Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I have never ramped ITM ...... only dealt in issues that I felt were relevant
I still believe the technology is leading edge
However under PH and JH the mgt has been appalling and have made a number of serious strategic errors due largely to what appears to be technical ignorance and arrogance
The membrane hasnt suddenly gone bad after 15 yrs under DH who has undoubted integrity as have the boffins who work with him But the ignorance of JH has lead to some silly decisions like abandoning the moulding of stacks in a vain attempt to
get something to market
I see the future as hinging on getting a technically comfortable CEO who can balance the reality of sudden setbacks with the need to survive by exploiting opportunities to generate income
ITM Power have enough cash to last 5 yrs
Wonder how this compares with other alternaive energy Cos in the US ?
Electrolytic ammonia in the farm belt fuels cars
How many farmers in the world have access to wind turbines or solar panels ?
Jim Heathcote of ITM Power made the following comment in a 2007 interview
“If ammonia could be synthesised on a local basis it would give a massive kick start to the wind turbine and electrolyser industries particularly in rural areas Intermittent wind power cannot be fully utilised because there is insufficient demand for power round the clock However using an electrolyser the excess power would be used to make hydrogen for conversion into ammonia The farmers would be able to sell ammonia and hydrogen as by products of their green energy production”
Well Jim
Since you made that comment ITM announced that they have successfully operated an electrolyzer at 75 bar and are now developing another version where the electrolyzer is inside a storage tank
So what you may say ?
Well
Ammonia is usually made by passing 3 volumes of hydrogen and one volume of nitrogen across an iron catalyst at a pressure of 200 bar
This is called the Haber-Bosch process
But
It is now possible to make ammonia at 75 bar using a slightly different process
Therefore
ITM may well be working on a process which enables electrolytic hydrogen to be made and immediately converted to ammonia
This would open up two major commercial possibilities
1 Farmers becoming self sufficient in energy and fertiliser as long as they had access to water and wind or solar power The ammonia would be available for use as either fertiliser or as a fuel for an HEC ammonia powered engine
2 Since we know that to convert the ammonia back to hydrogen requires only 5% of the energy needed to electrolyse water it is feasible for
electrolytic hydrogen to be made from water using green energy. This hydrogen could be immediately converted to ammonia on board a vehicle thus solving the hydrogen storage problem. The hydrogen would be released from the ammonia by electrolysis with the small amount of power needed being provided by the vehicle alternator
Is ITM`sp the only stock fluctuating so much?
350 bar hydrogen from ITM without a compressor?
Funny how you look at something several times and dont pick up the obvious..........
If you go to the ITM website at and click "News Coverage" you get a list of Videos showing the launch of the 10Kw Home Refueller Unit HRU
this includses footage of the Ford Focus hydrogen car seemingly being refuelled from a green box
Theres something very puzzling about that part of the clip
Aand heres why
To fill a car`s fuel tank with H2 you transfer the gas from a storage tank
All the regular ITM holders know that an HRU is a device for converting water into hydrogen
......its never been claimed to be a storage tank
And if the HRU was simply an electrolyser
the maximum rate at which it can make H2 is approx 250gms/hr
ie 4hrs to make and transfer 1kg in real time........rather a long time to wait for a top up
So for sure
The Green Box in the video is not the hydrogen equivalent of a petrol pump
Which begs the question
Why did ITM demo the Green Box as if it was the H2 equivalent of a petrol pump ?
Which begs another question ...........whats inside the Green Box ?
If its just a 10Kw 75 bar electrolyser like we have been lead to believe then the Ford Focus Driver requiring 1kg of H2 for his 25mls top up will indeed have to wait for 4 hrs to electrolyse and transfer 1kg from the green box into the car
This is clearly nonsense
The only way in which this video is credible is if the green box is simply a hydrogen storage tank inside a box which also contains the pump and electronics
And
If this is the case
it is reasonable to assume that the only way ITM can both claim that the green box can fill a car and also be an electrolyser
is
If the electrolyser is INSIDE the storage tank and made the hydrogen at some earlier point in time
suggesting
If this green box is indeed about the size of a US fridge
The space available for the storage tank is enough to hold 4 cylinders
100cm long x 20 cm diameter........ie a volume comparable with the volume of 1 kg of H2 at 75 bar
Or
perhaps
4.6 kg of H2 at 350 bar
which wouldnt make technical sense since
The 4 electrolysers inside the 4 storage tanks would have to make H2 at 75 bar and transfer it ti another external tank to be compressed to 350 bar and then returned to the 4 storage tanks at 350bar
Hence
The only sensible technical solution is that the Green Box contains 4 tanks with an internal electrolyser capable of making H2 at 350 bar
This would retain the credibilty of both
The BBC video( ie Green Box is a storage tank)
and
ITMs long held description of the HRU as an electrolyser
Hmm......
Are ITM Power really as low as $50/Kw?
It may be worth recounting why I believe ITM costs are closer to $50/Kw than the $164/Kw they now frequently state
Firstly
ITM quoted an independently costed figure of $283/Kw for an electrolyser which had two platinum electrodes
This reduced to another independently costed figure of “$164/Kw” when it was shown that one platinum electrode could be replaced by a lower cost electrode costing no more than one third of platinum
This reduced to another independently costed figure of “under $164/Kw” when it was shown that two platinum electrode could be replaced by lower cost electrodes
So
a reduction of $119/Kw was achieved or claimed to have been achieved simply by removing platinum from one electrode
This can`t be explained simply by differences in the cost/gm of platinum versus rainey nickel
In practical and technical terms what this was really saying was that all the problems associated with platinum on one electrode were costing $119/Kw
These costs come from the component “add ons” needed to prevent platinum poisoning on one side of the membrane in a nafion cell
It may have also included some nafion related “add ons” that had to be retained because one electrode included platinum…….who knows ?
