Quote :

"60 Minutes has reported on a new fuel cell product called a Bloom Box, a big metal box containing a small stack of ceramic disks and "ink" that can supposedly provide enough power to run a Starbucks. The big questions are: Does it work? And will it ever help the average homeowner save on energy costs? Google has supposedly been using four of them to power one of its data centers for the past 18 months, so yes to the first question. As for home use, a Bloom Box currently costs over $700,000, so no. Inventor K.R. Sridhar optimistically says he wants to get the price to under $3,000 in the next 5 to 10 years, though."

http://consumerist.com/2010/02/bloom-box-can-supposedly-power-a-small-home-but-you-cant-afford-it.html

Google and eBay use em but the ways things are going Google just got them to test them before they buy the entire company out and make the profit themselves after more R&D

2/22/2010 10:11:54 PM

Your title is admittedly better:

/message_topic.aspx?topic=588996


[Edited on February 22, 2010 at 10:18 PM. Reason : .]

2/22/2010 10:17:19 PM

I don't think each little box was $700,000

maybe the giant box made up of tiny little boxes...

Oh and these things will probably steal all of our available oxygen if they get mass produced

2/22/2010 10:18:48 PM

^^ lol, no prob, ive made some shitty thread titles in my day

2/22/2010 10:31:38 PM

I read this title as "Boom Blox", the game for Wii

2/23/2010 12:05:56 AM

me too

2/23/2010 8:53:43 AM

Today, we are all Boom Blox.

2/23/2010 9:02:12 AM

very cool...and the fact that's actually being used by companies i've heard of, with their endorsement (ebay's, anyway) lends credibility

neat...i want one!

2/23/2010 9:08:41 AM

i'm still skeptical until they release more technical details.

2/23/2010 9:09:42 AM

^ ditto...but it seems, at least, that it works if it's actually in use on a relatively large scale (i consider multiple large installations a pretty decent test environment, anyway)

2/23/2010 9:12:34 AM

Whole lotta smiling faces, not a whole lot of details. I'm not convinced yet. A bunch of people have a lot of money in this so of course they're going to sound confident and happy like it's going to work well. I personally think it's a boondoggle, but 400M in venture capital says I'm wrong. Just have to wait and see.

^They work, but how well? They mentioned multiple failures in the 60 Minutes segment. How reliable is the unit? How many hoses, fans, filters are there to fail? What kind of redundancy can you setup with it? Will the construction costs of removing high load lines be worth it? etc...

[Edited on February 23, 2010 at 9:19 AM. Reason : ^]

2/23/2010 9:14:26 AM

what kind of details should they provide that won't disclose too much information about the proprietary technology?

2/23/2010 9:16:41 AM

oh yea, I agree that it works to some extent given the fact that it is in use. I'd like to see the emission numbers (flow rates and concentration), amount of fuel used (so that it can be compared with the amount of fuel used to provide the same amount of energy in other forms), mechanical efficiency %s etc.

None of that should affect disclosure of proprietary technology and is important information when comparing this to other forms of energy creation. They can't just tell us emissions are negligible or that this is "more efficient" etc.

As a mechanical engineer, anytime I am dealing with new technology that someone is marketing to us and claiming higher efficiency, lower emissions, etc., this is the kind of stuff we ask for to evaluate whether it will truly do what it says it will do. If they can't provide this stuff, or dance around supplying the documentation we don't even consider them as a vendor for equipment in the new plant. You also have to be very very careful with HOW and WHEN data was retrieved and reported because there are a lot of loopholes and misinformation.

[Edited on February 23, 2010 at 9:27 AM. Reason : ]

2/23/2010 9:17:53 AM

^ ah, i agree...i guess i just wonder how blatantly they could lie about it...i suppose that i assumed that google and ebay and fedex were given more specifics and were convinced...their names are big enough that i feel they would prefer not to be associated with a giant sham

i do realize that i'm making assumptions and putting my "faith" in corporations...not ideal, but again, i feel that they're concerned enough with their image (and their bottom line) that they researched more than a 10-minute segment could demonstrate

*shrug*

2/23/2010 9:27:14 AM

oh i understand that. There is certainly a much higher chance that their stuff is legit vs someone who has no one currently using their product. However there are still questions that need to be answered, things that need to be proven, etc. How susceptible to a market jump in the price of their fuel are they and how much does that affect the strength of this product? Maintenance? And I am still interested in the emissions and efficiency.

