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
