Wikipedia

Talk:Fuel cell/Archive 4

< Talk:Fuel cell
Latest comment: 2 years ago by GrayStorm in topic Fuel cell
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 18 external links on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Space probes

Latest comment: 9 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

This statement is in the article. "The first commercial use of fuel cells came more than a century later in NASA space programs to generate power for probes, satellites and space capsules."

However, I can't find any sources on the web that state that a space probe used a fuel cell. I don't think any space probe used fuel cells at all; only manned spacecraft like the Shuttle and Biosatellite. Am I completely wrong? Are there actually probes that use fuel cells? anon (talk) 22:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Does this source answer the question?: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19900002488.pdf -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, I did encounter this source. I'm not sure. It seems that all Gemini spacecraft were manned (except for test flights), and low Earth orbit. From the Apollo Lunar Module page, it says: "Power was initially to be produced by fuel cells built by Pratt and Whitney similar to the CSM, but in March 1965 these were discarded in favor of an all-battery design." And the Apollo Command Module was manned.
Looking at the definition on the NASA site of space probe: "A probe is a spacecraft that travels through space to collect science information. Probes do not have astronauts. Probes send data back to Earth for scientists to study." Lcaa9 (talk) 05:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
I removed the word "probes" from the article. Do you suggest any other changes? -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:04, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Nope, that's it. Lcaa9 (talk) 04:24, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Adding solid acid fuel cells

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'd like to suggest adding solid acid fuel cells under "types of fuel cells." The first proof-of-concept was developed in 2000 Haile, Sossina M.; Boysen, Dane A.; Chisholm, Calum R. I.; Merle, Ryan B. (19 April 2001). "Solid acids as fuel cell electrolytes". Nature. 410: 910–913. doi:10.1038/35073536. Retrieved 5 July 2016. and subsequent versions have since demonstrated lifetimes in the thousands of hours.Haile, Sossina M.; Chisholm, Calum R. I.; Sasaki, Kenji; Boysen, Dane A.; Uda, Tetsuya (2007). "Solid acid proton conductors: from laboratory curiosities to fuel cell electrolytes". Faraday Discussions. 134. Royal Society of Chemistry: 17–39. doi:10.1039/B604311A. Retrieved 5 July 2016. Several science magazines have written about the technology.Bullis, Kevin (21 October 2010). "Cheap Diesel-Powered Fuel Cells". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 5 July 2016."Diesel: The Fuel of the Future?". Discovery News. 11 February 2013. Retrieved 5 July 2016.Olsen, Claude R.; Lie, Else (8 October 2010). "Running fuel cells on biodiesel". The Research Council of Norway. Retrieved 5 July 2016. --Ldajose (talk) 22:57, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Has the technology been commercialized and deployed widely yet? -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:33, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:16, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

FCEV section self-contradictory

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The section on Fuel cell electric vehicles says "General Motors and its partners estimated that per mile traveled, a fuel cell electric vehicle running on compressed gaseous hydrogen produced from natural gas could use about 40% less energy and emit 45% less greenhouse gasses than an internal combustion vehicle." Later it quotes Joseph Romm as claiming that FCVs aren't green because of escaping methane during natural gas extraction and when hydrogen is produced.

Wikipedia is not very helpful when it gives apparently contradictory information without explaining the contradiction, since then people can prove whatever they want by cherry-picking from Wikipedia. Is there some sense in which both GM and Romm could be right? Vaughan Pratt (talk) 17:16, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Both can be right. The General Motors quotation relates to comparisons of efficiency and emissions of vehicles. The Joseph Romm quotation relates to the process of producing hydrogen at a plant. This hydrogen could then be used to refuel a FCEV. Note that other methods of producing hydrogen are in use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.19.153 (talk) 13:42, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Citation for startup time of solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article states that the startup time of a solid oxide fuel cell is 10 minutes, but without any citation. The following document published by fuel cell manufacturer Ceres Power states that the startup time is 30 minutes: http://www.cerespower.com/admin/resources/ecs-trans.-2013-leah-461-70-2.pdf Without a citation for the 10 minutes figure I suggest that the article is updated to state 30 minutes. 82.6.19.153 (talk) 13:51, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:07, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Fuel Cells Are Not Necessarily Hydrogen-Based

