Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

World's First Hydrogen Fuel Cell Powered Island 216

Posted by Hemos from the making-things-work dept.
Albanach writes "According to this article in The Herald Newspaper, the island of Islay, on the West coast of Scotland is set to become the world's first Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered island. Scientests at Napier University wish to use the existing Wave Power Station to treat sea water and store the resulting hydrogen in fuel cells. The first plan is to power a building, moving on to powering the entire island in a decade."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World's First Hydrogen Fuel Cell Powered Island More

World's First Hydrogen Fuel Cell Powered Island

Comments Filter:

  • Minor confusion (Score:5, Funny)

    by interiot ( 50685 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @11:18PM (#3521879) Homepage
    "Powered Island" != "mobile island which moves because of Hydrogen Power".

  • I didn't need another reason... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dambiel ( 115695 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @11:18PM (#3521883) Homepage
    but this is just one more reason to drink scotch from Islay.

    It's not only delicious, but environmentally friendly too!
  • So where's my flying car. I'm sick of these antique wheels.
  • I can just see it now, a little island scooting around the atlantic using sea water as fuel. Hehe.
  • why not use the power from the wave station to drive a laser which in turn will heat a boiler that can be used to run a turbine which will generate electricity to separate hydrogen from the sea-water?

    i love the efficiency of green power. because it's so free, we can waste a lot more.

  • Nifty! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by klocwerk ( 48514 ) on Tuesday May 14, 2002 @11:30PM (#3521940) Homepage
    So they're using a completely renuable resource, namely wave power, to separate sea water into O2 and (2) H2.

    This is a great idea for any region with significant ocean frontage. Unfortunately, it is only a great idea in such locations. We can't fuel the US gas glutton SUVs via this method, there just isn't enough ocean frontage for all the soccer-moms.

    Kudos to a truly self-powered island!
    • If we can build a pipeline to transport oil in from Alaska, we could build a pipeline to transport hydrogen in from some remote seafront where there are no houses and resorts to be bothered by rows upon rows of these stations wherever that is.
      • we could build a pipeline to transport hydrogen

        Something tells me I'd rather live next to Yucca mountain than a hyrdrogen pipeline.
    • "there just isn't enough ocean frontage for all the soccer-moms."

      Well, then you know what our duty is. Start rounding up the soccar moms...I'll start digging the ditch.
    • No, you're right. Someday, we (or our children - but before your grandchildren's time,if we're the average /.er age) are going to have to... wait for it... do without SUVs . A terrible thought, I know; we might have to get up off our fat arses and WALK for a change... give it a go some time, it's actually enjoyable believe it or not.
      • My great, great grandchildren, and yours too, will be long dead and gone by the time we run out of coal to generate electricity to power electric cars, which in the future could very well be electic SUVs.
    • Don't they realize that nothing is truely free? There is always a cost! In this case, the cost of tidal power generation is to drain energy out of the power source, namely the Moon. This will generate power for a small island off Scotland, but at the cost of slowing the Moon's orbit for the rest of us! The fools don't know what they're doing! They must be stopped or we're all doomed!

    • you know, Soccer-moms are getting a bad rap. Most the one I know thta have an SUV use it for moving kids and stuff.
      Its the Person that uses it as there comute car thats the problem. Unless they fill it up with other commuters.
  • I've been hearing about hydrogen fuel cells for so long now, I'm glad to finally see some progress. What I've heard, though, about it is that "battery-ifying" the hydrogen (turning it into fuel cells) makes up for the pollution your saving by using the fuel cells. Is this still the case, does anyone know? Or is it actually environmentally friendly now from creation to use?

    P.S. What's been up with Slashdot lately? It's been really weird.
    • Probably not. Fuel cells have to be replaced periodically, as they wear out. Fuel cells are probably not the answer, long-term. They are very convenient in certain situations, though.

      A Stirling engine would be much better. They wear out too, but instead of requiring costly rare metal replacement parts, they can be machined.

