- Email: [email protected]
Ocean hydrogen for launch operations
hf. Copyrighl
0360-3199(94)00103-O
OCEAN
HYDROGEN
FOR LAUNCH
J. Hydro,yn Liwrq~, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp X1 X6, IYYh @ Intcrnationat Association for Hydrogen Energy Elsevier Science Ltd Prmted m (ireat Rr~ta~n. All rights reserved 0360.3 199196 $15.00 + 0.00
OPERATIONS
T. C. WOODBKIDGE and D. D. WOODBRIDGE Aqua-Magnetics, Inc., 10805 North 53rd Street, Tampa, Florida 333617, U.S.A
(Rrcrivrd,/br
puhlicutiorz
7 September
1994)
Abstract--Most existing and potential orbital and space launching facilities are located adjacent to oceans. These oceans can provide both the required energy and material for hydrogen production. A system has been dcsigncd to produce hydrogen and oxygen from the ocean adjacent to the Kennedy Space Center. The systems will utilize the swell and wave energy in the ocean as the energy source for the electrolysis. Production of the hydrogen and oxygen would be performed on shore and piped directly to the launch facility. Thus, both the cost of transportation, and the inherent risk associatedwith overland transportation would be virtually eliminated. The energy cost for producing the hydrogen and oxygen wilt be reduced by direct conversion of the energy in the ocean swells to electric power for the electrolysis process.
1. INTRODUCTION
from the ocean. It is realized that the size of the ocean swells is not constant and hence the electric power produced will not be constant. However, Huctuations in the energy tapped from the ocean swells is not a concern for this process. During larger than average swells, excess H, and 0, will be produced and stored, while during smaller than average swells, the stored H, and 0, will bc drawn down.
Electrolytic cells are highly reliable and efficient. Most commercial electrolyticcells are capable of operating with an electricity-to-hydrogen efficiency above 75 % [I]. Since electrolysis cells have no moving parts and do not require any complicated components, the cost ofgenerating hydrogen and oxygen is essentially the cost of the electric power consumed. Because of this, the cost of generating the H, by electrolysis is directly tied to the cost of producing the electric power and hence directly related to the electric generation method. To make the production of hydrogen and oxygen through electrolysis more attractive. a less expensive source of electric power is needed. The oceans contain a vast amount of untapped energy in the form of wind waves and swells crossing its surface. Aqua-Magnetics Inc. has developed a reciprocating generator that directly converts the energy in ocean swells to electric power. This direct energy conversion overcomes a major deficiency of most ocean power systems that convert the energy in the ocean to electric power. Most ocean energy conversion systems attempt to push a fluid to turn a turbine to drive a standard rotation generator. Each transformation of the energy from one form to another before electric power can be produced causes these types of systems to loose efficiency. In contrast, by directly converting wave motion energy to electric power, the reciprocating generator does not experience the loss of efficiency that cripples other ocean energy conversion systems. The reciprocating generator can be used to supply all of the cncrgy for the gcncration of hydrogen and oxygen
2. OCEAN SWELL WAVE ENERGY (OSWEC) SYSTEM
CONVERSION
Figure I shows an illustration of the reciprocating generator. The reciprocating generator consists of a base which supports the outer magnetic poles in a 360“ circle. A center magnetic pole is suspended from a top end bell down through the center of the circle created by the outer poles. Permanent magnets are placed on the outer poles in such a manner that the same magnetic polarity (either N. or S.) is pointing toward the center pole, which will acquire the opposite magnetic polarity of the magnets on the center pole. The end bell carries the flux from the outer poles to the center pole, with the magnetic flux lines crossing the air gap to complete the magnetic circuit. This is indicated in Fig. 2. Figure 3 illustrates a top-view cross-section, depicting how the magnets completely encircle the conducting coil, concentrating the magnetic flux through the coil. The generator coil is supported in the air gap between the outer poles and the center pole by the coil support tube, and is driven up and down through the air gap by any external forces applied to the coil support tube. The support tube can be attached to the float system that 81
82
T. C. WOODBRIDGE
,
END
BELL
CENTER
,,
and D. D. WOODBRIDGE
POLE
PERMANENT MAGNET
-GENERATOR COIL
/OUTER
POLE
3-
operating cost for the system is estimated to be in the area of 18 mils per kWh. Included in the operating costs are the maintenance requirements for support equipment such as boats for personnel transport to and from the platform. There arc two major advantages that this power generation method has over other conventional systems. First, there are no fuel requirements and therefore no fuel costs. Second, since there are no pollution by-products in the form of excess heat, waste fuel. or airborne particulates, there are no environmental control costs. This gives a rough power production cost of 55 mils per kWh for the OSWEC system. The cost of producing electric power from nuclear [Z] and coal-fired generation systems [S]. is compared with the estimated costs for the OSWEC system in Table I. As indicated in this table, the cost of producing power from ocean swells with the OSWEC system is substantially less than that of other methods of electric power production. The total power costs determined for both conventional power generation methods in this analysis are comparable to reported total power systems for 1990. These costs were stated as 100 -150 mils per kWh for nuclear power and 60-80 mils per kWh for coal/oil based power production [4]. As mentioned in the introduction to this paper, the primary cost for producing hydrogen through the electrolysis process is the cost of the electric power consumed. Therefore, the lower power production cost of the OSWEC system directly relates to lower costs for producing hydroqen.
