Digital Hubbub – IEEE Spectrum

/0 Comments/in , /by

Here’s an article that may be useful. It’s in current issue of IEEE Spectrum, and it appears to be available to nonmembers. The accompanying article on the major players is interesting also. (Don’t miss the chart.)

Note this paragraph, buried near the end of the article:
“As cable TV companies, burglar-alarm suppliers, and even power companies negotiate for space inside digital hubs, Whatley foresees a sort of free-for-all to control a raft of functions also tied into the hub. An electric utility could, for example, manage loads more effectively, even turning off an air conditioner during peak periods. The system would also know when homeowners returned from work, so it could bring the house back to a comfortable temperature by the time they walked in the door.”

Are energy industry companies just naive bit players with their attempts to do “gateways” and smart homes? (Note their complete absence from the chart.) Or are utilities in a unique position to pull it off while media and IT giants do battle with each other?

——————————–
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/publicfeature/jul02/hvid.html

Digital Hubbub

Companies vie to create a single device, or hub, to handle all your home entertainment needs

By Paul Wallich, Contributing Editor

It’s a set-top! It’s a home server! It’s a digital hub! Whatever you call it—a souped-up cable box or a hard-disk recorder with wings—companies know that whoever gets it right will rule the entertainment gateway to the home.

More than a half-dozen companies so far are scrambling for the billions of dollars they hope to reap by offering consumers a single machine to handle their home entertainment needs. The companies agree on what the machine should do: record, archive, and play back video and music, organize digital photo albums, and distribute digital media around the home. Where they disagree is on what shape that machine should take.

—————————
For a view of how media companies are organizing to reach the hub in your home,
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/publicfeature/jul02/media.html

The Largest Players Rule the Media Playground
By Steven M. Cherry, Senior Associate Editor

The top media companies increasingly do a lot more than create content. The 12 companies shown here deliver content via cable systems and the Internet. They also have investments in makers of personal video recorders (PVRs) and set-top boxes and suppliers of video on demand.

Consider the former Moxi Digital, builder of a personal entertainment hub that can play DVDs and CDs and can function as a PVR and a set-top box. Moxi’s investors, before Vulcan purchased it, included AOL Time Warner, Vulcan, and Scientific-Atlanta. Vulcan also owns Digeo, another hub maker, with which Moxi was merged.
see CHART:
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/publicfeature/jul02/mediaf1.html

Eight of the companies listed—AOL Time Warner, Comcast, Disney, GE, Liberty Media, Sony, Viacom, and Vulcan— were investors in ReplayTV before it was bought by SonicBlue. TiVo, an up-and-coming PVR maker, has attracted hefty investments from almost all major media companies.

DOE H2&FC Reviews

/0 Comments/in , /by

Hydrogen – Fuel Cells for Transportation – Fuels for Fuel Cells
— 2002 Annual Program/Lab R&D Review —

These three US DOE programs held their combined review meetings, May 6-10, 2002 in Golden CO. Proceedings are available on the Hydrogen Information Network:
http://www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/hydrogen_review.html

……..[addendum July 17]………
The proceedings of the 2002 US DOE Hydrogen Program Annual Review are available on-line.
http://www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/docs/2002toc.html

The 70 technical reports, each available as a separate downloadable file, represent the efforts of researchers and engineers at National Labs, universities, and in industry from across the US. They cover hydrogen production, storage, and use, with excellent papers on analysis and the Program’s technology validation projects. The CD-ROM will be available for purchase soon.
…………………………

As you know, UFTO made its group visit to NREL on the Wednesday. I was there all week and caught four days of the review meetings.

The first big news was that all three programs are now combined into one, under the major reorganization of Energy Efficiency and Renewables (aka EE or EREN). (See UFTO News March 26–if you missed it let me know. Also http://www.eren.doe.gov/ee.html.) These programs had been under separate offices (Power, Industrial, and Transportation).

HYDROGEN: May 6-8

Technical abstracts appear in two documents, each of which contain 2-3 pages on each of 38 presentations. Technical Papers from the meeting will be posted by mid-July 2002.

Session A – Production and Technology Validation
– Biological Hydrogen Production
– Fossil ? Base Production
– Renewable Production/Electrolytic Processes
– Technology Validation
– Separation And Purification

Session B – Storage, Utilization, Analysis
– Analysis Projects
– Hydrogen Utilization Research
– Technology Transfer
– Storage

FUEL CELLS FOR TRANSPORTATION (21 papers): May 9
– Fuel Cell Modeling/Analysis
– Fuel Cell Stack Components
– Membranes/MEAs
– Electrodes/Electrocatalysts
– Direct-Methanol Fuel Cells
– Fuel Cell Materials

FUELS FOR FUEL CELLS (13 papers): May 10
– Fuel Processing
– Water-Gas Shift Catalysts
– Fuels Effects

Complete papers for fuel cells are already posted, along with 20 poster papers.

—— ——— ————
DOE is required by law to do these reviews, and they are quite scripted and formalized. A panel of grey-beard expert reviewers sit in the front and ask probing questions and give sage advice to each of the researchers who present an update of their progress since last year. Meanwhile several hundred observers fill the rest of the room, and can ask questions if there’s time after the reviewers are finished. The format of the presentations were very tightly prescribed, with a number of required points to cover (e.g. ‘collaborations and outreach’). The Hydrogen program even banned fancy graphics and powerpoint, insisting on plain vu-graphs (bad experiences in the past with computer glitches).

