Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

On 02/22/2010 09:17 AM, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.


Gall dern right. I can't wait for my Bloombox. Should run on propane
just fine.

--
LSFT

wrote:

The home size unit was anticipated to sell for $3000.

You need to listen a little more critically - a home sized unit _needs_ to sell
for $3K to be economical. The current units sell for $750K who want to brag
about how green they are and are only being installed because state and local
tax credits cover half the cost. That's not free money - that's taxes being paid
by Joe and Josepine Homeowner.

Right now they are being hand built, one a day. There are serious doubts that
Bloom will ever get them into mass production at anything close to the target
cost.

On Feb 22, 9:28*am, Robert Neville wrote:
wrote:
The home size unit was anticipated to sell for $3000.

You need to listen a little more critically - a home sized unit _needs_ to sell
for $3K to be economical.

No, YOU need to listen. The founder clearly stated that the home size
unit would cost around $3000. That was the small unit.

The current units sell for $750K

Right and they are the LARGE test units which put out a lot more power
than a home size unit and are being used by the likes of UPS. Do you
think the AC unit a homeowner would use costs the same as the one for
the FedEx building?




who want to brag
about how green they are

I didn't here any bragging about being green. In particular, there
was no mention of how much greenhouse gasses they do or do not emit.


and are only being installed because state and local
tax credits cover half the cost. That's not free money - that's taxes being paid
by Joe and Josepine Homeowner.

No **** Sherlock. No one ever said it was free money. And to be
economically viable long term, they do have to be able to stand on
their own.




Right now they are being hand built, one a day. There are serious doubts that
Bloom will ever get them into mass production at anything close to the target
cost.

There are always going to be doubts. If that was the standard by
which we dismiss things, we's have no automobiles or airplanes. The
fact that Perkins-Elmer, a venture capital firm that knows technology
and after doing due diligence, is willing to put $100mil into it, says
they believe it will have commercial viability. That doesn't mean it
will work. But it also means this isn't some small mysterious
company making outrageous claims that no one with experience and
credibility has checked out before giving them $100mil.

Robert Neville wrote the following:
wrote:


You need to listen a little more critically - a home sized unit _needs_ to sell
for $3K to be economical. The current units sell for $750K who want to brag
about how green they are and are only being installed because state and local
tax credits cover half the cost. That's not free money - that's taxes being paid
by Joe and Josepine Homeowner.


I'm not Joe or Josephine homeowner, but I do pay taxes that go for
things that do not benefit me..
I pay school taxes and do not have any kids in school.
I pay a surcharge on my auto registration for the MTA (NY Metropolitan
Transit Authority), although I do not use the MTA.
Part of my taxes go for welfare, although I have never been on welfare.
There are many other things that I pay taxes for that do not benefit me.

Right now they are being hand built, one a day. There are serious doubts that
Bloom will ever get them into mass production at anything close to the target
cost.


Do not underestimate US technology and manufacturing.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

willshak wrote:
Robert Neville wrote the following:
wrote:


You need to listen a little more critically - a home sized unit
_needs_ to sell for $3K to be economical. The current units sell
for $750K who want to brag about how green they are and are only
being installed because state and local tax credits cover half the
cost. That's not free money - that's taxes being paid by Joe and
Josepine Homeowner.

I'm not Joe or Josephine homeowner, but I do pay taxes that go for
things that do not benefit me.
I pay school taxes and do not have any kids in school.

But you probably went to public schools. Or, your neighbors kids do. And they
become productive members of society, which benefits you. Uneducated people are
far more likely to become a burden on society.

I pay a surcharge on my auto registration for the MTA (NY Metropolitan
Transit Authority), although I do not use the MTA.

If you drive, traffic is a lot less because of the MTA.

Part of my taxes go for welfare, although I have never been on
welfare. There are many other things that I pay taxes for that do not
benefit me.

Or they benefit you indirectly. Just making society as a whole work better
benefits everyone. Not every tax has to benefit everyone to be worth its cost.

I note you were not complaining, so I suspect you personaly recognize this.