  • Now we will have people fighting more than ever for water and Uncle Sam : *cough cough* All your oceans are belong to me *cough cough*. China : Fuck that small country we want all the water around it and India is going to be a regional superpower *cough* and United States of America will have a new state Antarctica...sheesh am i getting unreal?

    All your water are still belong to us :(.

  • All this time I thought they were whisky-powered (Score:3, Funny)

    by Delirium Tremens ( 214596 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @01:18AM (#3521957) Journal
    Else, why would they have so many distilleries on that little piece of land?

  • Waste of energy! (Score:1, Informative)

    by zandermander ( 563602 )

    I'm supposed to use electricity generating wave turbines to crack water to generate hydrogen so that I can use the hydrogen to produce electricity?

    Sounds like a Rube Goldberg method!

    Just skip the electrolysis and fuel cells and store the electricity made from the wave turbines in batteries (for cars and such) and feed it into the grid (like they already do).

    Other than the obvious live laboratory for the fuel cells which is great, I fail to see how this system will save energy since there is loss any time you convert energy (waves --> electricity --> hydrogen --> electricity).

    • Re:Waste of energy! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Trinn ( 523103 )
      you do not save energy because of that. The point is that you can do waves->electricity->hydrogen->transport-& gt;electricity->consumer device you don't have to plug in.

    • Re:Waste of energy! (Score:5, Informative)

      by DarkSkiesAhead ( 562955 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @01:59AM (#3522054)

      You're right, it isn't perfectly efficient. But, efficiency isn't the most essential aspect of power production. Usability is.

      Sadly, the consumer's use of electricity doesn't vary in proportion to the tide. If it did, and the tide always produced exactly the right amount power to keep everyone's lights on then it would be best to pipe the electricty directly from the water to your power outlet. But, that's not the case.

      Fuel cells allow them to store the power and distribute it as needed. This ends up being most efficient in the long run because the water-driven power station only needs to produce power equal to the usage averaged over a period of time. It dosen't need to increase production during peak hours and won't be wasteful during off-peak hours. The fuel cells take care of that.
      • I wonder if this meathod, along with dams and wind stations would be the best way to produce Hydrogen.

        I mean, if you think about it, we already waist a TON of energy getting electricity out of coal, this type of meathod is basicly storing the energy in nature in hydrogen and then distributing it to cars, homes, and other places that will have their own fuel cell..

        I think that this couls be one part of a comprehensive hydrogen producing plan. we can get hydrogen from other places, like geneticly modified BG-Alge.

        we need to get off this hydrocarbon thing where we have the mind set that all fuel for a car comes from one natural resource, and all fuel for a powerplant comes from one natural resource, etc.
    • what you say is only true if you are only using the electricity soemwhere where there is a powergrid.

      Say you want to drive a clean car. You have an electrical engine. You have to store your energy somewhere, since draging an extensioncord along the road is not a viable solution

      You can charge inefficient, mostly very heavy bateries at home, or use the electrical energy to create hydrogen, a light substance that can easily be used to generate electricity for your car again.

      The last option is certainly viable.

    • What you're proposing (charging a battery and then discharging it) is no better, in fact in many ways it is worse. I can't find a good site to explain in depth how a recharagable battery works, but, remembering from my intro chemistry class it's an oxidation reaction at your anode and the corresponding reduction reaction at your cathode, and it's reversed to recharge- hydrogen brings the advantage of portability (it's easier to transport hydrogen than it is to transport nickle metal hydride) and, from what I've seen, increased practical efficency.

  • seems a very expensive way (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 56ker ( 566853 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @01:20AM (#3521962) Homepage Journal
    of getting some hydrogen! Surely it would be more efficient to use the electricity from the wave power and send it to people's homes rather than using it to electrolyse the water into hydrogen, then burning the hydrogen?

    • Re:seems a very expensive way (Score:5, Informative)

      by josh crawley ( 537561 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @01:57AM (#3522049)
      You've gotta understand what they are thinking. They're treating Hydrogen gas as a energy container. There's no way to feasibally hold pure energy. It disperses too quick, and cryo-torids are a ways off.

