Fuel cell-powered mobile lights tested, proven, ready for commercial use
Mike Janes Phys.org September 30, 2014
The H2LT developed by Sandia National Laboratories and its partners was deployed in 2011 at the site of the final space shuttle launch and observed by visitors, shuttle astronauts and members of the international media. Credit: Lennie Klebanoff
Mobile lighting systems powered by hydrogen fuel cells are cleaner, quieter and now have a proven track record in applications such as nighttime construction, sports and entertainment events and airport operations, making them ready for commercialization and broader use.
That's the conclusion reached by researchers at Sandia National Laboratories and others after a multiyear project sponsored by the Department of Energy's Fuel Cell Technologies Office and the Boeing Co. Project support also came from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Altergy Systems and 11 other project partners...
Developed by Sandia National Laboratories and several industry partners, the fuel cell mobile light offers a cleaner, quieter alternative to diesel-powered units. As seen here (top center), the system has been used by airport construction
... Emissions-free, but quiet and tough
In addition to zero emissions, perhaps the most attractive feature of the fuel cell mobile light system is how quiet it is.
"The primary driver of the project from the outset was the lowering of greenhouse gas emissions, and, in fact, the H2LT system was not designed to minimize noise," said Klebanoff. "Still, hydrogen fuel cell technology by its very nature is dramatically quieter than diesel generators, and this noise reduction is something that really excites users," said Klebanoff...MORE>
http://phys.org/news/2014-09-fuel-cell-powered-mobile-proven-ready.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
People need to be reminded that Hydrogen is not an energy source; it takes another energy source to create it before it can be used.
So, like electricity, hydrogen is an "energy carrier", not a source, and it can therefore be carbon intensive or renewable, but it's not necessarily clean and it sure as hell isn't "zero emissions" unless the power used to create it has zero emissions.
Sure, as a portable way to power construction lights, for example, it's less noxious than diesel generators. Fine, but it's carbon footprint isn't automatically "zero" unless one can trace it's production back to a zero emission source.
This is bad journalism, non-science, propaganda.
In almost every comparison I find the conditions used to make comparisons are unrealistic, and particularly unfair toward BEVs (battery electric vehicles).
In the chart below, you'll see magically low numbers for Hydrogen that depend upon unproven and largely non-deployed ways to make it:
H2 from Coal with sequestration;
H2 from Biomass gasification (probably not counting the water/fertilizer carbon factor);
H2 from Nuclear High-Temp Electrolysis;
H2 from Central Wind Electrolysis;
BEV's are noticeably absent from this particular chart.
In other charts where BEVs are included, the BEV figures often assume grid power as the electrical source and not renewables or pie-in-the-sky future technologies.
But see page 1 here where they do include ultra low renewables as a possible source to power EVs and it beats H2 all to hell:
http://hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/10001_well_to_wheels_gge_petroleum_use.pdf
Note, the link above is NOT the source of the image below.
Thank you for not being taken in by the hype.