Presentations covered projects funded by the three DOE programs. Most were from national lab researchers, with only a handful of industrials. As such the emphasis seemed to be heavily in favor of basic research/long-term R&D, and “analysis” projects, e.g. to estimate the costs and benefits of various infrastructure schemes. As such, it was a long five days, and only moderately rewarding at best (especially if one considers that developments with real commercial potential are not going to be talked about in public). As usual, the informal networking during breaks and receptions were at least as worthwhile. One can only hope that the reorganization will bring greater clarity to all of this work, along with a rethinking of the review process.

—— ——— ————
DOE staff gave overviews of the issues, programs, and progress–these are also on the website above.

For HYDROGEN:
– Storage is progressing well, notably pressurized tanks, but a breakthrough would be welcome
– Production is from natural gas in the nearterm, capitalizing on existing infrastructure, though not sustainable for the long term.
– Long term (20+ years) the goal is hydrogen from biomass, coal, nuclear* and waste.
(*by electrolysis, or better, direct thermal decomposition of water at high temperature)
– The essential end-use device- the fuel cell- continues to need huge cost reductions
– Safety, codes, standards, and fair trade issues are a major piece of the puzzle
– On-board vehicle reformers are only a transition strategy. Startup time and efficiency are key.
– Vehicle Insfrastructure Demonstration partnerships, involving the deployment of progressively larger fleets and charging station

DOE initiated a National Hydrogen Vision and Roadmap process in response to recommendations made in President Bush’s National Energy Policy. The Vision Meeting took place Nov 2001 and the Roadmap Workshop took place Apr 2002 in Washington, D.C. The summaries, the proceedings, and the individual presentations are available at:
http://www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/features.html

This presentation contains a lot of information about the perceptions, priorities and programs: — Review of the Hydrogen Program (N. Rossmeissl, DOE)
http://www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/pdfs/32405c.pdf

For FUEL CELLS:
National policy is indeed driving things. There is a draft report to Congress, following a workshop held in February, available now at:
http://www.sentech.org/fuelcell.html
“…an assessment of the technical, economic, and infrastructure barriers to commercialization of fuel cells for transportation, portable power, stationary and distributed generation applications. This full report is due November 5, 2002. In addition, the Department is to provide an interim assessment that describes the need for public and private cooperative programs to demonstrate commercial use of fuel cells by 2012.”

The FreedomCAR Partnership is the successor to PNGV, whose goal had been a very high mileage auto. Go to: http://www.cartech.doe.gov/
The new emphasis is on hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. Scroll down this long list of publications (probably a lot more than you wanted to know):
http://www.cartech.doe.gov/research/fuelcells/index.html
Note in particular, the 2001 Annual Progress Report for Fuel Cells for Transportation

The name “Freedom” is meant to represent freedom from foreign oil and emissions and freedom of choice, with myriad technologies and products. These programs address technical challenges such as cost (platinum), durability, fuel processing, air-thermal-water management, and higher temperature (=new membranes). Specific stretch goals: 60% efficiency; 325 W/kg; $45/kw (including storage!). For storage, 2 kwh/kg, 1 kwh/L.

NREL VISIT

/0 Comments/in , /by

Six stalwart UFTO company representatives and yours truly spent the entire day on May 8 at the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL), in Golden CO.

NREL is the smallest of the DOE national labs, with just over 1000 staff, and an annual budget of $187 million (FY00).. It is also the only lab with a specifically defined mission to advance renewable energy technology. NREL has a number of special purpose facilities and programs in wind, solar (PV and thermal), biomass/bioenergy, hydrogen and advanced transportation vehicles.

One impression that struck us was the strong sense of purpose and commitment that the NREL staff bring to their work. They really seem motivated by a desire to make the world a better place.

In terms of technical content, it was a bit of a drink from a firehose. Each presenter managed in under an hour to encapsulate the state of the art, explain the context and importance, and indicate what NREL’s particular role is.

(Presentations are available for download from the UFTO website–client password required. To access the directory of all presentation files, go to:
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/
Or click on the links below to download individual documents directly.)

Obviously, in this amount of time we were only beginning to scratch the surface–myriad information resources abound on the DOE, NREL and other websites and publications. Best of all, perhaps, was the opportunity to meet the people doing the work, and to be able to recontact them to dig deeper.

Discussions of context and importance reflected a familiar list of driving forces (climate, resources, population, poverty, etc.). Energy demand will grow substantially; oil and gas won’t last forever. Renewables are on a decades-long development cycle that most new technologies (e.g. oil) have experienced in the past. Their cost and performance characteristics are now beginning to reach a point where their use is increasingly entering the mainstream in a major way.

One idea that NREL has been talking about for a couple of years — if the 20th century was the fossil energy century, then perhaps the 21st will be the biological energy century, with “biorefineries” gradually taking the place of oil refineries to provide fuels, chemicals, and myriad other material feedstocks of the economy. It’s definitely a long-term vision, but one can cite several examples where this already happens, e.g. in a paper mill, trees become paper, energy and other products. Another is corn, which becomes ethanol, corn, and livestock feed.

————————-
NREL Overview
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Overview.pdf (1.2 mb)
David Warner, david_warner@nrel.gov
Lee Boughey, lee_boughey@nrel.gov
Industry Liaison

————————-
Distributed Energy Resources and Hydrogen
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Der.pdf (820kb)
Tony Schaffhauser, AC_Schaffhauser@nrel.gov
Director , Distributed Energy Resources Center
http://www.nrel.gov/energy_resources/

This group pursues the linkages of renewables and natural gas with national energy needs through distributed generation. They provide analysis tools, test facilities, resource assessment, and work on standards, codes, and regulatory/institutional issues.