      Hydrogen's fairly stable (without presence of oxygen molecules), and it takes only a wee bit of energy to start the chain reaction back to water and a ton of energy.

      But to answer your question: yep, its expensive as hell.

      • Re:seems a very expensive way (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Hydrogen is hardly the way to store 'pure energy' (whatever THAT is). It's no more feasible than batteries, except batteries don't get you government grants and hot lab assistants to exploit.
      • Hydrogen is a mobile energy container. Immobile energy containers can be much more efficient. The best thing I can thing of is gravitional energy: pump water to a higher place. Moving up a solid away from the earth is even more efficient, but can't be scaled up nicely. Some sort of huge elevator would be very efficient, but rather small scale.

  • *evil cackle* (Score:3, Funny)

    by JanusFury ( 452699 ) <kevin.gadd@gmail.COBOLcom minus language> on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @01:28AM (#3521969) Homepage Journal
    Once the hydrogen fuel cell is complete, my plan for world domination will be one step closer to completion! I must only get my secret island stronghold fully operational, then kick off all the islanders, and I can blackmail the United Nations for... 5 BILLION DOLLARS! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
  • We all know that when we use hydrogen power the waste is water vapor.
    Won't all this vapor make the climate much wetter causing it to rain more and so on?

    Plus since from what I've been told the vapor comes from the hydrogen mixing with oxygen in the air. Won't this also lower the oxygen content of the air?

    Please tell me I'm completely off my rocker.
    Or better yet explain why :)

    Thank you.
    • Won't all this vapor make the climate much wetter causing it to rain more and so on?

      Actually, I believe you get liquid water, not water vapor. It's pure and potable, although you'd probably want to add some minerals for taste. It may not be practical for vehicles to dump their exhaust into the public water supply, so you could either dribble it out behind as you go, or tank it to be dumped when you refuel. Or perhaps some clever engineer can come up with some other use for it.

      Plus since from what I've been told the vapor comes from the hydrogen mixing with oxygen in the air. Won't this also lower the oxygen content of the air?

      At a guess, not more than the internal combustion engine already does. All combustion draws oxygen out of the air. But if you look at the whole process from end to end, you see that oxygen is necessarily produced from the seawater along with the hydrogen. Assuming that oxygen eventually makes its way back into the atmosphere, either through being released on the spot or used in some application where it wasn't a reactant, there's no net loss.

      But that leads to a good question: electrolysis produces hydrogen and oxygen in exactly the proportions needed for a fuel cell. Why don't they bottle the oxygen as well, and use that to feed the fuel cells' cathode? It would result in a significant boost in efficiency.

      • Why don't they bottle the oxygen as well, and use that to feed the fuel cells' cathode? It would result in a significant boost in efficiency.

        Good question. Your're right about the efficiency, and it could be done that way. The only problems aren't really problems as much as they are things we're too lazy to go out of our way to deal with.

        First problem: you've got another thing to tank up and cart around. You think it's hard trying to get stations to carry H, try getting them to carry H and O.

        Second problem: Oxygen is dangerous, more volitile than Hydrogen which, contrary to common belief, isn't the most explosive thing in the world.

        Third problem: Maybe there is one, but I haven't heard of it...

        Like I said neither of these are real problems. For instance, looking a number 2, oxygen probably isn't any more dangerous than carrying around gallons of something like, say, gasoline. The real issue is more about implementation and the "why bother" attitude about packaging and transporting something that's 20 percent of the air around us.

    • True, some of the exaust may be water vapor. They could always condense the exaust and flow it to the local water works to be mixed with the drinking water. The stuff is nearly pure.
      I doubt the exaust uncaptured would alter the climate in that region much. But water vapor is a greenhouse gas. The most common one at that.

      Even if the reaction takes oxygen from the air you've got to remember the electrolisys phase. They probably released that O2 back to the atmosphere. Personally I'd harness it and run it in to the fuel cell along with the hydrogen.

