MCFC

Molten Carbonate Fuel Cells

Technology and Market
Overview

1. Introduction
Fuel cell converts chemical energy to electrical energy
A fuel cell is different than a battery in that it does not
store energy, but produces energy from the input materials
such as Hydrogen and Oxygen
First fuel cell was invented in 1839 by Sir William Grove
Not adopted early on due to high cost and technology barriers
NASA used fuel cells to generate power for space missions
which renewed interest in fuel cell research
Fuel cell technology has now advanced to the point where
various types have begun to enter the market place.
Pike Research has estimated that the stationary fuel cell market
will reach 50,000 MW by the year 2020
(Prabhu, Rahul R., Staitonary Fuel Cell Market, Jan. 2013)

Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell History

Both Solid Oxide and Molten Carbonate fuel cell research began
together with a divergence in the technologies during the 1950s
a. Emil Baur, H. Preis experimented with high temperature,
solid oxide electrolytes in the 1930s
b. O.Davtyan conducted further experiments in the 1940s
c. G. Broers, J. Ketelaar continued the solid oxide research, but
solid oxides of the day prevented any short term progress.
To forge ahead, they turned their attention to electrolytes
consisting of molten carbonate salts.
d. By 1960, Broers and Ketelaar had a fuel cell that ran for six
months using and electrolyte that was a mixture of lithium,
sodium and potassium carbonate.
e. Mid 1960s, Texas Instruments made MCFC for the US Army
which ranged in size between 100W and 1kW

1. Overview of Molten Carbonate Technology

Inputs : Hydrogen, Oxygen, and Carbon Dioxide
Outputs : Electrical Power, Water, and Heat
Applications are usually large stationary power plants

 Anode material is based on

porous Nickel.
Original designs used solid
Nickel, but due to high
temperature operation, the Nickel
would degrade (sintering)
Nickel is now stabilized using
chromium or aluminum
Cathode material is NiO
High temperature operation
causes the NiO to dissolve
A limiting factor for Molten
Carbonate fuel cell lifetime

 Electrolyte is a molten mixture of

lithium and potassium or lithium
and sodium carbonates
High temperature operation of
around 600C 700C forms a
highly conductive molten
electrolyte containing salts
formed by the carbonates
A porous ceramic material LiAlO2
called the electrolyte matrix is
used in the electrolyte region
The stability of the LiAlO2 matrix
is another limiting factor for fuel
cell lifetime. ( < 6 years )

Chemical Reactions :
Anode :
H2 + CO32- -> H2O + CO2 + 2e- (oxidation)
Cathode : 1/2O2 + CO2 + 2e- -> CO32(reduction)
Net Reaction : H2 + 1/2O2 + CO2(cathode) -> H2O + CO2 (Anode)
Carbonate Ions transfer from the Cathode to the Anode through
the electrolyte ( ion transfer )
The Cell potential : (Nernst equation)

The cell potential depends upon the

partial pressures of O2 , H2 , and H2O
The CO2 partial pressure may be the
same (electrolyte is invariant) or
different (contributes to cell potential

 Cell voltages typically range from 0.6V to 1.1V

Typical current densities range from 140 to 160 mA/cm^3
Fuels :
Hydrogen is input on the Anode side
Oxygen is input on the Cathode side
Carbon Dioxide is a second input
on the Cathode side, but may be
recycled from the Anode output
CO2 may also be produced by
combusting the anode exhaust gas
which is mixed directly with the
the anode inlet gas
Outputs : Electrical Power, Water,
Heat, Cathode Gas

 Advantages :
a. The high operating temperature improves chemical reaction
kinetics and so there is no need for noble metal catalysts (lower cost)
b. High temperature operation makes the MCFC resistant
to carbon monoxide contamination and as a result, may
use alternate fuels such as natural gas or methane.
c. High efficiency, up to 60% electrical efficiency or when
used as combined heat and power (CHP) up to 80%
d. Clean energy and quiet operation
Disadvantages :
a. High temperature operation limits applications to stationary power
plants (slow startup time)
b. Liquid electrolyte is difficult to work with
c. Short life span due to electrode and electrolyte degradation
d. Inject CO2 at cathode as carbonite ions consumed by anode reaction