Renewable Resource Data Center (RReDC) provides information on several types of renewable energy resources in the United States, in the form of publications, data, and maps. GIS integration enables overlay of related infrastructures, e.g. pipelines, roads, and transmission lines.
http://rredc.nrel.gov/

————————-
Solar Programs Overview
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/PV.ppt (7mb)
John Benner, john_benner@nrel.gov
http://www.nrel.gov/photovoltaics.html

PV Roadmap: http://www.nrel.gov/ncpv/pvplans.html

Some key take-aways:
– “Breakthroughs” are not necessary. PV is on track to become a major energy supply via gradual improvement. The range of cost-effective applications is rapidly expanding, with PV energy costing from 10-50¢/kwh. Over the last 20 years, prices have fallen 25% with each doubling of cumulative shipments.
– Silicon PV rides on the shoulders of the semiconductor industry, with all its materials, equipment and manufacturing technology (e.g. the progress from 6″ to 8″ to 12″ wafers). (NREL’s PV lab does research funded by IC companies!) Even amorphous silicon can draw from the flat panels industry. The various thin-film technologies have no such opportunity to leverage better established industry capabilities.
– Thin film, though less efficient, is cheaper, and can fill important niches such as building-integrated PV.
– US market share is dropping. Elsewhere in the world, interest, and government support is leading to faster growth. World wide production is over 400 MW/year.
– There are lots of myths to dispel. For example, some say that huge land areas are required. Answer: existing roofs are more than enough.

————————-
Superconductivity
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Superconduct.pdf (2.8mb)
Richard Blaugher, richard_blaugher@nrel.gov
Technology Manager, Superconductivity Program

NREL is one six DOE labs that work in superconductivity (SC). The DOE website has a lot of information about the overall effort:
http://www.eren.doe.gov/superconductivity/
(note in particular “Library” and “Technology Status”)

There are two main thrusts: basic research into new materials and wire or ribbon fabrication methods, and develop superconducting electronic power devices, in collaboration with industry. Devices include transformers, cables, a motor, current limiter and a magnetic separator. (Fact sheets on each one are available under “The Partnership”.) Utilities are involved with several of these projects.

NREL’s own internal R&D includes development of new coating techniques to make HTSC ribbon. One method uses electrodeposition, and recently a dip-coating technique has set new records for current density.

See Blaugher’s excellent review article from 2000 Global Energy
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/HTSC Prospects.doc (52kb)

————————-
Energy Analysis Overview
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Analysis.pdf (3.1mb)
Walter Short, walter_short@nrel.gov

This group, along with counterparts throughout the lab, studies technology, policy and market issues to support decision making at the program level, lab management, and DOE headquarters. They develop models and tools and perform analyses such as life-cycle cost, technology choice, R&D program prioritization and review, etc.
The website has a lot of good material, including publications and even an online software tool for renewable energy cost estimation.
http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/

————————-
Enterprise Development Program
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Enterprisdevelp.pdf (1.2mb)
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/entrep.prog.doc (word 300kb)

Marty Murphy, lawrence_murphy@nrel.gov
http://www.nrel.gov/technologytransfer/entrepreneurs/entrepreneurs.html

This unique program supports innovators, recognizing the need for viable small companies as one of the principal mechanisms to carry new technologies forward to commercialization. The website offers an broad array of reference and other materials to help them with all aspects of their business, especially fundraising. Venture investment forums are held around the company. Over 200 companies have presented in past events. NREL has also been instrumental in establishing a new national alliance of incubators around the country which focus on clean energy.

Next event: The 15th NREL Industry Growth Forum
Oct. 29- 30, 2002 in Albany, NY.
http://www.nrel.gov/technologytransfer/entrepreneurs/pdfs/forum_6.pdf

————————-
Biofuels Overview
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Biofuels.pdf (1.9mb)
Cindy Riley, cynthia_riley@nrel.gov
Process Development Leader
Biotechnology Division for Fuels and Chemicals

Ethanol from cellulosic biomass is a key goal of NREL’s. For thousands of years, ethanol has been made by fermentation of sugars and starches; most of today’s US ethanol is made from corn. Most biomass, however, consists of lignin and cellulosic material which has to be broken down first. Various combinations of acids and enzymes are used to convert the cellulose to sugars which then can be fermented. (Lignin remains, and once separated has uses of its own.)

The DOE website gives a good overview of the process:
http://www.ott.doe.gov/biofuels/advanced_bioethanol.html

NREL’s program includes engineering new enzymes and yeasts, process technology, a major test facility, resource analysis, and systems economics studies, with a goal to bring the production cost of bioethanol down to $1/gallon by 2010. Bioethanol, and many various potential coproducts, could be a major realization of the “biorefinery” vision.

————————-
Bioenergy Overview
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Bioenergy.pdf (5.3mb)
Rich Bain, Group Manager, richard_bain@nrel.gov
Chemistry for Bioenergy Systems

Following the ethanol story, bioenergy is a far broader topic. Noting there are hundreds of bio-based production facilities in the US already (which already produce over 6000 MW of power), this presentation reviewed many of the huge variety of opportunities within the biorefinery concept, from biodiesel to biopower and gasification at scales ranging from 15 kw to the 200 tons/day Battelle Gasifier.

————————-
Tour of the National Wind Test Center
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/Wind.nrel.ppt (2.4 mb)
Brian Smith, Turbine Program Development, brian_smith@nrel.gov,
Jim Johnson, Site Operations, james_a_johnson@nrel.gov,

As with solar, Europe leads the US by a wide margin in deployment of windpower, with a total installed capacity nearly four times ours. The economics of wind are steadily improving, and some very large companies are heavily committed. As DOE’s lead laboratory in wind technology development, NREL operates the National Wind Technology Center and manages turbine research programs and applied research activities.
http://www.nrel.gov/wind/

We visited the Center, 30 minutes from NREL, and toured the facilities, which are available to wind turbine manufacturers for equipment test and evaluation.

