Fuel Cells on the High Seas Naval Applications for Fuel Cells Matt Chin and JC Sanders

Fuel Cell Types used on Ships Molten Carbonate –Large Surface Ships Proton Exchange Membrane –Surface ships (usually in conjunction with Molten Carbonate fuel cells) –Submarines

Molten Carbonate Fuel Cells Operation Temperature: 650 degrees C Electrolyte: Salt Carbonates Fuel: Syngas or Hydrogen, and Additional: CO 2 due to CO 3 ion usage Catalyst: Nickel Power output: ~2MW units available

Molten Carbonate Fuel Cells

PEM Fuel Cells Operation Temperature: 100 degrees C Electrolyte: Polymer Fuel: Hydrogen Catalyst: Platinum Power output: kW units available

PEM Fuel Cells

Fuel cell advantages for surface ships High efficiency vs. gas turbine and diesel powered naval vessels (40% vs. 16%-12%) Reduced emissions of all types Low vibration and sound levels Improved thermal efficiencies Reduced cost for fuel (30% less for Navy) Ship design flexibility (modular units) Permits the use of alternative fuels

Fuel cell advantages for submarines High efficiency vs. diesel powered submarines (40% vs. 16%-12%) Low thermal profile compared to SSNs Low vibration and sound levels Reduced radar cross section Does not require air breathing like diesel subs Only has to come up every several weeks

Practical Applications Submarines –Fuel Cells = Silence = Increased Stealth –Fuel Cells = No air required = Longer dive times Surface Ships –Fuel Cells = Increased efficiencies = Longer time out to sea –Fuel Cells = Reduced emissions = Reduced Profile (Harder to detect)

Power Plan Efficiencies Courtesy of Edward House: Office of Navy Research

Developers and Researchers Germany – Working prototypes and service models of fuel cell submarines Canada – Prototype for fuel cell submarine United States – Prototypes and plans for both subs and surface ships United Kingdom – Prototypes and plans for subs and surface ships

Challenges to development Fuel Type (Logistics and Fuel Reforming) Cost and System Efficiency for Units Reliability and Maintainability Duty Cycle and Transient Response Fuel Cell Life and Contamination Fuel Cell Sensitivity to shocks and motion

Challenges – Fuel Type Unknown how fuel will react to shock Infrastructure for storing not yet established Method for extracting hydrogen from diesel not yet perfected

Challenges – System Costs Fuel is more expensive than other fuels Platinum catalyst- very expensive Hydrogen is expensive to process High cost of raw materials

Challenges – Contamination Anything other than hydrogen will foul PEMs Need to protect from salt water spray Many existing sources of hydrogen contain sulfur and other contaminants

Fuel Cell Power Plants Power Output: 1kW – 2MW (per unit) Internal Size and Structure: Flexible and modular (Can be placed throughout ship) Fuel Type: Various (Hydrogen, Methanol, Diesel, Synthetic, Gasoline, etc.) Cost: High (New Technology) Maintenance: High (Due to lack of robustness) Types of vessels: Submarines, Destroyers, Cutters

Power Plant Comparisons Current Types of Power Plants used on Ships Fuel Cell based SystemsFuel Cell based Systems – The future of ships? Diesel ElectricDiesel Electric – Workhorse of the world navies. Gas TurbineGas Turbine – Successor to the Diesel Electric. Nuclear PoweredNuclear Powered – Power overwhelming!

Fuel Cell Submarine Germany’s HDW U214

Fuel Cell Ship United States Navy DDX

Diesel Electric Power Plants Power Output: 1.5kW – 30MW Internal Size and Structure: Large Housing needed for battery block and motors, distributed system Fuel Type: Diesel Cost: Low (Well established systems, simpler) Maintenance: Low (Very robust system) Types of vessels: Submarines, Destroyers, Cruisers, Frigates, Command ships

Diesel Electric Sub USS Blueback

Diesel Electric Ship USS Leahy (Cruiser)

Gas Turbine Power Plants Power Output: 25kW – 100MW Internal Size and Structure: Large Housing needed for engines, centralized system Fuel Type: Propane, natural gas, synthetics, diesel Cost: Medium Maintenance: Low Types of vessels: Destroyers, Cruisers, Frigates

Gas Turbine Ship US Oliver Perry Class Frigate

Nuclear Power Plants Power Output: 10MW – 300MW Internal Size and Structure: Large Housing needed for reactor and shielding, centralized system Fuel Type: Uranium enriched rods Cost: Expensive Maintenance: Low (Fairly robust system) Types of vessels: Submarines, Aircraft Carriers, Cruisers

Nuclear Powered Ship USS Nimitz (Aircraft Carrier)

Nuclear Powered Sub USS Ohio (SSBN)

Power Plant Comparisons CO 2 Output: Fuel Cell414 Diesel Electric512 Gas Turbine735 Based off of diesel fuel. NOTE: Measurements are in (grams)/(hp*hour) Data from: Office of Naval Research (2003)

Power Plant Comparisons NO X Output: Fuel Cell<0.001 Diesel Electric12.9 Gas Turbine6.0 Based off of diesel fuel. NOTE: Measurements are in (grams)/(hp*hour) Data from: Office of Naval Research (2003)

Power Plant Comparisons SO X Output: Fuel Cell1.23 Diesel Electric1.52 Gas Turbine2.18 Based off of diesel fuel. NOTE: Measurements are in (grams)/(hp*hour) Data from: Office of Naval Research (2003)

Power Plant Comparisons Annual Fuel Consumption/Costs: Fuel Cell214,315 Diesel Electric321,703 Gas Turbine641,465 Based off of diesel fuel. NOTE: Measurements are in gallons/dollars 1 gallon ~ $1.00 US for Navy Data from: Office of Naval Research (2003)

Future for Fuel Cells on the High Seas? I.In the United States Surface ShipsSurface Ships US Navy DD(X) Destroyer Program (Land Attack) US Navy CG(X) Cruiser Program (Detection/Interception) SubmarinesSubmarines May utilize AIP fuel cell systems in future designs II.In the World 212A Class attack submarine (Germany, Italy) Type 214 attack submarine (Greece, S. Korea) Refit 209 Class attack submarine (Greece) Type 800 Dolphin Class attack submarine (Israel)

Future for Fuel Cells on the High Seas? Outlook for Fuel Cells: Pretty Good! Two fully funded programs by US Navy Adaptation for multiple sea platforms Ongoing research in various countries Sales of commercial units in Germany Actual vessel deployment in some countries