It has always been an elusive goal to provide a building structure, such as a house, with the ability to meet all of its energy needs as well as fuel vehicles, on-site, in a self-sufficient manner. True “off the grid” living would imply that a power generation system would provide all necessary energy needs: heating, cooling, electricity and fuel for vehicles without utility hookups or the need to travel to a remote fueling station.
Solar energy has held some promise with regard to providing an alternative electrical power source for buildings. However, the level of production from a bank of solar panels falls short with regard to providing all of the energy needs of a household and for fueling vehicles. The advantages of solar is that it is an abundant source of energy that is available throughout the world and it is sustainable. The drawbacks of solar power systems is that they are expensive without the infusion of government subsidies; solar energy is intermittent, depending on weather; energy storage is expensive as batteries must be relied upon; and solar panel production is not pollution-free as manufacturing processes related to solar panels are associated with greenhouse gas emissions.
Fossil fuels cannot be produced and refined on site for a typical household, so fossil fuels are not practical for achieving true self-sufficiency in the energy realm. In fact, as the world tries to wean itself off fossil fueled motor vehicles, three disparate technologies have emerged. The current leading technologies are hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), pure electric vehicles (EVs), and fuel cells vehicles (FCVs).
The predominant embodiment of most HEVs is to have a battery supply the startup power and supply power in and around town, and a gasoline internal combustion engine (ICE) supply power to a dynamo which powers both electric motors that turn the wheels for highway driving, and also keep the batteries charged for the next startup or in-town driving. Thus, even though the EV part of the HEV does not directly contribute much power to the vehicle, it allows the ICE to run at nearly constant speed. As a result the ICE efficiency is greatly improved and the resulting mpg rating is much higher than for purely ICE vehicles.
There is considerable effort devoted towards realizing a pure EV. The current well known examples are the Tesla® EV and Nissan Leaf® EV. As a result of being purely EV, they are very efficient; being able to convert electricity to electric motor power at an efficiency of >85%. The main drawback with EVs is that the energy density (energy per unit weight) of the currently preferred Li-ion battery is less than 5% than that for gasoline. Also, Li-ion batteries have over their lifespan an effective cost of between $2-$4 per kilowatt-hour (KWH), whereas, gasoline only costs 9 cents per KWH. Thus, to be economically viable, the Tesla® S only has a 200 mile range per charge, and the Leaf® only an 80+ mile range. Hence, unless a dramatic breakthrough happens in battery technology, the current EV market, without subsidies, will be only a niche market.
As a result of this apparent saturation in EV performance, there has been a renewed interest in the FCV approach. An FCV also supplies electricity to power an electric motor via a battery. However, the FCV battery is called a fuel cell (FC), which operates by removing an electron from a hydrogen atom at one electrode, which becomes a positively charged hydrogen ion. This ion moves through an ion conductor to the other electrode where it combines with OH— ion to become H2O, i.e. water. Meanwhile, the electron removed from the original hydrogen atom moves through a circuit doing work, e.g. running a motor. When this electron gets to the other electrode it reaction with oxygen and water to form the OH— ion that reacts with the hydrogen ion that has passed through the ionic conductor to form water. Note that for a FC there are no electrode-metal reactions as there are for a lead-acid battery. Hence, a FC should last as long as the ion conducting membrane is intact.
As of 2014, there are ≈>1000 FCVs being tested by consumers. So far a major drawback to practical operation of an FCV is the lack of abundant and conveniently located hydrogen filling stations. There are only a few located at or near major cities. This means that until there is a hydrogen supply chain (e.g. a hydrogen highway), buyers of FCVs will need to live near major cities to be able to drive and refill the tank. Furthermore, the specifications for an ideal FCV is that it will have a range of 300-400 miles and require 4 Kg of hydrogen gas to power the FCV to realize that mileage.
However, there is a major barrier to developing a critical number of filling stations. The current preferred method is to heat methane (natural gas), a fossil fuel, in steam, to generate hydrogen gas and carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas associated with climate change). As a result most hydrogen is made at a site remote to the filling station and must be transported by truck to storage containers (a hazardous operation). From the storage containers the hydrogen must be compressed to a pressure of 10,000 psi when delivered to the filling station and introduced into the FCV at this high pressure. The pumps for doing this are very expensive and need to have intensive, short term maintenance to keep them operational.
The range of FCVs is comparable to the range of many ICE vehicles and therefore makes them a practical and reliable subject for further development as an emissions-free vehicle of the future. The main drawback relates to the present solution for hydrogen production and delivery, as well as the dearth of fueling stations. The present invention solves these major drawbacks by providing a system for generating power which can heat and cool a building structure, serve its electrical needs and also manufacture hydrogen fuel on-site to fulfill the fueling needs of FCVs. This aspect of selectively locating the system at a building structure where an FCV is kept solves the problem of a dearth of fueling stations, and the system provides power for both the building structure and associated vehicles which is a total power solution and the realization of true “off the grid” performance.
The foregoing reflects the state of the art of which the inventors are aware, and is tendered with a view toward discharging the inventors' acknowledged duty of candor, which may be pertinent to the patentability of the present invention. It is respectfully stipulated, however, that the foregoing discussion does not teach or render obvious, singly or when considered in combination, the inventors' claimed invention.