

Bloom Box Fuel Cell Device is Revealed - alexandros
http://www.fastcompany.com/1557348/bloombox-bloom-box-fuel-cell-60-minutes-kleiner-perkins-kr-sridhar-green-energy-google

======
bmunro
_The box also produces carbon dioxide as a byproduct--a potential downside
depending on how much it generates._

The amount it generates is of little concern - what matters is where the
methane (or other fuel) comes from. If the methane is produced from fresh
biomass then the box is carbon neutral. But if the fuel comes from oil then it
won't be carbon neutral.

~~~
pmjordan
Also, how much CO2 it generates depends only on the amount and type of fuel it
consumes[1] - e.g. 1 CO2 molecule emitted per CH4 molecule consumed - so that
statement is nonsensical to begin with.

[1] unless it also produces carbon monoxide, which is unlikely considering the
efficiency claims. Other than H2O, I'm not aware of any other possible
byproducts of methane oxidisation.

~~~
IgorPartola
>> Other than H2O, I'm not aware of any other possible byproducts of methane
oxidisation.

The same was said for the ICE, and now our cars emit all sorts of crud.
Ideally, that's all you get: CH4 + O2 ---> 2H20 + CO2. Practically, you get
sulfur and other impurities. Specifically sulfur scrubbers ([http://www.duke-
energy.com/environment/air-quality/sulfur-di...](http://www.duke-
energy.com/environment/air-quality/sulfur-dioxide-scrubbers.asp)) are often
used to reduce the amount of sulfur, but they raise the amount of CO2
byproduct. It's a no-win situation.

~~~
pmjordan
The sulfur is an impurity of the fuel, though, it's not produced out of thin
air. How the engine deals with impurities will depend on the exact chemical
reactions, but you're not going to get more CO2 molecules out than carbon
atoms go in.

~~~
IgorPartola
Of course. But my point is that cleaning fuel is an energy intensive task.
Moreover, in the past it has resulted in additional CO2 being output.

------
mseebach
_Bloom estimates that a box filled with 64 ceramic disks can produce enough
juice to power a Starbucks._

So, how many Starbucks to a Library of Congress? How about not estimating and
giving us some useful metrics, preferable based on this newfangled "watt"
unit?

~~~
ableal
I figure about 30kW per box.

Elsewhere in the article, they say Ebay got 100k USD of electric power from
using 5 boxes for 9 months. Assuming 10c/kW.h, that's 1 MW.h in 6408 hours,
coming out to about 154 kW for all five boxes.

Adjust for actual utility rates and exact usage.

~~~
nazgulnarsil
yeah, but such hyperbole is a classic sign of a con. if they were serious
they'd just tell you the I/O.

~~~
krakensden
On the other hand, the source is a 60 minutes puff piece- their audience has
no conception of what a watt is.

~~~
anamax
Their audience knows what a hair dryer (1500-1800 watts) and a 100 watt light
bulb are.

30kw - can run 300 100 watt light bulbs continuously.

They could even throw in a refrigerator or two.

~~~
pedalpete
Actually, they did mention how one 'disc' or wafer powers one lightbulb.

The problem with comparing a lightbulb or refrigerator, etc. is that the
average person has to think... ok, so how many discs are in a box? how many
lighbulbs do I have in my house? etc.

In the piece (which I admit is very fluff), the founder shows a box and says
'this is a european house', grabs another box and says 'this is an american
house, or 4 asian houses'.

These are methods of explanation that the 60 minutes audience can understand.

The actual company is apparently launching on Wednesday, so I'd expect that on
that day we'll hear more details.

Seeing as the device can use a different gases as fuel, wouldn't we expect
that the output would be dependent on the fuel supplied?

~~~
anamax
> Seeing as the device can use a different gases as fuel, wouldn't we expect
> that the output would be dependent on the fuel supplied?

It depends on where the limits are.

Consider the typical gas furnace. I understand that natural gas varies
considerably in energy per gram (or per cubic feet at a standard pressure).
Within limits, the system adjusts the amount consumed to account for that and
appropriate output. Meanwhile, an electric hair dryer doesn't - it's heat
output is determined by the input voltage, current, and wave shape.

------
eserorg
This is essentially a solid-state microturbine.