NREL operates the only full-scale blade testing facility in the U.S. for MW-scale wind turbines. 35 meter length blades are pushed and pulled a million times to find their weak points. The full-system wind turbine drive train testing accommodates up to 2.5 MW turbines. A huge electric motor drive simulates the wind, pushing systems to their limit. This facility in the only one of its kind in the world. In addition, there is a strong gusty wind that comes through a notch in the mountains. This would make a poor production resource, but is an excellent testing environment, as it subjects systems to highly variable and difficult conditions. Full scale turbines of all sizes are installed at the site and monitored in detail. Our group actually got to up inside a 600 kw wind turbine– impressive to say the least, at 120 feet above the ground.

————————-
Distributed Energy Resources/Hybrid Test Facility
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/nreldocs/DERtestfacility.pdf (256kb)
Ben Kroposki, benjamin_kroposki@nrel.gov

This facility has a variety of distributed generation technologies, a grid simulator and load banks. It is used to test inverters and interconnection power electronic systems, especially those developed under the DOE Distributed Power Program. Recently, the mission has been expanded to do testing of standards, “testing the test” to see if proposed standards can be used in practice.

NRECA DG tools

/0 Comments/in , /by

Follow-up to this item from earlier UFTO Note:
UFTO Note – DOE Distributed Power Review 15 Feb 2002

— NRECA has an aggressive program to support its members to do fuel cell demonstrations, with training, handbooks, databases, and a users group. Coops view DG as “a solution, not as a problem”. Together coops represent the largest “single” utility in the country, with 34 million customers in 46 states. The handbook will be available on the DOE website in the near future, and many more resources are available only to members of NRECA.
Contact Ed Torrero, 703-907-5518, ed.torrero@nreca.org

——————-

From the DOE DER Update Newsletter for 10 May 02

Co-Ops Unveil Tool Kit For Interconnection

The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) has developed a collection of new business templates that will help local utilities harness the power of distributed generation. The NRECA tool kit will help utilities establish policies for the interconnection of DG units and assure the safe and reliable operation of the distribution system. “As interest in distributed generation grows, cop-ops must anticipate the effects that its application will have on their systems and the DG tool kit will help them prepare,” said NRECA CEO Glenn English. The project was co-funded by National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corp. and Energy Co-Opportunity. The interconnection tool contains the following resources:

o A Business and Contract Guide for Interconnection to help cooperatives and their employees move smoothly through the interconnection process

o A DG Rates Manual to help each cooperative think through the issues required to design a rate that meets that cooperative’s specific goals; and Consumer Guidelines for Interconnection to educate consumers about the interconnection process

o A Technical Application Guide that provides rules of thumb that engineers at each cooperative can apply to develop detailed technical interconnection requirements that work for their system

o A Model Interconnection Application to be filled out by consumers interested in installing their own generation

o A Model Short Form Interconnection Contract for consumers installing small DG units with a capacity of 3 kW or less

The document “tool kit” is offered at no charge to interested parties and can be found at:
http://www.nreca.org/leg_reg/DGToolKit

——————
DER Update: Summary of DER-related news and events is published by DOE’s Office of Distributed Energy Resources every two weeks. – email subscription available.
http://www.eren.doe.gov/der/summaries.html

Quite a few documents and online tools for DG are available here (but not sign yet of the NRECA materials):
http://www.eren.doe.gov/der/documents_resources.html

Small scale Gas to Liquids (GTL)

/0 Comments/in , /by

First demonstrated over 80 years ago, GTL has a long and colorful history. It was a mainstay of the German and Japanese fuel supply in WW2. Governments, major oil companies, and new entrants have made substantial investments over the years. While limited commercial operations are in place, the technology hasn’t progressed enough to enable widespread economic use.

Blue Star Sustainable Technologies Corp. has developed a set of new catalytic processes to convert natural gas into clean liquid fuels, as a new variant on Fischer-Tropsch. Based on a number of innovations (pat. or pat pend.), Blue Star reduces costs by simplifying the GTL process and by making small-scale units that can be standardized and mass produced for use in gas fields throughout the world, rather than seeking economies through very large units.

A pilot unit (six barrels per day) has successfully demonstrated all of the process steps. The Company is now building a 10-barrel per day demonstration unit (Blue Star 10) to prove integrated system performance. Designed to operate in remote oil and gas field operations and other applications, the Blue Star 10-demonstration unit is to be located in Wyoming’s Powder River Basin gas field, where very large potential unit sales exist.

BlueStar’s approach is unlike any other player in the GTL industry, with their focus on volume sales of small-scale (10 to 500 BPD) plants. All the others do large scale facilities (10,000 to 100,000 barrels per day), and can produce only a synthetic crude oil which requires further refining.

Remarkably, the liquid fuel produced by Blue Star –in the field– will be suitable for immediate use in diesel engines. (Lab analyses show good properties, and the fuel is EPA registered; engine testing has yet to be done.) The company calls this “Direct Diesel”. Their units could serve numerous potential applications worldwide for small stranded gas fields, as just one example. Coal bed methane also looks like an attractive market possibility, not to mention the 3.7 TCF of gas that is flared around the world each year.