On Feb 22, 8:17*am, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? * They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. * They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. * It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. * The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. * As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. * Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. *Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. * The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. * If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. * The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

I would take one, 20 big companies in CA are testing them, a few are
Walmart, Fedex Google,Ebay . John Donahoe Ceo of Ebay said they have
saved 100,000.00 in electric costs in the 9 months 5 boxes have been
running. But how long do they last. They are being tested now and
working well, but you need 20-30 years of reliable running to make the
investment worth while. So they will be sold more and more, but
longevity wont be known for a long long time.If priced right with
something like a 3 yr payback it would be worth it. We have plenty of
Ng to power them and its cheaper then the "commercial" electric rate
Ebay pays.

ransley wrote:
....

I would take one, 20 big companies in CA are testing them, a few are
Walmart, Fedex Google,Ebay . John Donahoe Ceo of Ebay said they have
saved 100,000.00 in electric costs in the 9 months 5 boxes have been
running. But how long do they last. They are being tested now and
working well, but you need 20-30 years of reliable running to make the
investment worth while.

Those two don't seem to compute -- who paid the upfront cost for these
test units and is that incorporated in the $100k number? I'd think it's
more like simply the difference in what they paid in fuel costs over the
time period, not total cost???

....
longevity wont be known for a long long time.If priced right with
something like a 3 yr payback it would be worth it. We have plenty of
Ng to power them and its cheaper then the "commercial" electric rate
Ebay pays.

Stationary power generation imo is about the biggest waste of
(increasingly limited) NG reserves as can be imagined. It's far more
valuable in the big picture as a chemical feedstock, space heating and
similar uses where there aren't other as viable alternatives.

--

wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

It's a good thing they kept it secret until they had actual deployments
of running systems. Otherwise they would have been put down by skeptics
and naysayers and no investments would have been made and nothing
developed. That is why there is very little innovation any more;
skeptics galore.

LSMFT wrote in :

wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

That 6" cube doesn't include the power converters to change DC to AC,nor
any regulators and safety devices that may be needed.
and what happens if the fuel cell has a problem? Or your inverter dies?
YOU will be the one paying for repairs.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

It's a good thing they kept it secret until they had actual deployments
of running systems. Otherwise they would have been put down by skeptics
and naysayers and no investments would have been made and nothing
developed. That is why there is very little innovation any more;
skeptics galore.


There are skeptics because there are plenty of scammers out there.

Also those who don't disclose the ENTIRE system,what other gear is
necessary,what other expenses an operator can expect to have.
the FULL costs,the bottom line.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Jim Yanik wrote:
wrote in :

wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

That 6" cube doesn't include the power converters to change DC to AC,nor
any regulators and safety devices that may be needed.
and what happens if the fuel cell has a problem? Or your inverter dies?
YOU will be the one paying for repairs.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

It's a good thing they kept it secret until they had actual deployments
of running systems. Otherwise they would have been put down by skeptics
and naysayers and no investments would have been made and nothing
developed. That is why there is very little innovation any more;
skeptics galore.


There are skeptics because there are plenty of scammers out there.

Also those who don't disclose the ENTIRE system,what other gear is
necessary,what other expenses an operator can expect to have.
the FULL costs,the bottom line.


They either work for the oil companies or are damn stupid.

LSMFT wrote in :

Jim Yanik wrote:
wrote in :

wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

That 6" cube doesn't include the power converters to change DC to AC,nor
any regulators and safety devices that may be needed.
and what happens if the fuel cell has a problem? Or your inverter dies?
YOU will be the one paying for repairs.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

Oh,if a fuel cell uses hydrocarbon fuels(like propane or CNG),it's going to
emit carbon,probably in the form of CO2 or CO.


They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

It's a good thing they kept it secret until they had actual deployments
of running systems. Otherwise they would have been put down by skeptics
and naysayers and no investments would have been made and nothing
developed. That is why there is very little innovation any more;
skeptics galore.


There are skeptics because there are plenty of scammers out there.

Also those who don't disclose the ENTIRE system,what other gear is
necessary,what other expenses an operator can expect to have.
the FULL costs,the bottom line.