However
Like all technical issues that permeate a complex engineering assembly its not until you eliminate the problem entirely that you get the biggest cost saving
Hence removal of platinum from the second electrode ought to generate a bigger pro rata saving than eliminating the platinum from only one electrode
So
The cost saving from eliminating platinum from two electrodes ought to be greater than $119/Kw meaning the true cost of the non platinum electrolyser should be somewhere in the region of $45/Kw
minimum ( ie $164 less $119 )
So
On ITMs own figures a cost of $40/Kw to $50/Kw seems sensible
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Further proof that this is the correct ballpark come from the Marcus Newborough report of Feb 2004 in which he refers to various potential cost saving developments which could reduce the cost/Kw of an ITM electrolyser
If you read the report you will see that
ALL OF THESE POTENTIAL COST SAVING DEVELOPMENTS HAVE BEEN CLAIMED AS ACHIEVED BY ITM IN SUBSEQUENT RNSs
And
On page 10 of the report Marcus Newborough states that from all the benefits associated with the replacement of nafion and the simplicity of a moulded manufacturing process ITM ought to be able to achieve a cost of $50/Kw in volume production of an electrolyser WITH TWO PLATINUM ELECTRODES
He goes on to state that:
“These alkaline ionomers offer a potential route to achieving (i) independence from Platinum-based catalysts and proton-exchange chemistries, and (ii) independence from the liquid alkaline electrolytes of conventional alkaline electrolysers. Hence ITM polymer-based electrolyser technology may emerge that is of even lower unit cost than that indicated above”
i.e. lower than $50/Kw if platinum is eliminated and by some margin if the arguments supporting ITM`s cost statements are taken seriously
The £:$ exchange rate in Feb 2004 was $1.83
It is now around $1.55
Do your own sums
ITM are sitting on a goldmine versus the competition
No wonder JH doesn’t want to licence the MEAs
Even if we assume the ITM volume costs inc bop at low production levels were $150/Kw
then JH can afford to sell at $500/Kw and still be a third of the selling price of the lowest competitor in the electrolyser industry………who are making hefty losses selling at $1500/Kw
On this reckoning
ITM would only incur variable costs of around $300k in making 2000 - 10Kw HRUs which they could sell for $5000 each in the US to bring in an income of around $10m and approach break even on current costs
wshaw14
I sincerely hope I am wrong
Unfortunately the evidence suggests that politicians who are zealots for a cause rarely gain high office and when they do they have to trim their enthusiasm and compromise their beliefs in order to achieve consensus
I havent seen a politician yet who functions effectively and consistently tells the truth It seems to be incompatible with
making progress
I respect your opinion and hope you are right
Which hydrogen generation cos will survive the depression?
Heres a thought
The US Gov isnt stupid
They will figure out that the recession will cost them megabucks and conclude that some cherished government programs will have to be cancelled or at worse deferred for a few years
They will also figure that one beneficial consequence of the upcoming great depression will be a world wide reduction in economic growth which will bring with it a reduction in fossil fuel demand ie for coal and oil
They will cynically conclude that the emissions targets they set themselves for 2015 ,2030 and 2050 will be either easier to achieve or capable of being delayed for 4 or 5 yrs
If they want to achieve targets earlier, all they need to do is to stick to their current game plan
If they want to achieve them on time they can actually cut back on the cost they were budgetting for the emissions program
And
If, like we have always suspected the US Gov never cared a hoot about achieving these targets they can argue that a freeze on emissions spending was justifiable
So what does this mean for the renewable sector ?
And
in particular, for my pet cos Hydrogenics and ITM Power ?
Well
It rather looks like they are both in for a tough time once the new administration gets underway next year
By about April or May 2009 we should begin to see if the federal budget for green projects is being squeezed If it is the key issue will be how much cash do Hydrogenics and ITM Power have to see them through the next 4 or 5 yrs ?
Looking at it this way ITM have an annual spend of around $9m and a cash pile of around $45m so they look good for about 4 yrs or so before funding is their major priority
They also have the comfort of knowing that despite having a hydrogen generator product that at $163/Kw costs something like 8% of Hydrogenics current selling price ITM Power can afford to duck out of the US market since they have a captive european market to exploit and no serious hydrogen generator competitors
Hydrogenics are not quite so fortunate with a cash pile of around 2 1/2 yrs
However unlike ITM they have established themselves in the US marketplace and when they approach something like 12 months cash pile in mid 2009 perhaps they will attract sufficient private funding to keep them going
I hope so
The planet needs to reduce carbon emissions much much more than it needs to increase economic growth
Which is a bit like saying
The planet needs to reduce carbon emissions much much more than it needs to reduce poverty
Sounds awful at first
But a poverty stricken future is surely better than no future ?
Just a thought
Which hydrogen generation cos will survive the depression?
Heres a thought
The US Gov isnt stupid
They will figure out that the recession will cost them megabucks and conclude that some cherished government programs will have to be cancelled or at worse deferred for a few years
They will also figure that one beneficial consequence of the upcoming great depression will be a world wide reduction in economic growth which will bring with it a reduction in fossil fuel demand ie for coal and oil
They will cynically conclude that the emissions targets they set themselves for 2015 ,2030 and 2050 will be either easier to achieve or capable of being delayed for 4 or 5 yrs
If they want to achieve targets earlier, all they need to do is to stick to their current game plan
If they want to achieve them on time they can actually cut back on the cost they were budgetting for the emissions program
And
If, like we have always suspected the US Gov never cared a hoot about achieving these targets they can argue that a freeze on emissions spending was justifiable
So what does this mean for the renewable sector ?
And
in particular, for my pet cos Hydrogenics and ITM Power ?
Well
It rather looks like they are both in for a tough time once the new administration gets underway next year
By about April or May 2009 we should begin to see if the federal budget for green projects is being squeezed If it is the key issue will be how much cash do Hydrogenics and ITM Power have to see them through the next 4 or 5 yrs ?
Looking at it this way ITM have an annual spend of around $9m and a cash pile of around $45m so they look good for about 4 yrs or so before funding is their major priority
They also have the comfort of knowing that despite having a hydrogen generator product that at $163/Kw costs something like 8% of Hydrogenics current selling price ITM Power can afford to duck out of the US market since they have a captive european market to exploit and no serious hydrogen generator competitors
Hydrogenics are not quite so fortunate with a cash pile of around 2 1/2 yrs
However unlike ITM they have established themselves in the US marketplace and when they approach something like 12 months cash pile in mid 2009 perhaps they will attract sufficient private funding to keep them going
I hope so
The planet needs to reduce carbon emissions much much more than it needs to increase economic growth
Which is a bit like saying
The planet needs to reduce carbon emissions much much more than it needs to reduce poverty
Sounds awful at first
But a poverty stricken future is surely better than no future ?
Just a thought
Which hydrogen generation cos will survive the depression?
Heres a thought
The US Gov isnt stupid
They will figure out that the recession will cost them megabucks and conclude that some cherished government programs will have to be cancelled or at worse deferred for a few years
They will also figure that one beneficial consequence of the upcoming great depression will be a world wide reduction in economic growth which will bring with it a reduction in fossil fuel demand ie for coal and oil
They will cynically conclude that the emissions targets they set themselves for 2015 ,2030 and 2050 will be either easier to achieve or capable of being delayed for 4 or 5 yrs
If they want to achieve targets earlier, all they need to do is to stick to their current game plan
If they want to achieve them on time they can actually cut back on the cost they were budgetting for the emissions program
And
If, like we have always suspected the US Gov never cared a hoot about achieving these targets they can argue that a freeze on emissions spending was justifiable
So what does this mean for the renewable sector ?
