Effects of electrolyte type and flow pattern on performance of methanol-fuelled solid oxide fuel cells

Abstract A comparison is made of the performances of methanol-fuelled solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) with different types of electrolyte (i.e., oxygen ion- and proton-conducting electrolytes) and flow patterns (i.e., plug flow (PF) and mixed flow (MF)). Although it was demonstrated earlier that, under the same inlet steam:methane ratio, an SOFC with a proton-conducting electrolyte (SOFC-H+) thermodynamically offers higher efficiency than one with an oxygen ion-conducting electrolyte (SOFC-O2−), the benefit of a lower steam requirement for the SOFC-O2− was not taken into account. Therefore, this study attempts to consider the benefit of differences in the steam requirement on the performance of SOFCs operated with different electrolytes and flow patterns. The efficiencies under the best conditions are compared in the temperature range of 900–1300 K. It is found that the maximum efficiencies decrease with increasing temperature and follow the sequence: SOFC-H+ (PF) > SOFC-O2− (PF) > SOFC-H+ (MF) > SOFC-O2− (MF). The corresponding inlet H2O:MeOH ratios are at the carbon formation boundary for the SOFC-O2− electrolyte, but are about 1.3–1.5 times the stoichiometric ratio for the SOFC-H+. It is clearly demonstrated that the PF mode is superior to the MF mode and that, although the benefit from the lower steam requirement is realized for the SOFC-O2−, the use of the proton-conducting electrolyte in the SOFCs is more promising.

[1]  Suttichai Assabumrungrat,et al.  Thermodynamic analysis of carbon formation in a solid oxide fuel cell with a direct internal reformer fuelled by methanol , 2005 .

[2]  Peng-fei Shi,et al.  Production of hydrogen by steam reforming of methanol on CeO2 promoted Cu/Al2O3 catalysts , 2003 .

[3]  Frank A. Coutelieris,et al.  Fuel options for solid oxide fuel cells: A thermodynamic analysis , 2003 .

[4]  C. Adjiman,et al.  Anode-supported intermediate temperature direct internal reforming solid oxide fuel cell. I: model-based steady-state performance , 2004 .

[5]  Ashok Rao,et al.  Analysis and optimization of a solid oxide fuel cell and intercooled gas turbine (SOFC-ICGT) hybrid cycle , 2004 .

[6]  Wan Ramli Wan Daud,et al.  Hydrogen production from steam–methanol reforming: thermodynamic analysis , 2000 .

[7]  J. C. Amphlett,et al.  Hydrogen production by the catalytic steam reforming of methanol part 1: The thermodynamics , 1981 .

[8]  Panagiotis Tsiakaras,et al.  Thermodynamic analysis of a hydrogen fed solid oxide fuel cell based on a proton conductor , 2001 .

[9]  Kevin Kendall,et al.  Formulating liquid hydrocarbon fuels for SOFCs , 2004 .

[10]  V. Formanski,et al.  Compact hydrogen production systems for solid polymer fuel cells , 1998 .

[11]  S. Assabumrungrat,et al.  Comparison of carbon formation boundary in different modes of solid oxide fuel cells fueled by methane , 2005 .

[12]  S. Chavadej,et al.  Temperature-programmed desorption of methanol and oxidation of methanol on Pt-Sn/Al2O3 catalysts , 2004 .

[13]  Panagiotis Tsiakaras,et al.  Thermodynamic analysis of a methane fed SOFC system based on a protonic conductor , 2002 .

[14]  B. Höhlein,et al.  Compact methanol reformer test for fuel-cell powered light-duty vehicles , 1998 .

[15]  P. Wild,et al.  CATALYTIC PRODUCTION OF HYDROGEN FROM METHANOL , 2000 .