BASE
Fig. 1. Reciprocating
generator.
consists of a float restrained in a hollow, open ended cylinder to permit only vertical motion of the float. As open-ocean swells pass by the cylinder, the hydraulic pressure of each wave causes the float inside the cylinder to rise and fall as the wave passes. The vertical motion of the float will directly drive the generator coil up and down through the magnetic flux lines, causing an electric e.m.f. to be generated in the coil. This type of system is illustrated in Fig. 4. Based on results of testing on proof-of-concept and prototype models, and the correlation of these tests with a computer simulation model, one reciprocating generator is capable of generating approximately 100 kW of power in a 1 m high ocean swell and approximately 400 kW in a 2 m swell. The size of the generator coil for an ocean system would be 1.5 m in diameter and 5 cm thick. By placing many of these new-concept generators out in the ocean, hundreds of MW could easily be produced, with no fuel cost involved and no pollution by-products. The cost of construction for this ocean energy system is estimated to be in the range of $2000 per kW of average power produced, or approximately 18 mils per kWh. The
3. OCEAN
HYDROGEN FOR THE KENNEDY SPACE CENTER
At a rate of eight Space Shuttle launches per year, The Kennedy Space Center consumes approximately 5,000,OOOgal (18.9 million I) of liquid hydrogen for those launches. This includes hydrogen required for testing and hydrogen lost through boil-off when transferring it from the launch-site storage vessels to the Space Shuttle’s external tank prior to each launch. The Kennedy Space Center estimates that about 100,000 gal (378,500 I) of hydrogen are lost each time hydrogen is transferred from the launch-site storage vessels to the Space Shuttle’s external tank [S]. The hydrogen for Space Shuttle operation is shipped to the Kennedy Space Center from New Orleans, Louisiana. Several weeks and close to fifty truckloads of liquid hydrogen are required to resupply the Kennedy Space Center after each launch. Transporting hydrogen this distance presents additional costs and hazards which need not be incurred. Creating hydrogen and oxygen at the oceanside launch site, in addition to reducing energy costs, will virtually eliminate transportation costs and the associated risk. A pilot plant is proposed which will utilize the energy in the ocean swells off the coast of the Kennedy Space Center to create hydrogen via electrolysis. The initial pilot plant will supply enough hydrogen to replace the amount lost through boiloff during each launch. Since
OCEAN
HYDROGEN
---_____
FOR LAUNCH
OPERATIONS
83
__--------m---m
----e-e-
-_
--
-
-_
---
----
--
,!XWAANENT MAGNETS
GENERATOR -‘COIL
-MAGNETIC FLUX LINES
CENTER POLE ‘FLUX CORE
-OUTER FLUX
Fig. 2. Reciprocating
POLE CORE
generator side view cross-section
PERMANENT MAGNETS
GENERATOR
CENTER POLE FLUX CORE
Fig. 3. Reciprocating
generator top-view cross-section.
T. C. WOODBRIDGE
and D. D. WOODBRIDGE RECIPROCATING /
oAEpNp:RR%ou:
k
FLOAT CONSTRAINT TUBE
-WAVE
-FLOAT
\
Fig. 4. Reciprocating
generator used in ocean swell wave energy conversion.
the cost of the electric power has been reduced by approximately 40%, the cost of the hydrogen created at the Kennedy Space Center will be less than purchasing hydrogen on the open market where power costs are high. Additionally, transportation costs for this hydrogen will be virtually eliminated. This recognizes that there
Table 1. Comparison
are still costs associated with piping the cryogenic hydrogen and oxygen from the the generation plant to the launch-pad storage vessels. The pilot plant will create 3,785,OOO 1 (l,OOO,OOO gal) of liquid hydrogen per year. This volume of hydrogen production will require a sea-water inlet flow of approx-
of power production
OSWEC 100 MW Capital investment depreciation
SUPPORT STRUCTURE LEGS
expense
18 mils/k Wh
cost
Nuclear* >400 MW
Coal firedt 600 MW
96 mils/kWh
22.5 mils/kWh
Fuel cost
0
9 mils/kWh
23.9 mils/kWh
Environmental
0
N/A
2.8 mils/kWh
Operation
control cost
maintenance cost
12 mils/kWh
Fixed costment (1.4 x investment cost)
25.0 mils/kWh
Total power production
55 mils/kWh
cost
* 1984 cost inflated at 5% to 1993. t 1983 cost inflated at 5% to 1993. $ It is assumed that the fixed cost was included in capital cost.