And
in particular, for my pet cos Hydrogenics and ITM Power ?
Well
It rather looks like they are both in for a tough time once the new administration gets underway next year
By about April or May 2009 we should begin to see if the federal budget for green projects is being squeezed If it is the key issue will be how much cash do Hydrogenics and ITM Power have to see them through the next 4 or 5 yrs ?
Looking at it this way ITM have an annual spend of around $9m and a cash pile of around $45m so they look good for about 4 yrs or so before funding is their major priority
They also have the comfort of knowing that despite having a hydrogen generator product that at $163/Kw costs something like 8% of Hydrogenics current selling price ITM Power can afford to duck out of the US market since they have a captive european market to exploit and no serious hydrogen generator competitors
Hydrogenics are not quite so fortunate with a cash pile of around 2 1/2 yrs
However unlike ITM they have established themselves in the US marketplace and when they approach something like 12 months cash pile in mid 2009 perhaps they will attract sufficient private funding to keep them going
I hope so
The planet needs to reduce carbon emissions much much more than it needs to increase economic growth
Which is a bit like saying
The planet needs to reduce carbon emissions much much more than it needs to reduce poverty
Sounds awful at first
But a poverty stricken future is surely better than no future ?
Just a thought
Thanks Jackal
Wind to Ammonia Hydrogenics Proton or ITM Power?
basbas
I wouldnt be too concerned about whether nitrogen oxides are a major roadblock
Heres some more info
The University of Minnesota have a 1.65Mw Vestas wind turbine They also have a part funded project with the local Utility Xcel Energy to make ammonia from wind as a means of exploiting stranded energy. They see this as a way of helping off grid farms avoid spending around $300m pa on imported fertiliser
See
http://renewables.morris.umn.edu/wind/hydrogen/
And
http://webstar.postbulletin.com/agrinews/299602785982742.bsp
The interesting comment is that it is envisaged that across Minnesota there is around 2Mw of stranded wind energy which could be exploited to make $300m of ammonia
(nb This would require at least 2Mw of electrolyzers or double the annual capacity of ITM`s plant in Sheffield )
There are some interesting linkages which suggest ITM may have some kind of involvement in this project
In Hydrogen Engine Center ITM have a partner who are very well connected with the renewable industry in Iowa and Minnesota
HEC are currently involved with Xcel Energy in a 110kw (100kw +10Kw) wind to hydrogen project at Boulder Colorado where they supplied the hydrogen powered gensets They must also be in the running to supply hydrogen gensets to the ammonia from wind project in Minnesota
Teledyne supplied a 100kw wet electrolyzer and Proton Energy supplied a 10kw pem electrolyzer to the Boulder project in 2006
PE have since been in financial difficulties and were recently sold to F9 Investments
The wind to ammonia requirement will include a 400Kw electrolyzer
The only serious pem electrolyzer candidates in the US are Hydrogenics and Proton Energy
Its interesting that ITM indicated in one of their patents that by enabling hydrogen be produced at 75 bar they have greatly simplified the small scale manufacture of ammonia from green hydrogen
The ITM chemists should be well suited to liaising with the University on both the electrolyzer and any ammonia plant which is fed hydrogen from the electrolyzer
So perhaps they will be involved in this project
Wind to Ammonia using ITM`s low cost technology
Back in 1970 when pem electrolysers were limited to the space program a patent was filed to make ammonia by electrolysing water using the tried and tested potassium hydroxide wet electrolyser
The patent contained a design which enabled the electrolytic hydrogen to be created at pressures of 30bar to 200bar
See
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3652431.html
One of the claims under this patent was that it enabled the hydrogen to be passed into a vessel which already contained nitrogen and a suitable catalyst This permitted ammonia to be formed which as a liquid under a modest pressure contains more hydrogen per litre than liquid hydrogen
This patent has presumably now lapsed after 38 yrs
Along come ITM in 2008 with their self pressurising electrolyser capable of operating at 75 bar the minimum pressure now needed to make ammonia using the latest catalysts ( it is still 200 bar with the traditional catalysts )
So what does all this mean ?
Well
In theory anyway it suggests that ITM have the capacity to make ammonia in remote locations using green energy Because it is made in a closed container it need never see the light of day if the container is simply used to get over the issue of hydrogen storage
ie
The hydrogen is made using an electrolyser inside a large storage tank with the ammonia collected and stored separately
When the hydrogen is needed it can be easily obtained by electrolysing the ammonia
which breaks down using only 5% of the Kws needed to break down water
And interestingly
In 2007 the Sales Director of Hydrogen Engine Center Joe E Lewis was challenged about how HEC could claim their ammonia engine was truly green when the ammonia was made from natural gas
His response was
“Of course, anhydrous ammonia has its negative aspects. It is currently made through the Haber-Bosch process, which uses natural gas and emits carbon into the atmosphere. That basically defeats the premise behind seeking an alternative fuel that doesn't increase greenhouse gases.
"When our big press release came out a week and a half ago, a lot of naysayers came out," said Lewis. "And for the most part they're right about anhydrous ammonia. The Haber-Bosch process, the primary method of making anhydrous ammonia, works by re-forming natural gas. Natural gas is made up primarily of hydrogen, and when you add nitrogen to it, you have anhydrous ammonia. But one of the negative aspects of the Haber-Bosch process is the fact that it creates a lot of CO2."
Lewis said that the solution to that problem is being developed right now. "Hydrogen Engine Center is working with a group that has a new method of producing anhydrous ammonia through a synthesis process, where they can take renewable power, like from a wind-generator, and use the electricity to run an electrolyzer to make hydrogen. Then take the nitrogen out of the air to mix with it, and you have anhydrous ammonia. That's right around the corner."
Well
An experienced Iowa watcher might be forgiven for thinking Lewis was referring to SSAS which is a method of making green ammonia from steam and air in a series of specially designed tubes
See 29 Sept article in
http://peakoil.blogspot.com/2008/09/ammonia-fuelthe-other-hydrogen-future.html
However the SSAS process does not use electrolyzers nor does it use the
intermediate step of electrolysis…….since electrolysers are so expensive
The Lewis comment was made over a year ago……
so where does this leave us ?
Well
Allowing for the sort of delays we have come to expect from ITM could we reasonably expect an ITM/HEC announcement before the year end regarding local production of green ammonia ?
There are lots of farms in HEC`s home state of Iowa which are not on the power grid and would be able to exploit stranded wind or solar energy to make ammonia......
