The Bloom Box

[JohnnyMack]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/18/60minutes/main6221135.shtml

Any of you smart people know anything about this? Supposed to be a clean, alternative energy source that might change da world? Anyone know if this is feasible? I guess eBay and some other companies are trying it out now.

[yermom]

i happened to see the guy on 60 Minutes this week (i never watch that show) and as he was talking i was thinking it was vaporware, until they said Google and some other places for like a year already

i think it comes down to the manufacturing process at this point

[NormanPride]

Sounds interesting. If it's eco-friendly and produces tons of power, then I'm all for it. Especially if I can buy one for $3000 and not have to pay power bills anymore. :D

[yermom]

you still need to pay for natural gas or something to power it. it's just more efficient

the guy was saying that the power companies should be buying them eventually as well

[NormanPride]

It should still make things a lot cheaper. I wonder if you could do something similar for electric cars? And the idea of these things powering remote villages in poorer countries is pretty cool. This plus water purification = lots of lives saved.

[Boomer.....]

Very cool. I guess we will soon see if it takes off. Those were some impressive companies already using it though.

[Boomer.....]

They're website is up and running today.

http://www.bloomenergy.com/

[SicEmBaylor]

I don't know what came of the idea, but I remember last year a company had supposedly designed tiny nuclear power plants that would be placed within the ground and could power entire neighborhoods with a very small cube. I forget what they had planned for the waste, but I recall it being pretty genius.

Anyway, these cubes would be about the size of a trash dumpster.

[SicEmBaylor]

Anyway, I love these ideas. Energy independence should be our nation's top priority.

[yermom]

Anyway, I love these ideas. Energy independence should be our nation's top priority.

if alternative energy and green stuff wasn't all tied up with global warming and Al Gore/liberal/Democrat stuff i think there would be more of a common ground

[SicEmBaylor]

if alternative energy and green stuff wasn't all tied up with global warming and Al Gore/liberal/Democrat stuff i think there would be more of a common ground

Yep, it absolutely would be. Also, if it were sold more as a national security and sovereignty issue (which it is) then I think it'd be much more acceptable.

[Stitch Face]

I wonder if you could do something similar for electric cars?

Nah, you'd only be able to drive it around in your back yard...

[JohnnyMack]

Yep, it absolutely would be. Also, if it were sold more as a national security and sovereignty issue (which it is) then I think it'd be much more acceptable.

One of the primary examples of how politics has failed the American people is on display in regards to energy independence.

[NormanPride]

Nah, you'd only be able to drive it around in your back yard...

Nuh-uh! You could fart in the seat and it would go outside your neighborhood.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

if alternative energy and green stuff wasn't all tied up with global warming and Al Gore/liberal/Democrat stuff i think there would be more of a common groundIt all has to make sense economically. Therein lies the problem.

[jkjsooner]

I have my doubts about this. It's not like there aren't 1000 companies working on developing economic fuel cells already.

I wanted to hear how this is different than other fuel cells but the 60 Minutes piece addressed almost nothing except that supposedly they don't have to use platinum. Instead we got a stupid "wow!" response from Leslie Stahl (who is a moron) when they talked about feeding in sand to make some of the components. WTF? How is that remotely interesting or relevant? Use sand as a power source and you'll get a wow from me.

Is it clean? Well, you still have to feed in hydrocarbons or pure hydrogen so it's still spitting out CO2 - either directly via hydrocarbons or indirectly via the production of pure hydrogen. The efficiency makes it "greener" but I wouldn't call it green at all.

Can it really be mass produced at a reasonable price? This has been a problem with fuel cells.

Is it reliable? This has also been a problem with fuel cells.

If it is to be used in homes, how will we get and store the fuel? If you don't already have gas in your house and don't have a propane tank or something you might consider this a hassle.

I'd love to see us move to reliable high efficient fuel cells. I'm just not sure what Bloom has done that others haven't already other than putting the hype machine in full force.


Edit: So I guess the ceramic squares is what replaces the platinum so I guess it is news afterall.

[NormanPride]

I have my doubts about this. It's not like there aren't 1000 companies working on developing economic fuel cells already.

I wanted to hear how this is different than other fuel cells but the 60 Minutes piece addressed almost nothing except that supposedly they don't have to use platinum. Instead we got a stupid "wow!" response from Leslie Stahl (who is a moron) when they talked about feeding in sand to make some of the components. WTF? How is that remotely interesting or relevant? Use sand as a power source and you'll get a wow from me.

Is it clean? Well, you still have to feed in hydrocarbons or pure hydrogen so it's still spitting out CO2 - either directly via hydrocarbons or indirectly via the production of pure hydrogen. The efficiency makes it "greener" but I wouldn't call it green at all.