18.6 mils/kWh
7.3 mils/kWh
1
31.3 mils/kWh
123.6 mils/kWh
87.8 mils/kWh
OCEAN
HYDROGEN
FOR LAUNCH
OPERATIONS
85
OCEAN SWELL ENERGY ’ ELECTRIC ; ENERGY
I I I I
HYDROGEN
LIQUID OXYGEN
I
’ ELECTRIC Fig. 5. Block diagram, combined OSWEC-electrolysis
imately 300 1 (79.3 gal) per hour. This inlet flow rate is less than a normal garden hose. The inlet water will be desalinated by distillation or reverse osmosis prior to the electrolysis process. The hydrogen and oxygen produced will be stored as compressed gas to avoid losses due to boil-off. When needed, the hydrogen and oxygen will be cooled to cryogenic temperatures and piped directly to the launch-site storage tanks for use in launch operations. Figure 5 shows a block diagram of the combined OSWECelectrolysis process for low cost hydrogen generation. The OSWEC system converts the energy in the ocean swells to useful electric power, which is distributed to the different functions of the overall hydrogen generation process. This figure also illustrates an added plus to using sea water, in that other useful chemicals can be obtained from the salt brine. The major elements (greater than 0.3 kg/1000 1 (0.5 lb/1000 gal)) in sea salt that can be extracted for commercial use are chlorine, sodium, magnesium, sulfur, calcium, potassium, carbon, and bromine [6]. Several of these elements or compounds of these elements are currently being commercially produced from sea water. The OSWEC system for the pilot plant will consist of twelve reciprocating generators located approximately 2 km off the launch site in the Atlantic ocean. The electric power will be brought to shore via submerged cables to the electrolysis plant. An advantage of this system is that it can easily be scaled-up to supply all of the hydrogen and oxygen required for launch operations at the Kennedy Space Center and the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, with the addition of more reciprocating generators and electrolysis cells. An estimated 100 reciprocating generators would be required to provide the electric
cALsIlJh4 FOTASSIUM
I I
’ ENERGY I ----------_----------------
hydrogen generation process.
power for producing all of the liquid hydrogen required for launch operations at the Kennedy Space Center.
4. CONCLUSION The goal of hydrogen research is to ultimately reduce the cost of its production, which for the electrolysis process is the cost of the electric power consumed. The OSWEC system provides a means of generating a sufficient amount of non-polluting electric power from the oceans to make it significantly less expensive than either nuclear or oil-based electric power. By utilizing the cheap energy available from the OSWEC system for the electrolysis of water, the cost of producing hydrogen will be reduced significantly as well. The Kennedy Space Center, with its ocean-side launch sites and its substantial need for hydrogen make it ideal for the combination of such a system. Having the hydrogen generation process at or near the launch site has the added advantage of eliminating the risk and added costs of transporting the liquid H, from New Orleans. In conclusion, utilizing the OSWEC system in concert with electrolysis of water to create hydrogen and oxygen for launch operation is economically feasible and is a lower risk method of providing fuel for the Space Shuttle system and other future launch vehicles.
REFERENCES 1. M. S. Casper, Hydrogen Manufacture by Electrolysis, Thermul Decomposition and Unusual Techniques, (p. 112). Noyes Data Corp. Park Ridge, NJ (1978).
86
T. C. WOODBRIDGE
and D. D. WOODBRIDGE
2. ‘Stretch-Outs’ Raise Nuclear Cost Over Coal. Elecfricul World, December, p. 15 (1986). 3. A. J. Fiehn and RI J. Vondrasek, Cost of Electric Power. Marks’ Stundard Handbook for Mechnnicul Enpineers (eds E. A. Avallone and T. Baumeister, III), 9th ed., ppy 17-35-l 7-45. McGraw-Hill, New York (1987).
4. J. Ward, A New Look At Reducing Electric Rates. Americun City & Country, January, pp. 36-38 (1991). 5. B. Buckingham and J. Ewing, KSC Staff Oversees Propellent Use for all of NASA. Smzceoort News. Januarv. D. 5 (1992). 6. R. C. Weast, CRC H&book of Chemistry clnd physics, 56th ed., p. F-199. CRC Press. Cleveland. OH (1975).