I'm not trying to be negative, its just that there has been so little information given that it is hard to get too excited.

EDIT: Also, if you do the math on EBAY's units...it looks like they have 5 units at ~$750,000/unit. They are on course to save $133,000 in energy this year, however that still leaves them with nearly a 30 year payback. Most people don't even consider anything with more than a 5 year payback in my experience from working on new construction and renovations. Now the price listed was for "home use," so I am not sure what the cost would be to a corporation with these under full production, but that is something else to consider.

[Edited on February 23, 2010 at 9:43 AM. Reason : ]

2/23/2010 9:31:47 AM

Quote :

"if you do the math on EBAY's units...it looks like they have 5 units at ~$750,000/unit"

i was under the impression that that price was effectively cut in half by the 20% california subsidization and the 30% federal tax credits that come from investing in green power?

that means it's only a 15-year payback (granted, the actual cost is still the actual cost and so the 15-year figure is artificial...but in hard numbers, it's still what it costs eBay)

also, was that $750k per unit or total? i might need to watch the clip again...

2/23/2010 9:42:44 AM

you're probably right about the subsidizing, the only clip I watched was last night, and now that I am back at work again I only have articles to glance at. However the $700k-800k was listed as "per box" but that was on a residential scale (I edited above right before I saw your post).

I guess at this point I'm just spinning my wheels speculating. I'm definitely interested to see some hard numbers on this stuff though.

[Edited on February 23, 2010 at 9:47 AM. Reason : ]

2/23/2010 9:44:28 AM

Quote :

"Patent number: 7255956 Filing date: Feb 20, 2003 Issue date: Aug 14, 2007 Application number: 10/368,348 Environmentally tolerant anode catalyst for a solid oxide fuel cell A solid oxide fuel cell includes a cathode, a solid ceramic electrolyte, and an anode comprising a cermet containing an environment tolerant catalyst, such as a fuel starvation and/or a sulfur tolerant catalyst. Inventors: James F. McElroy, K. R. Sridhar Assignee: Bloom Energy Corporation Primary Examiner: Raymond Alejandro Secondary Examiner: Angela J. Martin Attorney: Foley & Lardner LLP "

Quote :