If only they had a low cost process...........like what ITM are working on
Will the renewables part of the $700bn bill help Hydrogenics ?
Bought gas versus Refueler hydrogen from ITM
Its a known fact that 50% of all US cars run 25mls per day or less
This may be people commuting to work or more likely Mom taking the kids to school and going shopping
If the car gets 20 mpg it can probably run for about 2 to 3 weeks on a full tank
The Hydrogenics electrolyser converts electricity to hydrogen at about 50% efficiency.
It could run at 80% efficiency but it would need more cells and hence more high cost nafion and platinum so Hydrogenics have come to the conclusion that 50% efficiency is the optimum level to keep the overall cost down
The ITM electrolyser is made from very low cost materials
The basic cell membrane is only 1% (one per cent) of the cost of nafion and is 25% more conductive So it can run at 80% efficiency without being propotionately more expensive
The ITM Power 10 Kw Home Refueler (HRU) will cost around $4000 in the US
The HRU will use an electrolyser that has been tested successfully for well over 10000 actual hrs
Although ITM have hinted it may be built to a 50% efficiency size like Hydrogenics it is more probable that it will be sized for 80% efficiency The cost will still be a fraction of the cost of a Hydrogenics electrolyser possibly as low as 20% or so on a like for like basis
The HRU is about the size of a Refrigerator It can be sited outdoors in the yard or in the garage It could even be somewhere handy for sharing with the home next door
At 80% efficiency the HRU can make 1 kg of hydrogen for around 40 Kwhrs
So if the night time power rate is 6 cents/Kwh it will make 2kg in 8 hrs for about $4.80 on the power bill
If you are fortunate enough to have access to wind turbine energy you can make about 5kg of hydrogen per day At 4 cents/Kwh this would cost $8 per day or $1.60 per kg
Those communities who rely on wind energy, frequently can`t use all the power coming off the turbine So they are forced to waste some of this energy by reducing the power taken off the turbine or even switching it off
This is where a genuine free lunch is available
Excess wind power can be used to make hydrogen at zero cost
A 10Kw Home Refueller would probably be adequate to handle unwanted energy for all wind turbines rated at up to 100Kw
It would be reasonable to assume an average of 2Kw of unwanted wind energy is lost from a 100Kw wind energy system If this was converted to hydrogen it would provide about 48 Kwh or 1.25 kg of genuinely free hydrogen every day
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The hydrogen can be made and transferred to the car at the same time This would mean hooking up the car to the refueler overnight
Alternatively the hydrogen can be made and stored in an outdoor gas tank Any home which have an unused outdoor gas storage tank could use this tank with minimal modifications to store their hydrogen
1kg of hydrogen will burn in a normal gas engine and deliver the same mileage as one gallon of gas
So if you get 20mls on 1 gal of gas you will get 20mls on 1 kg of hydrogen
The car itself needs to have a tank fitted to carry the hydrogen so it will have both a gas tank and a petrol tank
Alternatively the car can have a dedicated space in the trunk to hold a portable hydrogen tank The home owner could have say 3 tanks which can be swopped around This would take maximum advantage of night time power rates
A small panel on the dashboard will signal when the car is running on hydrogen or has automatically switched back to gas when the hydrogen tank is empty
So to summarize
The Home Refueler Unit from ITM will help people manage their gas costs by giving them the option of making their own fuel
And all of this can be done using existing gas cars on the road today
At some point in the future hydrogen fuel cell cars will become affordable
When this happens, the home owner with an HRU will only have one fuel tank in his car
And he will be able to compare the cost of hydrogen being sold at the hydrogen gas station with the hydrogen he makes himself
That ought to make the hydrogen gas companies keep prices down
Can Hydrogenics match $2.50/kg for home made hydrogen?
ITM Power commenced US marketing of their $4000 Home Refueler when their Business Development Manager Marcus Newborough of gave a presentation on the ITM HRU at the 2008 Hydrogen Codes and Standards Conference on 19 Sept 2008
Also presenting their Home Refuelers were Honda and NEC
the last we heard it was $2m to $3m for a refueler making hydrogen from natural gas
ITM power make their hydrogen from electricity at a cost per kg of around 40 times the nightime Kwhr rate
Their 10Kw HRU can make 2kg every 8hrs
ITM have indicated they can sell volume production of their 10 Kw HRU for £2000 say $4000 US
mmmm........
I wonder if the price will be raised for the US market ?
http://www.hydrogenandfuelcellsafety.info/2008/sep/nextEnergy_agenda.pdf
Johnny Depp`s Client Mike Strizki, of REI Inc. was on the panel at the NHA Forum in Golden Colorado this week
No doubt Mike took the opportunity to speak with Gary Higginbottom of Hydrogen Energy Center who was also at this event
Both HEC and REI are likely to be working closely with ITM Power on the solar powered home for Johnny Depp to be built shortly in the Caribbean
This project will be the first opportunity for ITM to demonstrate to US customers the amazing breakthrough they have achieved in developing a moulded
( yes MOULDED ) electrolyser that at $164/Kw is around 10% of the cost of Hydrogenics precision machined and assembled equivalent
Its the technical equivalent of somebody moulding a TV set made almost entirely of plastic but capable of doing the same job at 10% of the cost
Will ITM and HEC soon announce India Trial ?
Indian steam turbine manufacturer Belliss have over 2000 MW of installed capacity across India. So they are well established in the Indian electricity generating market.
They identified a market for wind turbines in remote areas of India which are not on the grid and either have no power or rely on expensive diesel generators
Belliss have an Jan 2007 MOU with an upcoming Canadian Inverter Co Sustainable Energy Technologies
This is to manufacture in India a 240Kw Wind Turbine designed by SE to supply power for remote applications
The wind turbine will be part of a system which includes a hydrogen fuelled engine and generator, an electrolyser and associated bop
The electrolyser will make hydrogen enabling the genset to provide back up power when the wind turbine output is insufficient.
In Sept 2007 Belliss and HEC signed a deal to sell distribute and maintain HEC hydrogen gensets in India
The Sept 2007 Belliss /HEC joint press release contained this interesting comment
“Currently, Belliss provides steam turbines for electricity generation throughout India, where demand for electricity is growing rapidly. Much of the steam reformer generation is fueled by coal, and India is seeking greener ways of generating power. By combining wind turbines with Hydrogen Engine Center's product line, Belliss anticipates it will be able to offer a constant and stable power supply to virtually anywhere in India, even where the national grid doesn't run.
The key is to use excess wind-generated electricity to produce hydrogen that can be used to produce electricity when the wind speeds are not generating sufficient power to meet demand. In this scenario hydrogen is produced by electrolyzing water, splitting the hydrogen from the oxygen. Because there is no carbon in the process, the operation is much cleaner than existing coal-fired generating plants.”