Can it really be mass produced at a reasonable price? This has been a problem with fuel cells.

Is it reliable? This has also been a problem with fuel cells.

If it is to be used in homes, how will we get and store the fuel? If you don't already have gas in your house and don't have a propane tank or something you might consider this a hassle.

I'd love to see us move to reliable high efficient fuel cells. I'm just not sure what Bloom has done that others haven't already other than putting the hype machine in full force.

These and many other questions were answered in the article.

[SoonerInKCMO]

It all has to make sense economically. Therein lies the problem.

The problem with that is that people don't seem to want to consider the external costs of our energy sources when deciding whether something makes economic sense. There are real, measurable costs associated with all forms of energy; these costs vary by orders of magnitude amongst the different sources. Until people understand this and we have some mechanism in place by which the actual consumers of energy pay the full cost rather than allowing society as a whole to pay for the externalities, we'll never make the right decisions regarding energy.

[OUHOMER]

i cant wait to see how this pans out. I would have a propane tank installed in a heartbeat for this. But if i have to spend $200 bucks a month on propane to make $200 dollars worth of electricity it would suck. what ratio would it be i wonder,

[Stitch Face]

I'll probably pass. I haven't really been into puzzlers since Tetris.

[Stitch Face]

Sorry. I thought we were talking about
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/6237/boombloxg.jpg (http://img26.imageshack.us/i/boombloxg.jpg/)

[Stitch Face]

*

[SCOUT]

I watched the Bloom Box piece with great anticipation. Sadly, I think the Segway is a good comparison. As some may recall, it was supposed to be so revolutionary it was just called "It." The media campaign said that it would revolutionize walking.

I couldn't be a bigger proponent of alternative energy. My comparison is due to the fact that the 60 minutes piece was a pie in the sky, wouldn't it be great, kind of piece. It is one thing if a prototype works. It is another if it can be used in certain industrial/commercial capacities. The final link (the last mile to use another industries catch phrase) is the sticky wicket.

My opinion at this point is that the Bloom Box will serve electricity customers much the same way that the Segway has revolutionized walking. There are very good applications of an excellent idea. Fundamentally changing things isn't in the cards though.

This in combination of the numerous ideas will change the world though. Necessity is the Mother of invention. I am glad that the US has realized that necessity is knocking.

IMO, of course.

[yermom]

i don't see Google and eBay using Segways...

[SCOUT]

i don't see Google and eBay using Segways...

No, but you do see many, many municipalities using them. In addition, you see many private security firms using them.

Point being, they found their market segment.

A market segment does not equal market adoption.

[yermom]

the difference is that the Segway even if it was cheap wouldn't be that big of a deal. i don't think one would change my life much if i had one for free

anyone could use one of these in their house if the price came down enough, or utility companies could be using them now if they were able to supply enough of them

[Harry Beanbag]

I'm going to need a lot more information on how it works and what is inside it before I put one in my backyard. Green paint and sand doesn't do it for me.

[Leroy Lizard]

I don't trust anything that doesn't come from Big Oil.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I'm going to need a lot more information on how it works and what is inside it before I put one in my backyard. Green paint and sand doesn't do it for me.

It runs on fairy wings and unicorn farts, what more do you need to know?

[jkjsooner]

All the talk about cost efficiency and how this could compete with traditional alternatives (electric grid, internal combustion generators, etc.) gets me to thinking.

These are areas where the government can play a major role. Basic ideas behind fuel cells have been around for 200 years. The problem is that they aren't cost effective or reliable enough to replace our current systems. They've had a niche for sure but not near the role of other systems.

That brings me to my point... If the internal combustion engine had never been invented, other alternatives such as primitive fuel cells would have taken hold. In the beginning it would have been a more expensive and maybe less reliable but it would be the best we had.

The problem is that the internal combustion engine was easier and more reliable so we had 150 or so years of development on it and there's little incentive for the private sector to develop other alternatives. There's no doubt in my mind that had we had 150-200 years of full scale development and use of fuel cell technology (not just research projects) they would be much more advanced / cost-effective / reliable / efficient than what we have today.

I believe strongly that private industry and capitalism is the most productive political/economic system. However, in some cases it just isn't well suited. This is one of them. Too few companies will invest in technology unless it can pay off in the very near future. Capitalism, by itself, has a very short-term horizon.

This is where governments can and should play a role. While politics has a shorter timeframe (next election!) than even capital adventures some government programs can be set up that will benefit society years or even decades into the future. I always use rural water and electricity as an example. Without help, private enterprise would have never provided these services but in the long run what help the government provided has paid off many fold.