2. Types of Applications and Market Status

Primary application is stationary power plants
a. Electrical Utilities
b. Industrial and distributed power generation
c. Military and Government (Post Office)
Large systems : typically 250kW to 3MW
Future application may include ship power plants
a. Navy and civilian shipping
Early stationary power plant installations
a. Miramar Marine Corps Air Station (San Diego, 1997)
operated a 250 kW MCFC prototype power plant
b. Santa Clara, 1997, Energy Research Corp. operated a
2MW demonstration power plant (cosponsored by DOE)

Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell (MCFC) Market Overview

The commercialization of MCFC technology is still in its infancy
US manufacturers : Fuel Cell Energy and GenCell Corp. (CT)
European manufacturers : MTU Friedrichshafen and CFC Solutions
Japanese manufacturer : Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries
Korean manufacturers : KEPCO/ POSCO Power, Doosan HI
Total fuel cell market (all types) exceeded $1 billion in 2012
About half of fuel cell shipments have been stationary fuel cells,
Since MCFC technology applications are large, stationary power
plants, the number of units shipped are low, but the equivalent power
generated is high. For example, when comparing number of units
shipped per year between various fuel cell technologies, MCFC is on
the order of tens of units shipped, but the annual power generation
capacity is around half of the total power capacity shipped for
stationary power plants.

 Number of fuel cell units shipped globally in 2013 was 50,050 units
PEMFC is leading fuel cell technology with 88.6% of total units shipped
and 48.6% of power capacity shipped (mobile and stationary)
Stationary applications account for 57% of total capacity in 2013
MCFC accounts for about half of the stationary market
( Grand View Research, Inc. , 2014 )

(CAGR for MCFC ~ 56%, 2014 2020)

Molton Carbonate Fuel Cell shipments by Power (MegaWatts)

year
MCFC
Total FC Stationary
Ratio

MCFC Yearly Shipments (MegaWatts)

MCFC

2009

18.00

35.40

0.51

2010

7.70

35.00

0.22

200.00

2011

44.50

81.40

0.55

180.00

2012

62.00

124.90

0.50

2013

91.90

186.90

0.49

Total FC Stationary

160.00
140.00
120.00

Percentage of MCFC to Total FC shipped

(Power Capacity)

100.00

0.60

80.00

0.50

60.00

0.40
0.30

40.00

0.20

20.00

0.10
0.00
2009

2009

2010

2010

2011

2011

2012

2012

2013

2013

2014

0.00
2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

3. Cost Targets
MCFC power plant installation cost ~ $ 4,000 / kW
About 2x the cost of Gas Turbine and 3x cost of Reciprocating Engine
Feasibility study by NREL compared installation costs of several
competing power generation technologies
Company
FCE
Doosan
Solar
Caterpillar

Model

Technology

Installed Cost

Direct Fuel Cell 1500

MCFC

$4,245/kW

Power Pure Cell 400

PAFC

$4,375/kW

Mercury 50

gas turbine

$1,896/kW

C3250

reciprocating engine

$1,342/kW

Installed Cost by Technology ( $ per kW )

4245

4375

1896
1342

MCFC

PAFC

GAS TURBINE

RECIPROCATING ENGINE

4. Key Challenges
For MCFC technology to be competitive in the power generation market,
the installed cost per kilowatt will have to drop to under $2000/kW
Further research to increase the power density of MCFC technology
a. Increase the operating temperature
b. Increase ionic conductivity of the electrolyte
c. Decrease the polarization losses of the electrodes
Further research to increase the lifespan of Molten Carbonate fuel cells
a. Improve structural stability of Ni-base anodes
b. Reduce NiO dissolution of the cathode
c. Reduce particle growth in the LiAlO2 electrolyte matrix
d. Reduce electrolyte evaporation rate
e. Improve electrolyte structure ( ~ 70% cell ohmic losses )
Cost reductions with volume manufacture
Doubling orders from suppliers may reduce costs ~ 20%

 Installation and Conditioning

After manufacture, the fuel cell must be conditioned. Under controlled
conditions, the fuel cell is brought up to temperature to melt the electrolyte
and condition the electrolyte matrix. Currently, this process takes about 2
weeks after which the fuel cell can be delivered to the customer.
The fuel cell is then assembled into the power plant at the customer site
after which operation is verified and the power plant is commissioned. The
total cost of this conditioning, installation, and commissioning process is
estimated at $700/kW. At higher production volumes, it is estimated that
$200/kW could be saved on this process. Further cost reductions to this
process could make a significant contribution to MCFC feasibility.