The interesting comment here is
“By combining wind turbines with Hydrogen Engine Center's PRODUCT LINE(my emphasis),
Belliss anticipates it will be able to offer a constant and stable power supply to virtually anywhere in India, even where the national grid doesn't run.”
This can only mean that HEC will be supplying an electrolyser as well as a hydrogen genset
mmmm…….I wonder where HEC will get their electrolyser ?
Will ITM be trialling an electrolyzer in India?
Indian steam turbine manufacturer Belliss have over 2000 MW of installed capacity across India. So they are well established in the Indian electricity generating market.
They identified a market for wind turbines in remote areas of India which are not on the grid and either have no power or rely on expensive diesel generators
Belliss have an Jan 2007 MOU with an upcoming Canadian Inverter Co Sustainable Energy Technologies
This is to manufacture in India a 240Kw Wind Turbine designed by SE to supply power for remote applications
The wind turbine will be part of a system which includes a hydrogen fuelled engine and generator, an electrolyser and associated bop
The electrolyser will make hydrogen enabling the genset to provide back up power when the wind turbine output is insufficient.
In Sept 2007 Belliss and HEC signed a deal to sell distribute and maintain HEC hydrogen gensets in India
The Sept 2007 Belliss /HEC joint press release contained this interesting news
“Currently, Belliss provides steam turbines for electricity generation throughout India, where demand for electricity is growing rapidly. Much of the steam reformer generation is fueled by coal, and India is seeking greener ways of generating power. By combining wind turbines with Hydrogen Engine Center's product line, Belliss anticipates it will be able to offer a constant and stable power supply to virtually anywhere in India, even where the national grid doesn't run.
The key is to use excess wind-generated electricity to produce hydrogen that can be used to produce electricity when the wind speeds are not generating sufficient power to meet demand. In this scenario hydrogen is produced by electrolyzing water, splitting the hydrogen from the oxygen. Because there is no carbon in the process, the operation is much cleaner than existing coal-fired generating plants.”
The interesting comment here is
“By combining wind turbines with Hydrogen Engine Center's PRODUCT LINE, Belliss anticipates it will be able to offer a constant and stable power supply to virtually anywhere in India, even where the national grid doesn't run.”
This can only mean that HEC will be supplying Belliss with an electrolyzer as well as a hydrogen genset
mmmm…….I wonder where HEC will source their electrolyzer ?
HEC Irrigation Pump Engine Trialled with ITM Electrolyzer
Californian law requires that approximately 50,000 irrigation pumps in the state need to be converted to non-polluting fuels by 2010
HEC therefore see irrigation pumps as a key market for their emission free ammonia engine
They commenced a field trial of their ammonia engine on an irrigation pump under the control of TG West in the San Luis Obispo area of California.
A brief update on the project was given by HEC to the 2007 Ammonia conference in San Francisco in Oct 2007
A further update is imminent at the 5th Annual Ammonia Fuel Conference McNamara Alumni Center • Mpls.,
MN Sept. 29 - 30, 2008
Programme
10 am Review of Field Data on Ammonia Irrigation Pump Engine and New Ammonia Engine Development – Ted Hollinger, Hydrogen Engine Center
From an ITM perspective the following is relevant
The HEC pump engines require 5% hydrogen to burn ammonia
Two hydrogen sources are being trialled at San Luis Obispo
1 Direct injection of CNG (compressed natural gas) which requires the irrigation pump to be on the gas grid or have access to a compressed gas storage tank
And
2 An onboard electrolyzer driven off the alternator presumably supplied by HEC`s English partner ITM Power
Last year HEC presented some calculations showing that at the energy cost rates applicable in Oct 2007
……..The lowest running cost for these engines will be when they operate with an onboard electrolyzer
These pumps operate intermittently and may not have run more than 2000 to 3000 hrs pa since Sept 2007
So given that the trial has been ongoing for 12 months the HEC presentation will give an indication as to the reliability of the ITM OB
However
What is most significant of all is that this will be the first ITM product field trial that has been completed
If it has been successfull HEC will open up an OB market for ITM
Something like 15% of the nafion fc cost is dedicated to bop to ensure that hydrogen and oxygen is sufficiently pure to avoid poisoning the cell
Hydrogen from natural gas is not guaranteed to be sufficiently pure despite various purification stages after the hydrogen is released
Hence
So as long as CNG is the original source fuel for a nafion cell it will continue to carry this 15% oncost
Green hydrogen in an ITM platinum free fuel cell will not require this bop or oncost
Hence
A metal hydride H2 tank with an "ITM inside" electrolyser will be able to fuel an ITM fuel cell with pure hydrogen
Microcabs may link ITM with Air Products
TT re post 217
You may be on to something with the ITM Air Products link via the Micro link project at the University of Birmingham
There must have been contact between them at the very least to agree merging of their videos
When Linde took over BOC they wound up the BOC Foundation and although they allowerd the ITM project amonst others to be completed first their thrust was certainly to get out of UK hydrogen research
So perhaps it is Air Products who are sniffing around ITM They certainly have the global reach to exploit the HRU and would be better able to manage the decline of their cylinder market if they could replace them with on site electrolyzers
Are ITM planning to team with Linde / Air Products ?
The “CHIP” reference first surfaced in the article below
When JH was interviewed by Rue Swabey
September 10, 2008
Heres a thought
The Heathcote Swabey Interview
ITM Power Is Testing Home Refuelling Electrolyser Units And Hopes To Begin Shipments To Partners Soon
By Rue Swabey
Extract
“ITM Power is also developing a small electrolyser which it calls “the chip”. This 1-3kW system has the potential to generate hydrogen on-site for industrial processes. Jim Heathcote, ITM Power’s chief executive, points out that the development is customer-led, and underscores the potential to generate cash flow for the company while more complex applications are being developed and commercialised. If ITM Power is able to move into the delivered bottled hydrogen market, which is worth US$2 billion annually, it would provide much comfort to shareholders and take some pressure of the share price. However in the short-term the market will be waiting for the results of the electrolyser tests.”
So
If you had developed a low cost electrolyser that was capable of scooping the entire bottled hydrogen market
…….who would you prefer as a distribution partner and licencee ?
Would it be
Some co who already supply the bottled hydrogen market with electrolysers like Power Power, Hydrogenics, or Proton Energy?
Or
Some co who supply the same market with another product and see the ITM electrolyser as a potential money spinning new product ?
Or
Some co who currently supply bottled hydrogen to the bottled hydrogen market but are now fearful that their market will disappear
Like Linde or Air Products?