They either work for the oil companies or are damn stupid.

the stupid ones are those who blindly believe in anything that's on TV.
(especially the deceptive 60 Minutes)

Those who refuse to consider the FULL situation.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

On Feb 23, 8:38*am, Jim Yanik wrote:
LSMFT wrote :





Jim Yanik wrote:
*wrote :

wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? * They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. * They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. * It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. * The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

That 6" cube doesn't include the power converters to change DC to AC,nor
any regulators and safety devices that may be needed.
and what happens if the fuel cell has a problem? Or your inverter dies?
YOU will be the one paying for repairs.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. * As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. * Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. *Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. * The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

Oh,if a fuel cell uses hydrocarbon fuels(like propane or CNG),it's going to
emit carbon,probably in the form of CO2 or CO.







They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. * If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. * The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

It's a good thing they kept it secret until they had actual deployments
of running systems. Otherwise they would have been put down by skeptics
and naysayers and no investments would have been made and nothing
developed. That is why there is very little innovation any more;
skeptics galore.

There are skeptics because there are plenty of scammers out there.

Also those who don't disclose the ENTIRE system,what other gear is
necessary,what other expenses an operator can expect to have.
the FULL costs,the bottom line.

They either work for the oil companies or are damn stupid.

the stupid ones are those who blindly believe in anything that's on TV.
(especially the deceptive 60 Minutes)

Those who refuse to consider the FULL situation.

--
Jim Yanik


Geez, I don't see anyone here blindly believing anything or failing to
consider the FULL situation. I do see you being extremely negative
and trying to dismiss a strawman that you created.

On Feb 22, 3:32*pm, Jim Yanik wrote:
LSMFT wrote :

wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? * They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. * They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. * It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. * The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

That 6" cube doesn't include the power converters to change DC to AC,nor
any regulators and safety devices that may be needed.
and what happens if the fuel cell has a problem? Or your inverter dies?
YOU will be the one paying for repairs.


Who pays for the repairs when your car has a problem? Or when your
AC or furnace goes out?











The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. * As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. * Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. *Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. * The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. * If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. * The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

It's a good thing they kept it secret until they had actual deployments
of running systems. Otherwise they would have been put down by skeptics
and naysayers and no investments would have been made and nothing
developed. That is why there is very little innovation any more;
skeptics galore.

There are skeptics because there are plenty of scammers out there.

Sure there are scammers, but I hardly thing Bloom falls into that
category. Don't you think Kleiner Perkins did lots of due
diligence before they gave this guy $100mil and knew that it would
ultimately take $400mil to get to production? This venture capital
firm has been around silicon valley for 4 decades and has funded some
of the most successful startups in history. Sun Microsystems, Compaq,
Google, Amazon, Genentech..... They certainly have access to the
best and brightest minds that would know fuel cell and any other
technology involved.




Also those who don't disclose the ENTIRE system,what other gear is
necessary,what other expenses an operator can expect to have.
the FULL costs,the bottom line.


It's still a start-up company that is doing hand built prototype
testing. It's not at all unusual for a new company to not disclose
everything until they are at a point where they feel it's
appropriate.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On 2/22/2010 12:48 PM, LSMFT wrote:
wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

It's a good thing they kept it secret until they had actual deployments
of running systems. Otherwise they would have been put down by skeptics
and naysayers and no investments would have been made and nothing
developed. That is why there is very little innovation any more;
skeptics galore.

Hardly, if they actually had practical systems that could be purchased
turnkey for $3,000 what difference would skeptics make? Everything I
read about this so far is nothing but marketing speak.

On Feb 22, 8:17*am, wrote:

snip

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm

snip

People at Perkin-Elmer back East will be surprised to learn that they
are venture capitalists, since they have only been making scientific
instruments for many decades.
On the other hand, Kleiner, Caulfield, Perkins and Byers in the West
may be miffed for not getting credit for their savvy investments in
risky high tech ventures.
Just for the record...

Joe

On 2/22/2010 9:17 AM, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.


Maybe, but I've heard the only reliable fuel cells run on hydrogen and
major company working on figured at least 10 years before they had a
commercial product that was cheap and reliable. The cells would be
small and portable and could power your house or car. There has been
considerable R&D on these and I'd have a wait and see on these guys.