The Blue Star 10 is to be the Company’s first commercial product. It is skid mounted and designed to be transported to remote locations by truck. The Blue Star 10 converts approximately 200 MCFD of natural gas into 10 BPD (420 gallons per day) of a clean synthetic diesel. It also generates 300 kW of excess electricity (6,807 kWh per day). Industrial grade potable water and low temperature heat are the other byproducts of the process. The Blue Star 10 produces minimal toxic or noxious emissions.

These attributes are intended to open markets for applications where either: 1) electrical and fuel delivery infrastructures are not readily accessible; 2) power and fuel are expensive; or 3) there may be on-site uses for heat or water. Broader mandates for clean fuel emission standards are supportive of market development. In particular, the fuel produced by the Blue Star process contains essentially no sulfur, surpassing diesel fuel standards to take effect in 2006. The fuel also has improved combustion characteristics.

Blue Star will capitalize on proprietary catalyst, hardware and system concepts that provide competitive advantages for the development of small-scale GTL facilities. Interestingly, some of Blue Star’s key innovations do not lend themselves to application at large scale, with the important exception of the “direct diesel” capability. Licensing of technology is a distinct part of the company’s future plans.

The Company is also developing a mid-scale unit capable of producing 500 BPD of high-grade synthetic fuel from 5,000 MCFD of natural gas. At this size, the Blue Star 500 can deliver twice the liquid conversion efficiency of the Blue Star 10. The Blue Star 500 would be useful for converting stranded gas fields in the 50 to 100 BCF range in North America and other parts of the world to a high quality, clean and transportable fuel. Many fields with these characteristics are believed to exist worldwide. There are also numerous locations with fields of similar size where gas is currently flared or vented that provide market opportunities for both the Blue Star 10 and Blue Star 500 plants. While significantly larger, the Blue Star 500 is still substantially below the commercial scale targeted by competing companies in the GTL industry.

In Phase I, a prototype of the Blue Star 10 will be completed in 2002 and tested at an application site in 2003. Manufacturing engineering, marketing and business development activities to prepare the Company for commercial introduction of the Blue Star 10 will also be completed during Phase I of the business plan.

Following Phase I, the Company expects to proceed to commercial sales and distribution in Phase II. Manufacturing will be outsourced, possibly offshore and adjacent to international markets as sales volumes grow. A business scenario projecting Phase II performance has been developed. In this scenario, sales of the Blue Star 10 unit are projected to reach 200 units per year in 2008. The first Blue Star 500 unit is constructed in 2007.

The Company seeks a participant to fund a significant share of the next phase of its program (Phase I) covering a two year time period. The total cost of the Phase I program is $12 million. The size of the ownership share available and the structure of such participation are negotiable. Emex Corporation (EMEX-nasdaq) currently owns the Company, and is committed to continuing as an active investor. A business plan is available.

Contact: Nicholas Vanderborgh, President
Blue Star Sustainable Technologies Corp., Arvada, CO
303-432-8630 nvanderborgh@bluestarstc.com

[Text adapted from company materials with further discussions with management.]

PowerWAN PLC to Solve Last-Mile

/0 Comments/in , /by

A new Power Line Carrier (PLC) / Power Line Telecommunications (PLT) network technology is under development by a startup company called PowerWAN, which plans a complete solution to the last mile problem.

PowerWAN’s coding and modulation technology is their own proprietary approach to OFDM, especially suited to the reflective and noisy power line environment, and the particular characteristics are designed to minimize the effects of narrow band interference, impulse noise and multipath reflections. Company personnel have deep experience in OFDM, having successfully developed an OFDM based system for cable television voice applications. They are very aware of the whole landscape of past and present contenders to make PLC a reality, and are confident in their approach.

PowerWAN is a member of the HomePlug Alliance. They are already routinely seeing data rates over 6 MB, and are confident of reaching 10, at distances up to 0.5 miles. Product plans include increasing the data rates to 30 MB in the near term.

In tests at the distribution training yard at Sierra Pacific Power, they recently proved their capability to pass data through two low voltage (LV) distribution transformers without the use of any bypass technology. This is important to the network provider since it greatly reduces the cost of labor and maintains safety and simplicity. To date PowerWAN has exhaustively tested and verified the technical viability of both the Medium Voltage and Low Voltage areas of the power grid to support high bandwidth transmission of data.

Five patent applications have been submitted for both the technology and architectures used within PLC., with several more to follow for PLC technology. Also in the process are several other patents relating to proprietary uses of the technology and the controlling of Ethernet network elements.

Financial models indicate that with all network elements, including the cost to build a fiber backbone, the system will be competitive with DSL and Cable at less than $200 per home passed, and will meet or exceed the features and functionality they currently provide. Additionally, regulated applications such as AMR and distribution automation can also be facilitated within the PowerWAN solution since the installed network is a broadband two-way communications network reaching every facility within the service area.

The Hybrid Fiber Power Line Carrier (HFPLC) architecture includes four main elements:

1. The Power Line Modem Termination System (PMTS) provides the platform for system management and control for high-speed optical streams. It is a redundant Carrier Class product architecture, which provides the connection and control to the backbone network. It is located at the substation or Headend and interfaces the network with optical interfaces. A Mini PMTS will also allow the network provider to connect business users directly with Ethernet based services that can be scaled from small (1Mb ) to large (100 Mb).