"Solid oxide fuel cells typically generate approximately the 20 same amount of heat as electrical power. This heat is available at elevated temperatures, usually in the range of 250° C. to 1000° C., and is suitable to drive a heat driven heat pump. There are heat driven heat pumps, which have an efficiency of approximately unity. An efficiency of unity implies that the heat pump can remove the same amount of heat which is supplied to drive the heat pump. It is important to note that the heat streams involved are of different temperature. The heat stream from the fuel cell to the heat driven heat pump is provided at a higher temperature than the heat stream from the cooling load (in this case an electrical appliance) into the heat driven heat pump. The electrical power supplied by the fuel cell is consumed 35 by an appliance. Part of the electrical power supplied to an appliance is dissipated as heat. A close look at this part of the system reveals that all of the electrical power supplied to the appliance, which is not stored in the appliance or transmitted from the appliance beyond the system boundaries is dissi- 4Q pated. For most appliances, such as computers or machinery, only a small fraction of the power supplied is transmitted beyond system boundaries and most of the electrical energy supplied is dissipated as heat. The dissipated heat needs to be removed in order to avoid excessive temperatures within the appliance. The inventors have realized that the system described above has the extremely convenient feature of matching cooling loads with electrical loads. The combination of the heat driven heat pump with the solid oxide fuel cell provides 50 electrical supply and cooling capacity matching the requirements of many electrical appliances. Such a system is convenient, because it requires neither additional cooling devices, nor additional electrical power of significance (i.e., over 10% of the total power) to be incorporated. Careful 55 selection of the power generator and the heat driven heat pump can provide matched cooling and heating for a variety of applications. The power generator can also be a combination of a solid oxide fuel cell and a gas turbine, such as a bottoming cycle gas turbine. 60 Additionally, the amount of cooling and electrical power provided can be adjusted by selecting the appropriate operating conditions for the fuel cell. If for example the fuel cell is supplied with an excess of fuel, more high temperature heat can be created and thereby more cooling power. This 65 adjustment can be especially important in situations where additional heat loads need to be removed. One example for 45 an additional heat load is heating of the conditioned appliance due to high ambient air temperatures (i.e. hot climate zones). Another preferred option is heating of appliances or thermally conditioned space with the heat pump. For example in cold climate zones heating can be crucial to the operation of appliances or for the personnel operating the appliances. A heat driven heat pump can extremely efficiently provide heating. A variety of fuels can be used in the power generator. Examples for gaseous fuel are hydrogen, biologically produced gas, natural gas, compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, and propane. Liquid fuels can also be used. The system can also be adapted to solid fuels. FIG. 6 schematically illustrates the system of the second preferred embodiment. The system contains an electrical power generator 2, a heat driven heat pump 4, an appliance 6, and a heat sink 8. The electrical power generator 2 can be a solid oxide fuel cell. It can also be a solid oxide fuel cell combined with a gas turbine. Other power generators, such as molten carbonate fuel cells, which also provide high temperature heat in addition to electrical power, can also be used. The heat driven heat pump 4 can be an absorbtion chiller, such as a LiBr-Water or an ammonia-water heat pump. Heat driven heat pumps use high temperature heat to provide cooling (i.e. absorb heat at a low temperature), and reject heat at an intermediate temperature. Compared to conventional Rankine-cycle cooling devices, they require only a small amount of electrical or mechanical power. A description of heat driven heat pumps can be found in Bernard D. Woods, "Applications of Thermodynamics", Waveland Press, Inc., Prospect Heights, 111., Second Edition, 1991, incorporated herein by reference. Another class of heat driven heat pumps suitable for this embodiment is adsorption heat pumps. In an adsorption heat pump the refrigerant, which is usually a gas, interacts with a solid. Adsorption and desorption of the refrigerant on/from the solid provide pressurization of the refrigerant. High pressure desorption of the refrigerant is accomplished using high temperature heat. In the high-pressure portion of the refrigerant loop, heat is rejected and in the low pressure portion heat is absorbed. Adsorption heat pumps can be realized as solid state devices without the need to handle liquids. This can be advantageous for example in environments where handling of the liquids commonly involved in absorption heat pumps is too hazardous. Environmentally friendly gases/vapors can be used in the adsorption heat pump. The appliance 6 is a device that consumes electrical power for any purpose and generates heat (appliance cooling load), mostly as a parasitic loss, which needs to be removed. One preferred example for this appliance is a computer or a cluster of computers co-located in a data center."

http://www.google.com/patents?q=7255956

2/23/2010 10:20:54 AM

now this is some bad ass tech.

[Edited on February 23, 2010 at 10:52 AM. Reason : .]

2/23/2010 10:52:09 AM

yeah, there was 20% state and 30% federal subsidizing. So i t was suggested that they were paying half of the 700-800k price tag.

Tomorrow is the official "release." Hopefully they'll put out some hard numbers as well.


Also, poorly named thread here: message_topic.aspx?topic=588996

2/23/2010 11:01:20 AM

the bold part is exactly what i want to know

http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/02/23/bloom-box-segway-or-savior/

Quote :