Or
Would ITM start a new business entirely in order to sell electrolyzers into the bottled hydrogen market themselves ?
Well
Any licencing relationship with a co currently making and supplying electrolyzers to the bottled hydrogen market couldn’t be viewed as simply a commercial deal
Inevitably it would be viewed as the first step in the licencee abandoning their uneconomic and technically inferior electrolyser in favour of becoming a full blooded partner of ITM with all the implications this has for the rest of the electrolyser and fuel cell markets
So
A deal with an existing electrolyser supplier to the bottled hydrogen market is unlikely
Likewise
While there are attractions for ITM in linking up with a co supplying non hydrogen products to the bottled hydrogen markets this would mean choosing different partners for the laboratory, power generation, telecommunication masts and stand by power markets
It’s a safe and possible strategy but it would also be messy
So I reckon ITM are considering either a direct selling approach or a deal with one of the major bottled hydrogen suppliers like Linde who acquired BOC (and their link with ITM) or possibly Air Products
Given that ITM must first prove their technology via a field trial they would get more bang for their buck if they conducted this trial with a major bottled hydrogen supplier This would be a strategy satisfying the needs of both parties
The licencee would be able to control the transition from cylinders to on site hydrogen generation
ITM would be able to control the rate at which electrolysers would be manufactured at Sheffield and eventually migrated to a manufacturing licencee
Whats ITM and INTEL got in common?
Finally figured out the CHIP reference in the article below …..I think which is detailed in full in Conno`s post 192
i.e.
September 10, 2008
ITM Power Is Testing Home Refuelling Electrolyser Units And Hopes To Begin Shipments To Partners Soon
By Rue Swabey
Extract
“ITM Power is also developing a small electrolyser which it calls “the chip”. This 1-3kW system has the potential to generate hydrogen on-site for industrial processes. Jim Heathcote, ITM Power’s chief executive, points out that the development is customer-led, and underscores the potential to generate cash flow for the company while more complex applications are being developed and commercialised. If ITM Power is able to move into the delivered bottled hydrogen market, which is worth US$2 billion annually, it would provide much comfort to shareholders and take some pressure of the share price. However in the short-term the market will be waiting for the results of the electrolyser tests.”
The interesting comments here are
“Jim Heathcote, ITM Power’s chief executive, points out that the development is customer-led”
And
“However in the short-term the market will be waiting for the results of the electrolyser tests.”
I interpret these comments as follows:
ITM have been approached by some co or cos seeking to revolutionise the low volume on site bottled hydrogen market
The vision is to replace continuous replenishment of bottled hydrogen by a single fixed hydrogen bottle which would be continuously topped up by mains power
This would make the onsite hydrogen generator as ubiquitous as the Computer processor
And just as computers from diverse suppliers come with the tiny label saying “Intel inside” to represent the Intel processor inside the computer
So also will the hydrogen “ bottle” from diverse suppliers come with a tiny label saying “ITM inside” to represent the small ITM 75 bar electrolyser inside the bottle
If this is indeed the correct interpretation it is also saying something else which is very interesting
ie
ITM said in July 2008 that putting an electrolyser inside a hydrogen storage tank was the next logical step for the hydrogen car …This comment was considered rather odd at the time since the hydrogen car needs a 350bar tank and ITM would not admit they were working on a 350 bar electrolyser
However it would be a very convenient public explanation as to why ITM were engaged in redesigning the geometry of their electrolysers to enable them to fit inside a tank
The outside world and the ever increasing visitors to Sheffield wouldn’t need to be told that the static hydrogen market was about to be invaded by an offer to licence ALL suppliers who wanted a tank containing an electrolyser to which they could add their own bop and sell under their own established brand name
……providing of course they had a tiny label somewhere prominent saying
“ITM Inside”
What`s the safe alternative energy stock right now?
Let me make clear from the outset that I am heavily invested in ITM Power
However I didnt invest in ITM with my eyes closed
They are currently projecting a cash burn of $8m to $9m pa to April 2009 ( at £1=$1.8)
ITM had approx $48.5m in cash at end June 2008
Their policy is to licence their technology so it would be reasonably to assume that their annual average cash burn will not significantly exceed say $10m for the next few years
Their technology claims a cost/Kw reduction for both fuel cells and electrolyzers of the order of 80% when compared with Hydrogenics and all the other fc / electrolyzer cos
So
ITM to me looks like a fairly safe haven for those investors who want to stash away some cash in a growing industry
But
As I said at the beginning
I have a significant investment in ITM
So nobody who reads these comments
Should remotely consider investing in ITM without reading up on the Co and what it has done
At this point I could give a list of reference websites where you could get all the details about ITM
But then I`m biased as I am heavily invested in ITM
So
its much better if you do your own research
if you conclude you would be better off putting your money elsewhere........
then thats fine
Its your money after all
and I hope you have made the right decision
As I hope I have..........
#Sticking it into ITM
Will ITM outlast Hydrogenics through the credit crunch?