Frank wrote:
On 2/22/2010 9:17 AM, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.


Maybe, but I've heard the only reliable fuel cells run on hydrogen and
major company working on figured at least 10 years before they had a
commercial product that was cheap and reliable. The cells would be small
and portable and could power your house or car. There has been
considerable R&D on these and I'd have a wait and see on these guys.

They are a DIFFERENT kind of fuel cell, not the kind you know. I guess
everybody missed that.

LSMFT wrote:
....

They are a DIFFERENT kind of fuel cell, not the kind you know. I guess
everybody missed that.

Which, of course, is part of the problem -- they've let precious little
actual information other than hype and generalities out.

Here's the most detail I've ever seen and it's of very little actual use
in understanding what's going on for either a material or energy balance.

One thing I've found most interesting is that having spent a
considerable fraction of career in R&D targetted to the generation
utilities via EPRI this outfit while based quite close to EPRI
headquarters has been resolutely adamant about approaching them for
either funding or for demonstration/pilot studies. Perhaps w/ the
principal's primary previous sugar daddy having been NASA he's simply
unfamiliar w/ the commercial power folks but that would seem hard to do
in Sunnyvale while EPRI's in Palo Alto unless is purposeful...

--

dpb wrote:
LSMFT wrote:
...

They are a DIFFERENT kind of fuel cell, not the kind you know. I guess
everybody missed that.

Which, of course, is part of the problem -- they've let precious little
actual information other than hype and generalities out.

Here's the most detail I've ever seen and it's of very little actual use
in understanding what's going on for either a material or energy balance.

....
Sorry, forgot the link...this predates the 60 Minutes piece; may be from
whence they got the idea for the segment, who knows...

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/dec2009/gb2009127_746740_page_2.htm

--

dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:
LSMFT wrote:
...

They are a DIFFERENT kind of fuel cell, not the kind you know. I
guess everybody missed that.

Which, of course, is part of the problem -- they've let precious
little actual information other than hype and generalities out.

Here's the most detail I've ever seen and it's of very little actual
use in understanding what's going on for either a material or energy
balance.
...
Sorry, forgot the link...this predates the 60 Minutes piece; may be
from whence they got the idea for the segment, who knows...

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/dec2009/gb2009127_746740_page_2.htm

That says that it doesn't release carbon, which is obviously erronious if it is
using carbon based fuels.

If these things are 50% efficient, the excess heat could be used to heat houses
at the same time they power them.

LSMFT wrote in :

Frank wrote:

Maybe, but I've heard the only reliable fuel cells run on hydrogen and
major company working on figured at least 10 years before they had a
commercial product that was cheap and reliable. The cells would be small
and portable and could power your house or car. There has been
considerable R&D on these and I'd have a wait and see on these guys.

They are a DIFFERENT kind of fuel cell, not the kind you know. I guess
everybody missed that.


what happens to the CARBON in the hydrocarbon fuels? where does it end up?

do you even know?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:56:22 -0500, Frank
wrote:

On 2/22/2010 9:17 AM, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.


Maybe, but I've heard the only reliable fuel cells run on hydrogen and
major company working on figured at least 10 years before they had a
commercial product that was cheap and reliable. The cells would be
small and portable and could power your house or car. There has been
considerable R&D on these and I'd have a wait and see on these guys.

Several public schools in my state CURRENTLY have operating hydrogen
fuel cells making a large portion of their power.

wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:56:22 -0500, Frank
wrote:

On 2/22/2010 9:17 AM, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

Maybe, but I've heard the only reliable fuel cells run on hydrogen and
major company working on figured at least 10 years before they had a
commercial product that was cheap and reliable. The cells would be
small and portable and could power your house or car. There has been
considerable R&D on these and I'd have a wait and see on these guys.

Several public schools in my state CURRENTLY have operating hydrogen
fuel cells making a large portion of their power.


Where do they get the hydrogen?

--
bud--

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:42:56 -0600, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:56:22 -0500, Frank
wrote:

On 2/22/2010 9:17 AM, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

Maybe, but I've heard the only reliable fuel cells run on hydrogen and
major company working on figured at least 10 years before they had a
commercial product that was cheap and reliable. The cells would be
small and portable and could power your house or car. There has been
considerable R&D on these and I'd have a wait and see on these guys.