"Bloom Box: Segway or savior? February 23, 2010 10:50 AM Three critical questions Bloom Energy must answer to succeed. By Paul Keegan, contributor Now that Bloom Energy has come out of hiding on Fortune.com last Friday and on a recent episode of CBS’s “60 Minutes,” you’d think we’d all be able to start celebrating the invention of K.R. Sridhar’s magic black fuel-cell box. The CEO claims it can provide abundant, cheap, clean electricity that will finally rid us of our dependence on fossil fuels. But hold the champagne. A few critical questions remain that we hope will be answered at Bloom’s big press event on Wednesday in San Jose, Calif. on the campus of eBay (EBAY), one of Bloom’s first customers. The event will feature a star-studded lineup that includes California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, board member Colin Powell, eBay CEO John Donahoe, venture capital firm and early Bloom believer John Doerr of Kleiner, Perkins, Caulfield & Byers — and, of course, the man on the hot seat, Sridhar himself. Let’s hope one of them can tell us whether the eight secretive years and $400 million Bloom has raised has produced a product that might be commercially viable anytime soon. Here’s what everyone should be asking: Can the Bloom Box be cost-competitive without subsidies? Remarkably, after all this time, Bloom has still not released numbers about how much the Bloom Box costs to operate per kilowatt hour. Here’s what we need to know: How much does a typical Bloom Box — the kind Google (GOOG), eBay, Wal-Mart (WMT), and Staples (SPLS) have been testing — cost. And how many kilowatts of electricity will each box produce (unsubsidized, of course)? Is the cost the $700,000 to $800,000 that “60 Minutes” reported FedEx (FDX) paid for its unit? Would that be for a 400 kilowatt system like the one Google told Fortune.com it bought? With those two facts, we can factor in the cost of natural gas and determine how much it costs per kilowatt hour to run the system around the clock for 10 years — the length of the Bloom Box warranty. We also need to know the price of that warranty and whether there is another fee for monitoring and maintaining the system, which Bloom handles so customers don’t have to worry about it. On “60 Minutes,” eBay’s Donahoe said the Bloom Box has saved the company $100,000 in energy costs, but that’s meaningless without the details to see how he got there. Once we get an accurate number for what the Bloom Box costs, we have to compare it to what companies can pay simply by plugging it into the grid — yes, that nasty, coal-burning grid. Jacob Grose, senior analyst with Lux Research, says the average retail price of coal-generated electricity is 11 cents per kilowatt hour, which includes the cost of transmission and distribution. Bloom has to make its boxes cheaper than that — and just as reliable — to prove that it has a winner. Says Grose , who has updated his research since the “60 Minutes” piece on Sunday, “I’m still skeptical that Bloom will be able to compete on price in unsubsidized markets.” How will people respond when they find out this isn’t a zero-emission generator? Awestruck news accounts group the Bloom Box with renewable energy sources such as solar and wind. But the most common form of energy fueling Sridhar’s box is likely to be CO2-emitting natural gas. Sridhar argues that a Bloom Box fueled by natural gas installed in your backyard would produce half as much carbon dioxide as a fossil-fuel power plant. But the comparison isn’t completely apt because states such as California — where all of the units Bloom has sold so far are located — get much of their energy from renewable sources. And he acknowledges that by using natural gas, the Bloom Box does indeed have a carbon footprint. “As long as there is a hydrocarbon fuel,” he admits, “there will be CO2.” Though some Bloom Box users such as eBay are using bio-gas, not much of that stuff is around and therefore natural gas is likely to be the primary fuel. Rather than being discussed as a completely new form of energy, shouldn’t the Bloom Box be more accurately considered a more efficient way to burn fossil fuels? Has the company made a mistake targeting consumers? How much would it really cost to buy a Bloom Box to power your home — and is that really a plausible market over the next five to 10 years, as Sridhar suggested on “60 Minutes?" Sridhar told Lesley Stahl the same thing he told Fortune.com: that one bread loaf-sized unit capable of producing 1 kilowatt of power could power a single home. We are grateful for the online commentators responding to our article on Friday who pointed out that the average American home consumes far more than one kilowatt. It’s true: If you have ten 100-watt bulbs ablaze in your house, you’ve already consumed 1 kilowatt and haven’t even turned on the air conditioner, dishwasher, or hair dryer yet. Sridhar says a 1-kilowatt unit would cost $3,000. But if, as many analysts say, the average home might consume five to 10 kilowatts during peak use, the price would be a harder-to-swallow $15,000 to $30,000. It’s unclear why Sridhar is pushing the home market, anyway, since the most fertile ground for now seems to be the corporate and institutional market, which can exploit efficiencies of scale. The tech world’s been waiting for Bloom to emerge from the shadows; Sridhar will have to prove Wednesday that he’s got something that lives up to the hype."