      Besides, it would all balance out in the end. Whether humans are in the mix when the balance occurs is another question all together. :)
    • The water is being electrolyzed to hydrogen and oxygen, which is then being converted back to water in the fuel cell. No net change. Water isn't being "dumped" into the environment, as the water originally came from somewhere. And oxygen isn't being "used up", because it was created in the electrolysis process.
      • Yes but it's not the same water and oxygen now is it?
        The oxygen is likely being released into the atmosphere at point A
        and the water/water vapor at point B.
        So unless I'm missing something once we all have fuel cell cars we'll be in trouble.
      • If this water vapor gets sent into the environment and this is done on a large scale, will this have adverse affects on the climate? If not for the movement of water from point A to B, then for the amount of water vapor being released. On a small scale it probably wouldn't matter, but if say cars run on this stuff and don't do a condensation first then a lot more water will end up in the air than before (talking on the scale of current day fossil fuel emmissions), what would the consequences of that be?

  • The usual questions *sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ariux ( 95093 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @02:18AM (#3522114)
    • How much did the plant cost to build?
    • How much will it cost to operate?
    • What is the environmental impact?
    • How many such plants could feasibly be built around, say, continental Asia? How would their output compare to (in our example) Asia's overall energy consumption, or a projection of its future energy needs?

    According to the article, the plant produces 500 kilowatts.

    Btw, even if these answers aren't so great, it's still a cool experiment - but you have to cite more details than the article does to reasonably brag that you'd save the world except that the evil oil companies won't let you. :(

  • Someone joked "Won't anyone think about the rotation of the Earth?"

    The question has a much more serious ramification than the jokester may have realized:

    The Earth is slowing down and will eventually break this system.

    The Moon ya see is creating these things called tides that this generation plant is at least partially dependent upon.
    The friction of the water being drug across the surface of the Earth by the moon is slowing decelerating the earth. Eventually the Moon will become geosynchronous with the Earth, and the lunar tides will cease.

    If lunar tides cease to exist, ocean temperatures will likely equalize a little (less water movement at all), and so winds will become less intense. Lower wind speeds mean lower waves (wind and tides are the major causes of waves).

    This may not really be the long term soution they think it is.
    • But I think we'll be on to something better by the time it's noticable... 1,000,000+ years is a long time...

      Cheers,
      Richard

    • Re:Not really a "long term" energy source though. (Score:5, Funny)

      by jackal! ( 88105 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @04:44AM (#3522380) Homepage
      A similar problem exists with solar energy. If we become too dependant on solar, we'll be totally up a creek in just under 5 billion years.
      • Hell, every time we convert energy from one form to another, we're contributing to the heat death of the universe. (See also, the simplified laws of thermodynamics: You can't win, you can't break even, and you can't quit.) Earth, schmerth. We're talking about the entire universe here. See what your evil SUV is doing! What kind of universe are we leaving to our grand(2.35x10^14)children! -- If enviromentalists *really* cared about the environment, they'd kill themselves.
    • If lunar tides cease to exist, ocean temperatures will likely equalize a little (less water movement at all), and so winds will become less intense

      This is wrong, but only because youve got a bigger problem. When the tides cease to exist, it means that the earth is rotating much much slower than it is now, say once every 28 days (or longer, the moons orbital period is getting longer too) This means that for 14 days any point on the earths surface is in sunlight. The reason we have decent temperate weather around here is because every 12 hours the earth cools back down. The equilibrium temperature at the earths orbital radius is 121 degrees C. The longer we stay in the sun the more likely the oceans will boil off. Not to mention the extremely cold temperatures that will occur on the night side of the planet. As the oceans boil on one side of the planet they will recondense on the dark side, which would be pretty cool to watch, but would eventually scour the planet smooth due to massively increased erosion.

  • Well, their whiskey is clearly too good to use for fuel...

    Mats
    • Generate all the power you like, I still say Islay will handle like a cow: slow up to cruising speed and no good on corners.

      Other islands are more streamlined, like Egg fr'instance?

      • like Egg fr'instance?