Hydrogenics are a potential competitor to ITM for hydrogen generators
In the first half of 2008 HYDG had $29.8m in cash and losses of $8.3m suggesting a 2008 year end position of $23m to $25m cash and losses of $14m to $16m at best
At this rate of cash burn HYDG have under 2yrs to turn the business around
Their gross margins are in the region of 25% to 30%
At £1=$1.80
ITM for the 12m to April 2008 had losses of $7.2m and cash of $48.4m suggesting a 2008 year end position of $42m to $44m cash and losses of $5m to $6m at best
At this rate of cash burn ITM have at least 5yrs to turn the business around
However if they sell H2 generators at 80% of the price of Hydrogenics on a like for like technical specification
Then because of their low cost electrolyzer design
ITM can make around 50% to 100% gross margin
So really they are in much better shape to survive any credit squeeze in the next 2 or 3 yrs
TT
It appears that conventional oxygen from air manufacturing systems designed for hospitals and providing 93% purity are fairly complex compared with using a low cost electrolyser capable of providing 99.99% purity
See
http://www.ogsi.com/hospital_supply_systems.php
However 999.99% purity can easily be reduced to 93% if this is the optimal for patient care
What this does suggest is that remote hospitals in developing countries would find an electrolyser based system much more cost effective in terms of reduced capital cost and could be supplied by green power
TT Re your post 202
It does seems a bit odd that Air Products would agree to their hydrogen filling station being shown in the same news item as an ITM Green Box
Particularly since its painfully obvious that the Green Box would be a more cost effective way of filling a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle than using cylinders
At the very least one might have expected Air Liquids to insist on mentioning at least one advantage their product has over the Green Box
But they didn`t
However it would not be odd at all if ITM and Air Products were considering building a commercial relationship
As suppliers of cylinder hydrogen to various industries Air Products cannot stand by a while the cost of on site hydrogen generation plummets
In August 2008 they acquired a US co Harvest Energy Technology who reform hydrogen from natural gas and claim they can achieve the quality needed for fuel cells in road transport
However ITM are not only able to offer a flexible onsite hydrogen source from renewable power they can also offer both hydrogen and oxygen at the purities needed to run vehicle fuel cells Many people are unaware that around 15% of the cost of nafion fuel cells goes towards extra bop simply to tackle inadequate purity in hydrogen made from natural gas
So
It would be reasonable to assume that Air Products would be interested in some sort of collaboration agreement with ITM to trial their electrolyzers
TT
The car mechanics box and the reference to the ITM news item on the Microcab website are very likely to be online adverts placed by ITM and Car Mechanics
So all I would take from that is
1 The PR campaign is underway and we should expect to see more online adverts by ITM
2 Microcab are perfectly happy to showcase ITM despite having no business connection to date
Whether anything deeper emerges we will have to wait and see
TT
I agree there is room for both batteries and hydrogen fuel cells to energise an electric power train
Meawhile the two big issues between them apart from cost are
.... the charging time and so far the battery fails the filling station test and there is no solution to that on the horizon
........the lifecycle carbon footprint of each ie
what carbon is needed to manufacture each and to safely dispose of each when their life is over
and
what is the availability and carbon footprint to extract the source elements to make each
TT
very interesting post
Having a look at your links and will revert later
Ecotricity may be partnering ITM for Green Power
I agree Conno
ITM may well be trialling with Ecotricity who installed the Ford Wind Turbines
If so I would not expect an explicitly Ford announcement until the trial has been demonstrated successfully
elsewhere
The contacts at senior level are there with the ex Ford UK Chairman now on ITMs Board
Wll have a look at your links and comment further
Are ITM and HEC teaming with Ford UK ?
Todays announcement said Hydrogen Engine Center expects to receive an electrolyser from ITM on completion of the current ITM development program. Upon receipt of that unit, HEC will begin conducting trial testing on the combined generator-electrolyzer system. ITM will also be conducting trial testing on a similar system. Data collected from both trials will be gathered and analyzed to better determine potential commercialization avenues for the system.
This raises a few interesting questions
e.g.
An electrolyser makes hydrogen from water and electricity and puts it into a tank
And
The electrolyser can then be switched off
Likewise
A hydrogen engine generator draws hydrogen from a storage tank, burns it in an engine which rotates the generator and creates electricity
ie
It doesn’t matter to the gen set whether or not the hydrogen in the tank came from ITM`s electrolyser or was made from some other source
Therefore
ITM don’t need to trial their 10kw HRU in conjunction with an 8Kw HEC gen set in order to prove that it can work as part of a system containing both items
Similarly
HEC don’t need to trial their 8Kw gen set in conjunction with an ITM 10kw HRU in order to prove that it can work as part of a system containing both items
So what conclusions can we draw from this statement ?
Firstly the Statement was probably written by ITM and released by HEC as it reads like an ITM press release with its mixture of confusion and obfustcation
Secondly the Statement is really talking about trialling a system and not about trialling either an electrolyser or a gen set
And
The system contains much more than just an electrolyser and a gen set
It will be something you can see and touch and feel and operate
The system will need:
Solar panels or wind turbine generating say 25Kw minimum of green power, a storage tank ,some electrical equipment, control electronics and some civil works to fix and enclose the various items and protect them from the elements
A green power co will have to be part of the project as it will be necessary to interface the various components supplied by each party
Planning permission will be needed if it is to be installed as a brand new installation
Alternatively the system could be an enlargement of an existing green power installation possibly in a UK site possibly one which may be connected but is not dependent on the UK grid
And most importantly of all
ITM don’t need to prove to themselves that their electrolyser works
And
HEC don’t need to prove to themselves that their gen set works
Therefore someone else needs to be convinced that both ITM`s electrolyser and HEC`s gen set will work in THEIR green power system
Now who could that be ?
Who has their own green power supply at their english factory ?
Who previously employed people who are now Directors of both ITM and HEC ?
Who has an interest in electrolysers fuelling one of their HydrogenTransit Vans ?
mmmmmmmm…………….
Will ITM licence OB distribution to HYDG ?
Bi Fuel Ltd following their extensive tests have advised ITM Power that despite the real savings being made by adding trace hydrogen to older HGV diesel engines in North America.......
....the very latest common rail diesel engine design does not significantly benefit in mpg terms by adding H2 to the air intake manifold...
This result does not disprove the fact that adding H2 via the air intake manifold is a proven and viable way of improving mpg in non common rail engines with mpg improvements of 10% to 15%
All it says is that it doesn’t produce a significant saving in the latest design of common rail engines
So presumably from an ITM standpoint
This rules out retrofitting OBs to any engine which has the common rail design
thus ruling out deals with an OEM
However it still leaves a very lucrative retrofit market where ITM`s solid electrolyte pem onboard electrolyzer(OB)_ can undercut current wet design OB suppliers by up to 80% There are millions of older vehicles on the road today that are not of the common rail design
ITM have the choice of either selling direct or licencing the manufacture and sale of their OB through one or more of the following
an existing electrolyzer supplier like Hydrogenics
or
one of the current OB suppliers like CHEC or Hy Drive
or
a major distributor of diesel engine spares
or
A major fleet servicing chain
etc
ITM ought to be able to make a very good margin wholesaling a 350w OB for around $500 - $1000 Their technology does not use nafion or platinum and the devices are moulded not assembled
Leaving the Retailer possibly HYDG with a very healthy margin at a selling price of say $1500 -$2000
Versus the $6000 to $10000 being charged at present for these devices
And
By slashing the selling price there ought to be an exponential increase in demand particularly with the high price of diesel
Will ITM licence OB distribution in the US ?
Bi Fuel Ltd folowing their extensive tests have advised ITM that despite the real savings being made by adding trace hydrogen to older HGV diesel engines in North America.......
....the very latest common rail engine design does not significantly benefit in mpg terms by adding H2 to the air intake manifold...
This result does not disprove the fact that adding H2 via the air intake manifold is a proven and viable way of improving mpg in non common rail engines with mpg improvements of 10% to 15%
All it says is that it doesn’t produce a significant saving in common rail engines
So presumably from an ITM standpoint
This rules out retrofitting OBs to any engine which has the common rail design
thus ruling out a deal with an OEM
However it stll leaves a very lucrative retrofit market where ITM can undercut current OB suppliers by up to 80% There are millions of older vehicles on the road today that are not of the common rail design
ITM have the choice of either selling direct or licencing the sale of their OB through one or more of the following
an existing electrolyzer supplier like Proton Energy or Hydrogenics
or
one of the current OB suppliers like CHEC or Hy Drive
or
a major distributor of diesel engine spares
or
A major fleet servicing chain
etc
So what do ITM need to do to exploit this lucrative opportunity ?
