [21]). Although a fuel cell system is more efficient than an internal combustion engine it has similar or larger cooling loads.…”

Section: Automotive Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although a fuel cell system is more efficient than an internal combustion engine it has similar or larger cooling loads. More importantly, because of the fuel cell's low operating temperature (60 to 80°C) the heat rejection equipment is typically much larger than that for a comparable internal combustion engine [21,26].…”

Section: Automotive Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

PEM Fuel Cells

Barbir

Fuel Cell Technology

133

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrochemical conversion of alcohols for hydrogen production: a short overview

Coutanceau

Baranton

2016

WIREs Energy & Environment

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the emerging hydrogen economy, one of the major objectives is the production of electricity using fuel cells, particularly proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFC). In this perspective, high purity hydrogen is needed. Hydrogen is currently mainly produced from fossil fuels (natural gas, oil, and coal) by energy‐consuming and environmentally unfriendly industrial processes that also involve complicated clean up steps for the removal of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Water electrolysis (particularly the proton exchange membrane electrolysis technology, which allows higher efficiency than alkaline technology) appears to be a good candidate for the production of clean hydrogen. The use of renewable primary energy sources, such as wind, solar, tidal, etc., makes this technology greener. However, the low kinetics of water oxidation, which implies high cell voltage (i.e. high energy consumption) even when using noble metal‐based catalysts (Pt, Ru, Ir), makes this technology expensive. Biosourced alcohols can be interesting alternatives as hydrogen carriers in an electrolysis cell; their reversible oxidation potentials are much lower than that of water, ca 0.1 V versus SHE (standard hydrogen electrode) against 1.23 V versus SHE, so that the cell voltages for hydrogen production are lower (and so is the energy consumption). However, the low kinetics of alcohol oxidation in acidic media requires high Pt‐based catalyst loadings at the anode. Direct alcohol alkaline electrolysis cells can be operated with low Pt loading and even non‐noble metals. In the case of glycerol, generation of hydrogen at the cathode can be performed simultaneously with the formation of value‐added products at the anode for a more profit‐making process. WIREs Energy Environ 2016, 5:388–400. doi: 10.1002/wene.193 This article is categorized under: Bioenergy > Science and Materials Fuel Cells and Hydrogen > Science and Materials Energy Efficiency > Science and Materials

show abstract

System design for vehicle applications:GM/opel

Cited by 13 publications

References 14 publications

Life cycle assessment of a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell system for passenger vehicles

Life cycle assessment of a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell system for passenger vehicles

PEM Fuel Cells

Electrochemical conversion of alcohols for hydrogen production: a short overview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About