2/23/2010 11:15:13 AM

so...the site went live today (http://www.bloomenergy.com/)

animation of how their solid oxide fuel cells work: http://bloomenergy.com/products/solid-oxide-fuel-cell/

datasheet for their "energy servers" (info below): http://bloomenergy.com/products/data-sheet/

Inputs
Fuels: Natural Gas, Directed Biogas
Input fuel pressure: 15 psig
Fuel required @ rated power: 0.661 MMBtu/hr of natural gas
Water required (for startup only): 120 gallons municipal water

Outputs
Rated power output (AC): 100 kW
Electrical efficiency (LHV net AC): > 50%
Electrical connection: 480V @ 60 Hz, 4-wire 3 phase

Physical
Weight: 10 tons
Size: 224" x 84" x 81"

Emissions
NOx: < 0.07 lbs/MW-hr
SOx: negligible
CO: < 0.10 lbs/MW-hr
VOCs: < 0.02 lbs/MW-hr
CO2 @ specified efficiency: 773 lbs/MW-hr on natural gas, carbon neutral on Directed Biogas

Environment
Standard temperature range: 0° to 40° C (extreme weather kit available)
Max altitude at rated power: 6,000 ft. MSL
Humidity: 20% - 95%
Seismic Vibration: IBC 2003: Site Class D
Location: Outdoor
Noise @ rated power: < 70 DB @ 6 feet

Codes and Standards
Complies with Rule 21 interconnection standards
Exempt from CA Air District permitting; meets stringent CARB 2007 emissions standards
Product Listed by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) to the FC-1 standard
Capable of emergency stop based on input from your facility

2/24/2010 1:56:26 PM

Quote :

"The Bloom Box is essentially a generator – a type of fuel cell that is constructed of a stack of ceramic plates with different (secret) substances painted on either side. You feed fuel and oxygen in one end, and you get electricity out the other end. I found it amusing how 60 Minutes tried to spin this into something more than it is – it’s a generator. The most likely fuel for the Bloom Box is natural gas, a fossil fuel. Natural gas is still somewhat abundant and cost effective, and there is already a distribution system for it. So in the end this is just another way to burn fossil fuels to generate electricity. ... Once again, when dealing with an energy technology, we have to put this into the proper perspective. The technology is not an energy source (so it will not solve our energy problems, as Stahl asked of Colin Powell – for some reason). It is not a means of storing energy. It is simply a means of converting fuel into electricity – in other words it is a generator or power plant."

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=1648

[Edited on February 24, 2010 at 6:46 PM. Reason : .]

2/24/2010 6:45:53 PM

^ that doesn't make sense

a catalytic fuel cell (what it seems to be) is inherently different than what most people think of when they hear "generator." It doesn't seem to be an internal combustion type of generator, or that it's actually "burning" anything. And it seems to be able to run from any hydrocarbon source, and I wouldn't be surprised if it could powered efficiently from sewer gas (which would make it carbon-neutral, right?).

It sounds to me from the patent description that they are using the "waste heat" generated from the devices that run off of the Bloom Box to drive a fuel cell reaction that generates electricity, and this is where their marketable feature is. IF they have a reasonably efficient chemical process, combined with the fact that their box can cool devices, then they can kill 2 birds with 1 stone for a data center.

But, it's almost certain that the company and media are over hyping this, but it does seem like a step in the right direction.

[Edited on February 24, 2010 at 6:59 PM. Reason : ]

2/24/2010 6:59:14 PM

so is this more efficient than a big-ass combined cycle plant?

2/24/2010 7:36:02 PM

Quote :

"Noise @ rated power: < 70 DB @ 6 feet"

That's somewhat loud for a chemical reaction... So what exactly is happening to create that noise?

2/24/2010 8:38:33 PM

Quote :

"It sounds to me from the patent description that they are using the "waste heat" generated from the devices that run off of the Bloom Box to drive a fuel cell reaction that generates electricity, and this is where their marketable feature is. IF they have a reasonably efficient chemical process, combined with the fact that their box can cool devices, then they can kill 2 birds with 1 stone for a data center. "

I'm pretty sure the waste heat that is recycled is from the chemical reaction which helps heat the steam which in turn helps sustain the chain reaction. Since its sold as an enclosed box I severely doubt there is going to be any capture of waste heat from the electrical load.

Quote :

"That's somewhat loud for a chemical reaction... So what exactly is happening to create that noise?"