2. The Mini-PMTS is an environmentally hardened, line mounted layer 2 switch with Layer 3 functionality and protocol support. The Mini-PMTS is provides traffic policy control of the data streams for each of the power Line Nodes and customer premise units controlled by each individual Mini-PMTS. Through the use of proprietary software control and monitoring developed by PowerWAN, the Mini-PMTS will allow the network provider to offer various levels of service and data rates to each individual customer premise device. Additionally, the Mini-PMTS will ensure a high degree of security is maintained for all users of the network. A proprietary use of VLAN (Virtual LAN) tags will ensure any and all services can be delivered

3. The PLC Node converts the optical signals from the network to the PLC/PLT signals needed for transmission over the power line for both high and low speed applications. The PLC Node would physically reside at the best strategic location for insertion of the signal to the power network and may be added as needed to segment the system. Possible locations are: the substation end of the distribution feeders; downstream of the local transformer; or any split point of the electrical feeder distribution network

4. The Customer Premises Device can be either an externally mounted “gateway” or a modem that plugs into any wall outlet. This is a key differentiator–PowerWAN sees no need to separate “to” the house from “in” the house. Both can be done in the same system.

Contact Al Johnson, COO
ajohnson@powerwan.com 650-833-5790 x145

New Small Turbines, 600 Watts to 2 MW

/0 Comments/in , /by

As distributed generation continues to evolve (technically and politically), microturbines continue to be one of the main technologies in the mix. Capstone, of course, is the only one with a truly commercial product and sizeable installed base. The collapse of the Honeywell Parallon program is well known. (Less well known–or so the story goes– to avoid any future liability for performance or maintenance, the company bought back and destroyed every unit they’d sold.) Meanwhile, other companies entering or about ready to enter the field with commercial units, such as Turbec, Ingersoll, Elliott, etc.

This note reviews a number of other contenders. Some are startup companies at various stages, actively engaged in fundraising. Others, less visible, have been built for defense applications with no active effort to pursue commercial uses. Two of these companies have aggressive near term plans to sell components for turbines, either replacement parts or OEM.

*available information at:
http://www.ufto.com/clients-only/turbines/ [password required]

++++++++++++++

M-DOT Aerospace http://www.m-dot.com

M-DOT is an engineering and manufacturing company in Phoenix, specializing in turbine technology, primarily for military/aerospace. With funding from DARPA, they have demonstrated the world’s smallest operating gas turbine and are developing a soda-pop can size gas-turbine driven 600-watt alternator intended to be a compact, carry-able power source for the soldier. They’re about to launch a development program for a 6 KW turbine with the requisite light weight and performance characteristics for commercial applications, particularly in portable power.

Bryan Seegers, CEO, 408-752-1911 x13, bseegers@m-dot.com

++++++++++++++

IHI Aerospace

Originally built for military and civilian use, IHI’s Dynajet 2.6 KW microturbine genset is selling commercially in Japan is 1.2 million Yen (about $9000) "for use in Japan only" (kerosene fuel). There are no plans for export. They don’t have a natural gas version. Very little information is available, though I do have a 2-page product description and spec sheet (*available). The unit measures 30"x10"x11" and weighs 140 lb.
[The contact at IHI prefers not to be listed.]

++++++++++++++

ALM Turbine http://www.almturbine.com/

The Company is developing a new "Dual Stream Engine" (DSE) mini-turbine for small-to-medium size power generation and automotive applications. The DSE can be scaled to generate power between 25kW and 300kW, with efficiencies of 37 – 40%. The engine recirculates the exhaust–the intake is 5/6 exhaust and 1/6 makeup air.

Certain parts and components will upgrade existing installed turbines to make them cleaner and more and efficient. One of these replacement parts is a revolutionary combustion system for large, medium and small turbines (5kW ? 250MW) with NOx levels of 3ppm or less, without the use or need of a catalyst. ALM’s combustion system prevents the creation of emissions as opposed to after treatment or clean-up technologies such as SCR.

ALM is working with a number of companies to develop aftermarket combustors for the existing installed base of large heavy-duty turbines (i.e. GE Frame 7EA) and for other size turbines. (Utilities want an alternative to the GE monopoly on replacement parts.) ALM is seeking partners to develop combustors to retrofit Solar, Rolls Royce and GE LM series turbines. The combustor uses external premix with no dilution zone, and has no pilot nozzle. ALM has developed technology to run significantly leaner than conventional DLN combustors.

ALM, then, is addressing two goals; 1. to make and sell their small engines (preferably with a strategic partner), and 2. to sell parts for existing large turbines, which should begin to generate significant revenues in the near term.

ALM recently signed a $3 million contract with the California Energy Commission to deploy a number of miniturbine beta units in the field. They’ve presented at several venture conferences, and are actively seeking additional funding. An executive summary is available.*

Contact MartyKalin, CEO 202-778-8538, x134 mkalin@almturbine.com

++++++++++++++

OPRA http://www.opra.nl/

The 1.6 MW all radial OPRA OP16 is a new engine evolved from operational and design experience of an earlier engine developed in Norway more than thirty years ago by a team led by Jan Mowill, the CEO of OPRA.

The old Kongsberg engine demonstrated high reliability and endurance in applications ranging from backup power for hospitals and banks to auxiliary power supply for merchant ships, off shore platforms and combined heat and power (CHP) applications for process industries. More than a thousand generating packages were delivered worldwide and some eleven million operating hours amassed.

Key features of the new engine include single stage highly efficient rotor components, and a unique burner design using a lower temperature lean burning flame.

Most of the combustion development on the engine was made with diesel fuel, significant for customers without access to natural gas infrastructure, for marine installations, and for dual fuel applications. Achieving low emissions on liquid fuels is also considered the most difficult by the turbine industry. Recent engine testing on natural gas demonstrated NOx levels as low as 5 ppm. Emission levels with diesel fuel #2 of 20 ppm NOx, 5 ppm UHC and 2 ppm CO is now well established. Even the typical "diesel smell" has disappeared from the exhaust of the OP16 engine.