Simply to finalise a prototype OB of around 350w and complete the necessary
permitting work needed to obtain approval to sell the product in North America
ITM ought to be able to make a very good margin wholesaling a 350w OB for around $500 - $1000
Leaving the Retailer with a very healthy margin at a selling price of say $1500 -$2000
Versus the $6000 to $10000 being charged at present for these devices
And
By slashing the selling price there ought to be an exponential increase in demand particularly with the high price of diesel
Will ITM licence OB distribution in the US ?
Bi Fuel Ltd folowing their extensive tests have advised ITM that despite the real savings being made by adding trace hydrogen to older HGV diesel engines in North America.......
....the very latest common rail engine design does not significantly benefit in mpg terms by adding H2 to the air intake manifold...
This result does not disprove the fact that adding H2 via the air intake manifold is a proven and viable way of improving mpg in non common rail engines with mpg improvements of 10% to 15%
All it says is that it doesn’t produce a significant saving in common rail engines
So presumably from an ITM standpoint
This rules out retrofitting OBs to any engine which has the common rail design
thus ruling out a deal with an OEM
However it stll leaves a very lucrative retrofit market where ITM can undercut current OB suppliers by up to 80% There are millions of older vehicles on the road today that are not of the common rail design
ITM have the choice of either selling direct or licencing the sale of their OB through one or more of the following
an existing electrolyzer supplier like Proton Energy or Hydrogenics
or
one of the current OB suppliers like CHEC or Hy Drive
or
a major distributor of diesel engine spares
or
A major fleet servicing chain
etc
So what do ITM need to do to exploit this lucrative opportunity ?
Simply to finalise a prototype OB of around 350w and complete the necessary
permitting work needed to obtain approval to sell the product in North America
ITM ought to be able to make a very good margin wholesaling a 350w OB for around $500 - $1000
Leaving the Retailer with a very healthy margin at a selling price of say $1500 -$2000
Versus the $6000 to $10000 being charged at present for these devices
And
By slashing the selling price there ought to be an exponential increase in demand particularly with the high price of diesel
Thanks wshaw14 I`m not invested either although I am in
ITM Power I was just trying to get a handle on whether Hydrogenics could kick start the market by getting their cost down to under $164/Kw with the elimination of platinum
Or is cost no longer a issue ?
Are ITM making ammonia for Hydrogen Engine Center ?
Back in 1970 when pem electrolysers were limited to the space program a patent was filed to make ammonia by electrolysing water using the tried and tested potassium hydroxide wet electrolyser
The patent contained a design which enabled the electrolytic hydrogen to be created at pressures of 30bar to 200bar
See
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3652431.html
One of the claims under this patent was that it enabled the hydrogen to be passed into a vessel which already contained nitrogen and a suitable catalyst This permitted ammonia to be formed
Ammonia as a liquid under a modest pressure contains more hydrogen per litre than liquid hydrogen so it would be eminently suitable as a storage medium in a closed container
This patent has presumably now lapsed after 38 yrs
Along come ITM in 2008 with their self pressurising electrolyser capable of operating at 75 bar the minimum pressure now needed to make ammonia ( it is still 200 bar with the traditional catalysts )
So what does all this mean ?
Well
In theory anyway it suggests that ITM have the capacity to make ammonia in remote locations using green energy Because it is made in a closed container it need never see the light of day if the container is simply used to get over the issue of hydrogen storage
ie
The hydrogen is made using an electrolyser inside a large storage tank with the ammonia collected and stored separately
When the hydrogen is needed it can be easily obtained by electrolysing the ammonia
which breaks down using only 5% of the Kws needed to break down water
And interestingly
In 2007 the Sales Director of Hydrogen Engine Center Joe E Lewis was challenged about how HEC could claim their ammonia engine was truly green when the ammonia was made from natural gas
His response was
“
Of course, anhydrous ammonia has its negative aspects. It is currently made through the Haber-Bosch process, which uses natural gas and emits carbon into the atmosphere. That basically defeats the premise behind seeking an alternative fuel that doesn't increase greenhouse gases.
"When our big press release came out a week and a half ago, a lot of naysayers came out," said Lewis. "And for the most part they're right about anhydrous ammonia. The Haber-Bosch process, the primary method of making anhydrous ammonia, works by re-forming natural gas. Natural gas is made up primarily of hydrogen, and when you add nitrogen to it, you have anhydrous ammonia. But one of the negative aspects of the Haber-Bosch process is the fact that it creates a lot of CO2."
Lewis said that the solution to that problem is being developed right now. "Hydrogen Engine Center is working with a group that has a new method of producing anhydrous ammonia through a synthesis process, where they can take renewable power, like from a wind-generator, and use the electricity to run an electrolyzer to make hydrogen. Then take the nitrogen out of the air to mix with it, and you have anhydrous ammonia. That's right around the corner."
ITM and Boeing`s Unmanned Air Vehicles
On 20 Nov 2007 ITM released the Boeing announcement which said
Preliminary Design Agreement
“ITM Power plc (AIM:ITM), the technology and research company focused on the commercialisation of the hydrogen economy, is pleased to announce that it has signed an agreement with Boeing Research & Technology Europe S.L. to prepare a Preliminary Design of an Environmentally Friendly Refuelling Station for Fuel Cell Powered Unmanned Air Vehicles. “
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Then in the Interim Results Statement on 31 Jan 2008 Peter Hargreaves said
“Elsewhere our superior fuel cell construction methods are also being sought as far afield as Boeing in Madrid and the United States Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division Newport. Our labs, which are working in close conjunction with our new
production facility, should enhance the Company’s reputation.’’,
When you read the first statement it rather suggests that the ITM have been asked by Boeing to design an electrolyser which would make hydrogen from green energy to be stored for use in refuelling Boeing`s Fuel Cell Powered Unmanned Air Vehicle.
However the second comment clearly implies that ITM`s Boeing contract also relates to fuel cells as well as electrolyzers
So perhaps a second contract has been placed by Boeing covering fuel cell design
Couple this with the announcement in July 2008 that Intelligent Energy who currently supply the Boeing UAV fuel cell were forced to raise another $13.6m to keep going and you might conclude that ITM are poised to join or replace IE on this project
Can anyone advise what Hydrogenics consider to be their market advantage or put another way their unique selling feature?
Thanks