        You bin on the water of life? Where's this Egg place then? somewhere near Huy Brasil? surely you refer to Eigg? (though I think Muck would take the corners better...)

  • How appropriate that my favorite C2H5OH [google.com], made by Laphroaig [laphroaig.com] on Islay, will one day be manufactured entirely using H.

    ::Colz Grigor // I'll take donations of it, too!
    • I think Lagavulin [ed.ac.uk] is nicer -- Laphroiag is a bit, er, over the top. Lagavulin still has the strong Islay character (think ultrasmoke), but stops short of whacking you over the head with a crowbar; instead, it ... seduces you. Christ I can't begin to explain how perfect the stuff is. Just try it.

      • Add a drop of water to Laphroiag (Just ONE drop!!) and kill the "over the top" exerience and release a more subtle experience.

        Lagavullin is my other favorite as well, but Laphroiag is very well this way and for me even outranks Lagavullin

      • Either you like the taste of peat and hint of seaweed in your whiskey or you don't... There are seven distilleries on Islay [islaywhiskysociety.com] (Lagavulin, Ardbeg, Laphroaig, Bunnahabhain, Bowmore, Caol Ila, and Bruichladdich), each with a slightly different flavor. All are exceptional.

        ::Colz Grigor
  • .. to try this.

    Actually, I was going to have a play with it to make a self-running radio transmitter stuck up a tree.

    Either way, check out this site http://www.bullnet.co.uk/shops/test/hydrogen.htm [bullnet.co.uk] - they sell hydrogen fuel cells and have some information on them.

  • Islay's Second Product? (Score:3, Funny)

    by stereoroid ( 234317 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2002 @05:11AM (#3522422) Homepage Journal
    Let's see:
    1. Islay will be producing oxygen as a byproduct of the hydrogen generation;
    2. Islay is also famous for its whisky.

    So, will we be seeing oygenated whiskey as Islay's Next Big Thing? It could conceivably slow or prevent the loss of brain cells. It's a pity they're not going to produce Helium (squeak)...

  • ...that Islay is pronounced eye-la, not eye-lay.
  • The world's finest whiskies come from this little tiny island! Who does NOT know where it is? (At least, somebody with a small interest in whisky?)

    Bowmore, Laphroiagh, Ardbeg, Lagavulin, Port Ellen, Bruichladdich, Caol Ila and Bunnahabhain -- eight distilleries on this island, each one of them producing a fantastic malt. (Though my favorite right now is a 17yo Ardbeg.)

    Sadly though, some of these stills have been dozed...

    Seriously, what do they need hydrogen for? They have plenty of fuel, just tap from the stills :-)
  • Not for electrical power though - they have an abundance of geothermal energy to tap from and plentiful of hydroenergy to boot - but since 1998 they're in the process of switching all fossil fuel powered vehicles to fuel cell powered. Thanks to the abundance of energy the process of getting hydrogen out of seawater should be fairly cheap. In fact they hope to be the new Kuwait of the hydrogen powered world!

    Well, we'll see about that but here are a few links that may be interesting.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid _1 727000/1727312.stm
    http://detnews.com/2000/autos/ 0009/10/b01-117373.h tm
    http://www.lv.is/lv.nsf/pages/hydrogen_society -ens . tml
    http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa0 90299 . tm
    http://www.worldpress.org/europe/0123iceland.h tm
    http://www.shell.com/hydrogen-en/content/0,601 3,30 718-56069,00.html

  • A lot of the discussion has been around the production of the hydrogen for the fuel cells. An interesting side note: California Solar Center [california...center.org] has a weekly new clipping service [california...center.org] that, this week, has this article [california...center.org] about scientists discovering huge, natural stores of H2 gas. From the article:

    LONDON -- Scientists have discovered vast quantities of hydrogen gas, widely regarded as the most promising alternative to today's dwindling stocks of fossil fuels, lying beneath the Earth's crust.


    The discovery has stunned energy experts, who believe that it could provide virtually limitless supplies of clean fuel for cars, homes and industry.

Slashdot Top Deals

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Close