Simple cycle shaft efficiency is 26%. A recuperated OP16R is under design and will yield an efficiency of 38%. Utilization of the exhaust heat will provide hot water and/or air conditioning, boosting the overall fuel utilization efficiency to nearly 90%.

The company, now in the Netherlands, is expanding to the US. There are currently investment opportunities in OPRA.

Contact Jan Mowill, rjm@opra.nl
tel +31 (011) 74 245 2125 fax +31 (011)74 245 2139

++++++++++++++

Wilson TurboPower

Wilson TurboPower’s first product, a rotary regenerator, is based on MIT-patented technology (US Pat RE37,134). It raises the efficiency of microturbines from 30% to 35%.

Turbines typically use recuperators, or "air-to-air" heat exchangers, that recover heat from the exhaust to preheat incoming air. Because of the extremes of temperature and temperature cycling which are a challenge to materials, recuperators are high in cost if they are to be reliable. Effectiveness (efficiency) is typically 88-91%. (Heat must travel through the barrier separating the hot and cold sides.)

Another approach is a "regenerator", where a material is heated directly, and then the same material surface is exposed to the cold side. Effectiveness can reach 95-97%. A typical system (e.g. an air heater) has a ceramic honeycomb of porous disk which rotates slowly between openings to the hot and cold sides. In a high performance application, sealing against leakage is a problem that hasn’t been solved before. Wilson’s innovation consists of "stepping" the disk’s rotation. Seals are released momentarily when the disk moves, and clamped again when it stops.

Microturbine companies that represent Wilson’s customer base include GE, Ingersoll-Rand, Pratt & Whitney, Turbec (a Volvo/ABB joint venture), Elliott, and Capstone. The regenerator will be prototyped and tested in 2002 and field tested by prospective customers in 2003. Wilson will ship in 2004 and/or license manufacturing rights to one or more of its customers.

Wilson’s next product will be a microturbine (MIT patent applied for) that will be the first distributed power generation product with efficiencies at about 50% and costs at about $500/KW. This performance is possible with the regenerator, which in turn permits a lower pressure ratio and lower rpm, so cheaper ceramics can be used compared with "high-performance" turbines. The ceramic regenerator also operates at higher temperatures than turbines using stainless steel recuperators.

The company believes it can reach profitability in 2 years with a total investment of under $3 million, which they are now raising.

Contact Bruce Anderson, 617-290-9913, brucenanderson@alum.mit.edu

++++++++++++++

Candent Technologies

"Turbine in a turbine" –The engines being developed by Candent Technologies do not require a recuperator, but will use instead a high pressure ratio (> 16 atm), simple cycle turbine to achieve the desired performance.

The engine has two spools, low pressure and high pressure; one sits "inside" the other one.
— LP Spool: centrifugal compressor (single stage) and axial turbine (2-stage), with the shaft directly coupled to an alternator
— HP Spool: centrifugal compressor (single stage), combustor (Catalytic), and turbine (radial inflow)

The LP compressor supplies pressurized inlet air to the HP spool, whose output is directed back to the LP turbine and then exhausted. The HP spool thus acts as a kind of supercharged combustor for the LP spool.

Based on detailed design modeling, this simple cycle system is expected to have lower production costs than an equivalent recuperated system, as well as lower operating cost and higher reliability (lowest reliability component is typically the recuperator itself). The cost of the additional spool will be less than the cost of the recuperator (in a 750 kW system, $25K for the additional turbomachinery versus $75K for a recuperator). Operating life will increase to around 30,000 operating hours, versus less than 10,000 hours.

The engine configuration, while unique, does not push performance, cost, or design envelopes. The company’s plan relies on simplicity and proven technology imported from the aero engines, which routinely run at pressure ratios much higher than current power generation turbines. The operating temperatures have been kept low in order to prolong component life and allow utilization of common and less expensive materials, while the choice of higher pressure maintains quite competitive thermal efficiencies for the system. They expect their "alpha" will essentially be the "beta", since the modules and subsystems used are substantially similar to thousands already in service in many engines.

The team has deep experience in all aspects of the turbine industry, and has designed dozens of aircraft and land-based turbines using proven design codes and components.

The company needs partners and capital.
Contact: Hernando Munevar, 317-442-0624, hmunevar@comcast.net
Mark Bobbi, 203-758-7702, WaldoBobbi@aol.com

+++++++++++++

Rolls Royce

Rolls is developing a 1 MW hybrid SOFC-Turbine system. The company is now satisfied that its IP-SOFC possesses the necessary performance characteristics for commercialisation, and is starting to bring the technology out of the lab. Rolls is beginning to develop a low cost production process, and has designed a hybrid 1MW power plant, which combines an 800kW SOFC with a 200kW turbine, which will be developed very specifically for this application. Rolls expects to have prototype systems in place in 2004-5, and to begin selling units in 2005-6. Initially, it plans to target US power generation markets, and with this in mind it is not at present developing a CHP system. Rolls-Royce says that its stack cost target of US$300 per kW is already achievable. It is aiming for a maximum system efficiency of 65%.
[source: Fuel Cell Today, http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/

A detailed presentation on the program (found it with google)
http://www.h2net.org.uk/PDFs/EndUse/H2net%20RAL%20Sep01.pdf

Colin Berns, 011-44-1332-248382, colin.berns@rolls-royce.com

IEEE 1547 Interconnection Working Group

/0 Comments/in , /by

IEEE SCC21 Working Group
(P1547 Draft Standard For Interconnection)
31 Jan -1 Feb 2002, Arlington, VA.