You can order a 65-kW microturbine from Capstone Turbine Corp for about
$40,000 USD.

Natgas-powered microturbines have commonly been used for distributed power
generation in industrial settings (hotels, hospitals, etc...)

See Ingersoll Rand: [http://www.ingersollrandproducts.com/IS/Category.aspx-
am_en-...](http://www.ingersollrandproducts.com/IS/Category.aspx-am_en-18218)

See Captsone Turbine Corp:
<http://www.microturbine.com/prodsol/solutions/chp.asp>

Try Googling for "microturbine".

[edit] Also, "Microturbines: Applications for Distributed Energy Systems" is a
good book on the subject. Amazon: [http://www.amazon.com/Microturbines-
Applications-Distributed...](http://www.amazon.com/Microturbines-Applications-
Distributed-Energy-Systems/dp/0750684690)

~~~
frankus
This might eventually scale down better than a microturbine (65kW is enough
electricity for a large neighborhood (on average), and enough heat for a
handful of homes), and I would bet it also operates better at part load.

Microturbines aren't especially quiet either, but it's hard to know how much
noise this thing makes without more information.

------
scotty79
Is that more effective than burning natural gas in turbine?

EDIT:

In the movie there is a statement that it is twice as effective.

Another question: How much a natural gas turbine of the same output costs?

------
pi3832
I think the fact that you'd need a natural gas pipeline, or a propane tank out
back, kind of negates the "disconnected from the grid" thingy.

Also, where does one get the energy to heat the magic box to 1800 F?

~~~
cracki
from the box itself, i'd guess... electric heating elements?

~~~
pedalpete
electric heating elements to get 1800F? Wouldn't that take more power than
this thing would create? I missed the part about heating to 1800.

~~~
ncarlson
The chemical reaction heats up the box. However, large amounts of insulation
is needed to retain the heat.

------
david927
I'm really excited about this. But it won't be actually 'revealed' until
Wednesday.

------
philf
"we can use fossil fuels, or renewable from land fills..." "solar?" "we can
use solar". Sounds pretty much like a hoax.

~~~
conover
I was watching the interview on 60 minutes and it seems like they edited out
something that was said about "solar". As if he probably qualified that answer
but the producers decided that it wasn't really relevant.

------
dbz
How long is the predicted life on these big boxes though? The thirty years
quote was abut how long a fuel cell _should_ last. How long do these ones last
though?

Well. It can't be worse than coal.

~~~
khafra
It does seem rather unexciting, given that "ebay has saved $100,000" over 9
months with 5 boxes, and the boxes cost $800,000 apiece--that's a 30 year
payback.

~~~
sethg
How long does it take to pay back the construction of a conventional power
plant?

------
motters
I had to stop watching the video half way though, because I was laughing so
hard. To me this looks like a _definite_ energy generation hoax, of which
there have been many in the past. A wafer of sand (silicon) painted green is
not going to produce much (if any) electricity.

Suspend your suspension of disbelief and engage physics 101.

~~~
danparsonson
I guess the boxes that eBay and Google are using have hamsters inside them
instead?

~~~
motters
The people at Google are no doubt hotshot software engineers, but how many of
them are physicists/chemists I wonder. Has there been an independent
scientific confirmation that the underlying mechanism of electricity
generation is valid, and produces significant net energy gain? I very much
doubt that.

Do we have anyone here on HN who can actually confirm that these devices have
been installed at Google?

I've taken an interest in various energy generation ideas over the years, and
a fair amount of hoaxing has always gone on. Sometimes the hoaxes are quite
sophisticated an investors who like what they see but know little about
physics end up being defrauded out of large amounts of money. From what I've
seen in this article/video this raises all the classic red flags which you
could expect from a hoax operation.

~~~
gfodor
Yes, the classic energy hoax of "marginal improvement over a well known and
understood chemical process that obeys the laws of thermodynamics."

I have a feeling you missed the part where they put hydrocarbons in one end.

~~~
motters
I watched the rest of the video, and noticed the big gas pipeline. So whatever
is going on here it's not clean energy - it's basically a generator burning
fossil fuel or gas from waste decomposition as usual. It seems unlikely that
individual homes or companies could produce enough decomposable waste products
to generate the gas needed.