Several public schools in my state CURRENTLY have operating hydrogen
fuel cells making a large portion of their power.


Where do they get the hydrogen?

It's exacted out of hundred dollar bills.

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:13:24 -0500, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:54:37 -0600, AZ Nomad
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:42:56 -0600, bud-- wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:56:22 -0500, Frank
wrote:

On 2/22/2010 9:17 AM, wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

Maybe, but I've heard the only reliable fuel cells run on hydrogen and
major company working on figured at least 10 years before they had a
commercial product that was cheap and reliable. The cells would be
small and portable and could power your house or car. There has been
considerable R&D on these and I'd have a wait and see on these guys.

Several public schools in my state CURRENTLY have operating hydrogen
fuel cells making a large portion of their power.


Where do they get the hydrogen?

It's exacted out of hundred dollar bills.


http://tinyurl.com/y9snrzb

do you have a point to make, other than showing a stupid animation of
somebody doing a google search for "fuel cells" "connecticut"?

wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

Here's a link to some folks who have been working on fuel cells for
some time. The second link is to the folks who supplied fuel cells
to NASA for spacecraft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor..._manufacturers

http://www.utcpower.com/

TDD

On Feb 22, 6:31*am, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:17:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? * They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. * They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. * It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. * The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. * As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. * Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. *Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. * The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. * If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. * The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

He's got a substantial resume that seems to indicate he's probably not
a nut. He may be a bit overly excited about the prospects, but that's
part of convincing others to invest.

I didn't listen super carefully, I was fixing a doorknob. Plus I got
a bit too excited 20 years ago with the "cold fusion" thing.
There are more than a few companies (Seimens, GE, and smaller ones
too) working on fuel cells.

My limited experience with fuel cells (the ME dept down the hall was
testing a number of them) is that they are (were 5 years ago) about
10x more expensive per kwatt than a "not particularly" cheap micro
turbine combustor / genset.

I'd agree with sa's assessment.

Did anyone catch a conversion efficiency number? ie Percent
electrical energy compared to nat gas input energy?

cheers
Bob

DD_BobK wrote:

On Feb 22, 6:31 am, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:17:42 -0800 (PST),
wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last
night on Bloom
Energy? They are a CA based start-up company that is
supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple
and cost
effective. They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each
side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. It runs
off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. The goal of
the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate
the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer,
the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil
to get it into
full development. As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Like at today's rates, what does the nat
gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of
energy. Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. The founder came
off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every
house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think
there is
much info there. If you want to see the actual 60 mins
video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size
units being test
run by companies like FedEx. The home size unit was
anticipated to
sell for $3000.

He's got a substantial resume that seems to indicate he's
probably not
a nut. He may be a bit overly excited about the prospects,
but that's
part of convincing others to invest.

I didn't listen super carefully, I was fixing a doorknob.
Plus I got
a bit too excited 20 years ago with the "cold fusion"
thing.
There are more than a few companies (Seimens, GE, and
smaller ones
too) working on fuel cells.

My limited experience with fuel cells (the ME dept down the
hall was
testing a number of them) is that they are (were 5 years
ago) about
10x more expensive per kwatt than a "not particularly"
cheap micro
turbine combustor / genset.

I'd agree with sa's assessment.

Did anyone catch a conversion efficiency number? ie
Percent
electrical energy compared to nat gas input energy?

cheers
Bob
Yes they did, about 50% of conventional use. Half of what a
propane generator would take.
--
LSMFT

first,who believes anything 60 Minutes has to say?
They have no credibility;remember the Bush memos and Dan Rather.

2nd,remember that the fuel cells need power inverters
(more conversion losses) to turn the DC into AC.
They have the potential to fail,and then you need a new high power
inverter. It won't be a simple repair of the existing inverter.
(and what happens after a lightning strike? how much of YOUR plant goes
'poof'?)