There's a lot of steam in there and a heat exchanger/pump which probably means a compressor of some sort. I'm not that surprised

2/24/2010 8:51:37 PM

^ hmm…

where did you see that it uses steam?

2/24/2010 8:58:06 PM

^ it mentions it during the "how it works" animation: http://bloomenergy.com/products/solid-oxide-fuel-cell-animation/

[Edited on February 25, 2010 at 8:22 AM. Reason : .]

2/25/2010 8:21:39 AM

so running a few calculations:

Retail/Residential Price of Natural Gas: ~$16/MMBTU (1000ft^3=1MMBTU) (http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_a_EPG0_PRS_DMcf_a.htm)
Fuel required @ rated power: 0.661 MMBtu/hr of natural gas
Rated power output (AC): 100 kW

That would be ($16/MBTU)(0.661MMBTU/hr)(1/100kW) = $0.10576/kW-hr or 10.576 cents/kW-hr @ rated power

Progress energy's residential rate for the Carolinas is 10.57 cents/kWh in the summer and 9.57 cents/kWh in the winter plus a $6.75 base charge. (http://progress-energy.com/aboutenergy/rates/NCScheduleRES.pdf)

You aren't going to use 100kW at a time, but it'd be interesting to see how the numbers add up for smaller units.

[Edited on February 25, 2010 at 9:24 AM. Reason : ]

2/25/2010 9:17:55 AM

Is Bloom Energy a public or privately held company? What's the ticker?

2/25/2010 1:27:05 PM

^ private

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=28543927

[Edited on February 25, 2010 at 6:17 PM. Reason : -]

2/25/2010 6:16:47 PM

So can someone sum up the device in 4 sentences? Not what it will accomplish, but what it actually is.

2/25/2010 7:01:43 PM

Quote :

"Standard temperature range 0° to 40° C (extreme weather kit available)"

So it won't work in below freezing conditions? Thats not gonna fly.

2/26/2010 9:09:25 AM

i can't imagine it being that difficult to put a small heater on it or something to keep it warm enough

2/26/2010 9:13:33 AM

guys how hot is steam again

2/26/2010 9:26:27 AM

Quote :

"So it won't work in below freezing conditions? Thats not gonna fly."

in addition to ^^, i would assume that it only matters for startup purposes, as ^ indicates

2/26/2010 9:42:50 AM

Quote :

"So can someone sum up the device in 4 sentences? Not what it will accomplish, but what it actually is."

It's a solid oxide fuel cell and, while it is probably more efficient than previous iterations, the technology itself is not inherently new nor remarkable. The remarkable feature is that it is combined with a heat driven heat pump (again nothing new) in such a way that it can remove waste heat, ie the heat generated in a room full of computers/electronics. It's basically an air conditioner that generates electricity via natural gas instead of consuming it. This is attractive to companies that typically have to pay for electricity to run electronics which generate heat, which needs to be removed by using more electricity (HVAC).

2/26/2010 10:13:15 AM

jethro you forgot to include the price of the water which means it's more expensive than pe

2/26/2010 3:07:08 PM

I assume it's 120 gallons that you only need to provide once, so I'd roll that into the initial investment. Even on my calculations it turns out to be right at PE's summer rate, but that doesn't account for the fact that you would not need to run your AC as much (or at all?).

2/26/2010 4:36:39 PM

umm ... would you really keep something like this sitting INSIDE your house???

2/27/2010 8:39:40 AM

why would you put it inside?

Quote :

") in such a way that it can remove waste heat, ie the heat generated in a room full of computers/electronics. It's basically an air conditioner that generates electricity via natural gas instead of consuming it."

Quote :

"but that doesn't account for the fact that you would not need to run your AC as much (or at all?)."

where are you getting this? i don't see anything about removing heat from the data center, the "how-it-works" video only talks about heat from the chemical process being recycled, nothing about heat from the electrical load.

2/27/2010 9:26:48 AM

Quote :

"umm ... would you really keep something like this sitting INSIDE your house???"

These aren't made for going inside your house. It even says so on the side of their Boxes:



Source:
http://www.engadget.com/photos/bloom-box-energy-server-hands-on/#2739666

[Edited on February 27, 2010 at 10:23 AM. Reason : -]

2/27/2010 10:23:04 AM