Held in conjunction with the DOE Distributed Power Program Review [covered in a separate UFTO Note]

Officially established by IEEE Standards and integrated into SCC21, the P1547 project was launched 4/99, and the Working Group (WG) has been on a fast track ever since to get a standard written and accepted by stakeholders in a wide-open consensus process. Relentlessly, meetings have been held 4-6 times a year, around the country.

Complete documentation of 1547 activities can be found at:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc21/1547/archives/

An excellent overview and current status as of last Oct can be found in a paper by Dick DeBlasio in the proceedings of the IEEE T&D Expo 2001 (Atlanta). [I have the pdf.]

In the last year, Draft #7 was voted on in March, and #8 by a ‘recirculation’ ballot in October. The voting showed interesting patterns; in particular utilities were divided right down the middle. Other constituencies are clearly in favor. There were two huge flurries of email among WG members debating various points, one just before the Oct ballot, and again just before this meeting. The goal now is to complete Draft #9 and to have a successful ballot on it.

Chairman Dick DeBlasio’s introductory remarks* and charge to the group outlined a key source of the problem–a long list of issues which are most likely not appropriate to deal with in a Technical Standard are nonetheless being brought up repeatedly. People with reservations about impacts on the grid, penetration levels, contractual issues, etc etc. continue, sincerely or otherwise, to raise and debate these issues in the WG. There was also a red herring over a minimum vs. maximum standard — opponents claimed that once enacted 1547 could only be made less restrictive and not more — the truth is that IEEE standards invariably undergo revision time and again, before the ink is dry. A cynic might wonder how much of this concern is sincere, how much is due to misinformation, and how much is simply raw tactics to block DG.

Another complicating factor for the 1547 effort–it is the very first case under IEEE’s newly introduced “open balloting”. This means that any IEEE member can jump in fresh to the process and cast a vote without having been involved in previous discussions. Standards committees have long endured repeat dialogues covering ground that’s been dealt with before, but ballots with anyone able to vote is much more problemmatic.

* This agenda document has the remarks which explain the approach:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc21/1547/archives/agendas/Agenda20020131Ext.pdf
* Also see the middle section of Dick’s presentation to the DPP meeting:
http://www.eren.doe.gov/distributedpower/ReviewAnnual01Pres/0102_deblasio.pdf

New Working Groups

IEEE Standard making recognizes the difference between “shall” and “should” and “may”, and produces three types of documents: Standards, Recommended Practices, and Guides, which reflect these different levels of influence. As many of the issues being piled on to 1547 are more appropriately dealt with the second or third type rather than the first, two new working groups have been established and a third has been proposed. The idea is to strip out of 1547 anything that belongs in a different document, e.g. procedures, applications guidance, safety, etc. (In sheer size, 1547 drafts began at over 500 pages; it’s been shrinking but it’s still far above a length appropriate to a IEEE Technical Standard.)

– IEEE SCC21 P1589 — Draft Standard for Conformance Tests Procedures For Equipment Interconnecting Distributed Resources With Electric Power Systems
– IEEE SCC21 P1608 — Draft Application Guide For “IEEE Draft Standard 1547 Interconnecting Distributed Resources With Electric Power Systems”
– Potential new SCC21 PAR for DR communication/control

(P1589 is also a Standard, but it separates issues of testing from the Standard itself. The numbering may be changed to 1547.1, 1547.2 and 1547.3, to reinforce the association among them.)

After DeBlasio’s opening remarks, the opening session of the WG meeting continued with presentations on the new initiatives. Each of these new working groups are recruiting members at the present time.

P1589 (1547.2) Standard on conformance testing will specify the types of tests to be done to demonstrate compliance with 1547.1, in particular at the factory producing equipment and at commissioning. (It would not deal with post-installation testing, which is a matter between business parties involved in a particular setting.) Contact Jim Daley, 973-966-2474, jdaley@asco.com

P1608 (1547.3) Guide is to facilitate use of 1547, by providing characterizations of DG technologies. The development of this document will draw on dozens of existing resources, including 1547 resource materials, the 1001 IEEE standard for storage technology done in the 80’s (and withdrawn in ’98), various state procedures, utility handbooks, and other materials from EEI and EPRI. Contact Dick Friedman, 703-356-1300, nrf@rdcnet.com

New Comm/Control (1547.3) Guide will cover equipment and systems for both remote on onsite monitoring and control of DG, supporting a wide variety of transactions among any DG stakeholders. It will include CHP and coordination with building or enterprise energy management systems. Contact Frank Goodman, 650-855-2872, fgoodman@epri.com

Back to Draft-Writing

The rest of the first session saw the start of a difficult process of reviewing Draft #8, section by section, going over suggested changes, and deciding which materials could be moved into one or the other of the new documents. It recalled the old saying about laws and sausages, with the added fun of wordsmithing by (very large) committee.

Over the next day and 1/2, significant progress was made, with lots of material removed from the Technical and Test sections and the appendices, for inclusion in 1589 and 1608. A “strawman” for Draft #9 is set for the writing committee to tackle in the next two months. (It was also announced that there will be some adds and drops to the writing committee roster.) A full WG meeting in June will, it is hoped be followed soon with the ballot.
—-
Contact: Dick DeBlasio, 303-384-6452, dick_deblasio@nrel.gov
Tom Basso, 303-384-6765, thomas_basso@nrel.gov

(For background about the start of this effort, see:
UFTO Note – IEEE Stds for DR Interconnection, 09 Jul 1999)