Repairs will be at YOUR expense.

and you still have a distribution network;it's either gas pipeline or
delivery trucks.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

On Feb 22, 10:30*am, Jim Yanik wrote:
first,who believes anything 60 Minutes has to say?
They have no credibility;remember the Bush memos and Dan Rather.

2nd,remember that the fuel cells need power inverters
(more conversion losses) to turn the DC into AC.
They have the potential to fail,and then you need a new high power
inverter. It won't be a simple repair of the existing inverter.
(and what happens after a lightning strike? how much of YOUR plant goes
'poof'?)

Repairs will be at YOUR expense.

and you still have a distribution network;it's either gas pipeline or
delivery trucks.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

You think you know so much, you should call Google, Ebay, Walmart,
Fedex, and tell them they are idiots.

On Feb 22, 12:17*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 08:37:08 -0800 (PST), ransley

wrote:
You think you know so much, you should call Google, Ebay, Walmart,
Fedex, and tell them they are idiots.

These companies often do things like this for the tax write *off and
the PR value, even when it doesn't make financial sense in
conventional terms

BTW solar may actually be making sense now days but only because of
the taxpayer subsidizing the installation. I am currently looking at a
grid tie PV array for about $1.25 a watt installed. That gets my
payback in the 4-5 year time frame, something that is attractive.
Of course the plan is really unsustainable in any large scale or even
particularly fair, though because the burden gets thrown back on the
taxpayer, even if they chose not to participate.
I traded in a clunker too, thanks suckers!

4-5 year is great, what system, what tax credits. Germany has a major
solar program most everyone particpates in, but not here in the US

On Feb 22, 11:30*am, Jim Yanik wrote:
first,who believes anything 60 Minutes has to say?
They have no credibility;remember the Bush memos and Dan Rather.

2nd,remember that the fuel cells need power inverters
(more conversion losses) to turn the DC into AC.

Sure there are conversion losses in an inverter. But there are also
losses in getting power from a plant in Ohio to my home here in NJ.




They have the potential to fail,and then you need a new high power
inverter. It won't be a simple repair of the existing inverter.
(and what happens after a lightning strike? how much of YOUR plant goes
'poof'?)

Repairs will be at YOUR expense.


The same things could be said for the AC units, high efficiency
furnaces or LCD TV's that are widespread today. Does that mean they
are all not viable too?





and you still have a distribution network;it's either gas pipeline or
delivery trucks.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Jim Yanik wrote:
first,who believes anything 60 Minutes has to say?
They have no credibility;remember the Bush memos and Dan Rather.

2nd,remember that the fuel cells need power inverters
(more conversion losses) to turn the DC into AC.
They have the potential to fail,and then you need a new high power
inverter. It won't be a simple repair of the existing inverter.
(and what happens after a lightning strike? how much of YOUR plant goes
'poof'?)

Repairs will be at YOUR expense.

and you still have a distribution network;it's either gas pipeline or
delivery trucks.

Many large companies are already using them. Google, ebay, etc.

LSMFT wrote in :

Jim Yanik wrote:
first,who believes anything 60 Minutes has to say?
They have no credibility;remember the Bush memos and Dan Rather.

2nd,remember that the fuel cells need power inverters
(more conversion losses) to turn the DC into AC.
They have the potential to fail,and then you need a new high power
inverter. It won't be a simple repair of the existing inverter.
(and what happens after a lightning strike? how much of YOUR plant goes
'poof'?)

Repairs will be at YOUR expense.

and you still have a distribution network;it's either gas pipeline or
delivery trucks.

Many large companies are already using them. Google, ebay, etc.



Is anything I said incorrect?

LARGE companies can afford them,and have gas supplies at hand.
Knowing Google,I would not be surprised to find they are paying more to run
them than for utility power.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
4...

first,who believes anything 60 Minutes has to say?
They have no credibility;remember the Bush memos and Dan Rather.

60 Minutes has given itself some black eyes over the years, their spear-job
on Audi being another example (they rigged a car to malfunction when they
couldn't get it to malfunction on its own). I sometimes see stories on 60M
that disappoint me, like the creampuff interview with the head of Blackwater
(the guy never broke a sweat) or Lesley Stahl asking Anton Scalia such
poorly-researched questions that he visibly lost interest in the interview
from then on.