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Solid oxide and molten carbonate fuel cells operate using negative ion transport, so the initial definition of fuel cell is incorrect, being too narrow: "A fuel cell is a device that converts the chemical energy from a fuel into electricity through a chemical reaction of positively charged hydrogen ions with oxygen or another oxidizing agent." In fact, a fuel cell in general is a device for converting chemical energy in fuel to electricity by ion transport across an electrolytic barrier, with hydrogen ions being easiest to transport and therefore hydrogen-ion fuel cells being the most common and most successful to date. Furthermore, negative-ion-transport fuel cells do not necessarily have an "internal reforming" process, and the primary chemical equations for them are those of carbon oxidization. For example, if coal were being used directly in a molten carbonate fuel cell, hydrogen would not even be present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.208.159.19 (talk) 19:31, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Fuel cell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

O2-

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In the article, there are some reactions using O2-, where in aqueous solutions I would expect OH-. Maybe this is just a short-cut, where everyone knows how it works, though I believe here it would be nice not to take such short cuts. Gah4 (talk) 21:28, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Various bus experiments

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, @Ssilvers:. That seems like a lot of information to delete. If you think it's too much detail for the main fuel cell article, I wonder whether moving it to a separate article on, say, "fuel cell bus experiments" might be appropriate. PRRfan (talk) 19:18, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

What I deleted was ancient information about projects that were discontinued by 2005. There already is a separate article about it, Fuel Cell Bus Club. I added instead, current information from the NREL. I can't imagine why you would delete. Also, I can't understand why you would delete the word "commentators", which gives at least some color to the extremely vague "some". Also, why substitute "said" for the literally correct "stated", since they stated it in writing, rather than verbally. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:30, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
The newer info from NREL is, of course, welcome; "commentators" adds no useful distinction; and "said" is shorter, less stuffy, and no less accurate than "stated", which of course is also used for verbal statements. But to my main point here, if all that info is at Fuel Cell Bus Club, then I have no objection to removing it. PRRfan (talk) 20:05, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Duplication of PEMFC material

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was looking into PEM fuel cells and noticed that there is a large description on PEMFCs both at Proton-exchange membrane fuel cell and here. I'm new to editing Wikipedia but happy to help: how does the community feel this would be best resolved? Richardcw (talk) 19:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

This article should basically contain a section that is a good summary of the other article, and at the top of the section, there should be a cross-reference that would look like this: {{main article|Proton-exchange membrane fuel cell}} Also, if there is anything good in the PEMFC section of this article that is missing from the other article, it should be copied there. For more information, see WP:SUMMARY. Happy editing, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

2020

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Was the Pike prediction correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.11.224.129 (talk) 00:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

WP:REFSPAM

Latest comment: 2 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

@Ssilvers: As I explained in the edit summary, I removed the citation in question (along with the referenced claim) for reasons of WP:REFSPAM and WP:COI. Restoring the citation without restoring the referenced text, as was done here, seems unproductive to me. IpseCustos (talk) 18:25, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

The ref appears to verify the information preceding it about batteries, which is not referenced elsewhere in the article. It is from a reputable scientific journal. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Do you mean this statement?
in a battery the chemical energy usually comes from substances that are commonly already present in the battery
That a battery is self-contained but a fuel cell isn't (necessarily) seems to me to be a matter of definition. I also don't see how that paper helps, to be honest... IpseCustos (talk) 20:57, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia that requires references. If you have a better reference, we can use that, but do not delete references that verify otherwise unreferenced text. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:05, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I didn't. I removed the reference along with the text it verified, and left the statement above, which doesn't seem to be mentioned in the reference. So, I'm puzzled still. IpseCustos (talk) 21:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
You obviously have something against this ref. I have no dog in this race, other than to make sure that the statement has a ref. If you can provide a better ref for the proposition that most batteries make the energy from substances that are contained within the battery, then feel free to substitute it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
I'll try again. The statement doesn't match the ref. The ref doesn't verify the statement. The statement and all of the statements in the ref are unrelated. This is not the ref we are looking for for this statement.
I do have something against this ref (REFSPAM, COI, FRINGE), but that's beside the point.
I'm going to remove the ref, which belongs to a statement that is no longer there. Feel free to replace it with {{cn}}, or a better ref, or remove the entire statement. IpseCustos (talk) 08:46, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Fuel cell

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

What I can conclude from the entire reading from Wikipedia about fuel cell?? 61.5.151.51 (talk) 17:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

This talk page is for discussing improvements to the article, not for the article itself, this is not the place to ask for a summary. See WP:NOTFORUM Graystormmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 19:19, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fuel_cell/Archive_4&oldid=1236014861"