However it's a bit silly to claim they have *no* credibility, they've done
their share of good journalism as well. It isn't a perfect science,
everybody gets it wrong now and then, and at least Rather, his producer and
a couple of others lost their jobs over their antics.

The trick is to take in info from a wide variety of sources and be critical
enough to sift the wheat from the chaff. Nobody should take what 60M says
on faith, but then nobody should do that with Fox or CNN or the Chicago Trib
or the LA Times either--they've all made their share of journalistic
blunders over the years..

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:47:28 -0800 (PST), DD_BobK wrote:
On Feb 22, 6:31Â*am, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:17:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? Â* They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. Â* They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. Â* It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. Â* The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. Â* As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. Â* Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. Â*Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. Â* The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. Â* If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. Â* The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

He's got a substantial resume that seems to indicate he's probably not
a nut. He may be a bit overly excited about the prospects, but that's
part of convincing others to invest.

I didn't listen super carefully, I was fixing a doorknob. Plus I got
a bit too excited 20 years ago with the "cold fusion" thing.
There are more than a few companies (Seimens, GE, and smaller ones
too) working on fuel cells.

My limited experience with fuel cells (the ME dept down the hall was
testing a number of them) is that they are (were 5 years ago) about
10x more expensive per kwatt than a "not particularly" cheap micro
turbine combustor / genset.

I'd agree with sa's assessment.

Did anyone catch a conversion efficiency number? ie Percent
electrical energy compared to nat gas input energy?

I was amused at the comparison to NASA. There are some major differences:
1) bloom uses cheap materials 2) bloom doesn't use aerospace quality fuel.

How long before the unit cruds up to the point where it will no longer operate?

Until somebody provides this data, bloom can be safely ignored.

On Feb 23, 9:03*am, AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:47:28 -0800 (PST), DD_BobK wrote:
On Feb 22, 6:31*am, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:17:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Did anyone else here see the 60 Minutes segment last night on Bloom
Energy? * They are a CA based start-up company that is supposed to
have a revolutionary fuel cell technology that is simple and cost
effective. * They showed a cube that was maybe 6" on each side and
said that it was sufficient to power a house. * It runs off nat gas,
methane, possibly other carbon based fuels. * The goal of the company
is to have one in each house, business, etc and eliminate the
distribution grid.

The company has about $100mil backing from Perkins-Elmer, the well
known venture capital firm and will need around $400mil to get it into
full development. * As usual, their was a lot of missing
information. * Like at today's rates, what does the nat gas cost
compared to an electric bill for the same amount of energy. *Or what
kind of greenhouse gases does it emit. * The founder came off as a nut
at one point when he stated his goal was to have every house using one
of these within 5 to 10 years.

They have a website at Bloomenergy.com, but I don't think there is
much info there. * If you want to see the actual 60 mins video you can
probably find it with google.

On the other hand they showed real refrigerator size units being test
run by companies like FedEx. * The home size unit was anticipated to
sell for $3000.

He's got a substantial resume that seems to indicate he's probably not
a nut. He may be a bit overly excited about the prospects, but that's
part of convincing others to invest.
I didn't listen super carefully, I was fixing a doorknob. *Plus I got
a bit too excited 20 years ago with the "cold fusion" thing.
There are more than a few companies (Seimens, GE, and smaller ones
too) working on fuel cells.
My limited experience with fuel cells (the ME dept down the hall was
testing a number of them) is that they are (were 5 years ago) about
10x more expensive per kwatt than a "not particularly" cheap micro
turbine combustor / genset.
I'd agree with sa's assessment.
Did anyone catch a conversion efficiency number? * *ie Percent
electrical energy compared to nat gas input energy?

I was amused at the comparison to NASA. *There are some major differences:
1) bloom uses cheap materials 2) bloom doesn't use aerospace quality fuel..

How long before the unit cruds up to the point where it will no longer operate?

Until somebody provides this data, bloom can be safely ignored.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Life expectancy cant fully be known yet, just tested and guessed. So
they have to be cheap, which they wont be. It cant be ignored as thats
the way alot of new tech things are.