0360-3199(94)00103-O
OCEAN
HYDROGEN
FOR LAUNCH
J. Hydro,yn Liwrq~, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp X1 X6, IYYh @ Intcrnationat Association for Hydrogen Energy Elsevier Science Ltd Prmted m (ireat Rr~ta~n. All rights reserved 0360.3 199196 $15.00 + 0.00
OPERATIONS
T. C. WOODBKIDGE and D. D. WOODBRIDGE Aqua-Magnetics, Inc., 10805 North 53rd Street, Tampa, Florida 333617, U.S.A
(Rrcrivrd,/br
puhlicutiorz
7 September
1994)
Abstract--Most existing and potential orbital and space launching facilities are located adjacent to oceans. These oceans can provide both the required energy and material for hydrogen production. A system has been dcsigncd to produce hydrogen and oxygen from the ocean adjacent to the Kennedy Space Center. The systems will utilize the swell and wave energy in the ocean as the energy source for the electrolysis. Production of the hydrogen and oxygen would be performed on shore and piped directly to the launch facility. Thus, both the cost of transportation, and the inherent risk associatedwith overland transportation would be virtually eliminated. The energy cost for producing the hydrogen and oxygen wilt be reduced by direct conversion of the energy in the ocean swells to electric power for the electrolysis process.
1. INTRODUCTION
from the ocean. It is realized that the size of the ocean swells is not constant and hence the electric power produced will not be constant. However, Huctuations in the energy tapped from the ocean swells is not a concern for this process. During larger than average swells, excess H, and 0, will be produced and stored, while during smaller than average swells, the stored H, and 0, will bc drawn down.
Electrolytic cells are highly reliable and efficient. Most commercial electrolyticcells are capable of operating with an electricity-to-hydrogen efficiency above 75 % [I]. Since electrolysis cells have no moving parts and do not require any complicated components, the cost ofgenerating hydrogen and oxygen is essentially the cost of the electric power consumed. Because of this, the cost of generating the H, by electrolysis is directly tied to the cost of producing the electric power and hence directly related to the electric generation method. To make the production of hydrogen and oxygen through electrolysis more attractive. a less expensive source of electric power is needed. The oceans contain a vast amount of untapped energy in the form of wind waves and swells crossing its surface. Aqua-Magnetics Inc. has developed a reciprocating generator that directly converts the energy in ocean swells to electric power. This direct energy conversion overcomes a major deficiency of most ocean power systems that convert the energy in the ocean to electric power. Most ocean energy conversion systems attempt to push a fluid to turn a turbine to drive a standard rotation generator. Each transformation of the energy from one form to another before electric power can be produced causes these types of systems to loose efficiency. In contrast, by directly converting wave motion energy to electric power, the reciprocating generator does not experience the loss of efficiency that cripples other ocean energy conversion systems. The reciprocating generator can be used to supply all of the cncrgy for the gcncration of hydrogen and oxygen
2. OCEAN SWELL WAVE ENERGY (OSWEC) SYSTEM
CONVERSION
Figure I shows an illustration of the reciprocating generator. The reciprocating generator consists of a base which supports the outer magnetic poles in a 360“ circle. A center magnetic pole is suspended from a top end bell down through the center of the circle created by the outer poles. Permanent magnets are placed on the outer poles in such a manner that the same magnetic polarity (either N. or S.) is pointing toward the center pole, which will acquire the opposite magnetic polarity of the magnets on the center pole. The end bell carries the flux from the outer poles to the center pole, with the magnetic flux lines crossing the air gap to complete the magnetic circuit. This is indicated in Fig. 2. Figure 3 illustrates a top-view cross-section, depicting how the magnets completely encircle the conducting coil, concentrating the magnetic flux through the coil. The generator coil is supported in the air gap between the outer poles and the center pole by the coil support tube, and is driven up and down through the air gap by any external forces applied to the coil support tube. The support tube can be attached to the float system that 81
82
T. C. WOODBRIDGE
,
END
BELL
CENTER
,,
and D. D. WOODBRIDGE
POLE
PERMANENT MAGNET
-GENERATOR COIL
/OUTER
POLE
3-
operating cost for the system is estimated to be in the area of 18 mils per kWh. Included in the operating costs are the maintenance requirements for support equipment such as boats for personnel transport to and from the platform. There arc two major advantages that this power generation method has over other conventional systems. First, there are no fuel requirements and therefore no fuel costs. Second, since there are no pollution by-products in the form of excess heat, waste fuel. or airborne particulates, there are no environmental control costs. This gives a rough power production cost of 55 mils per kWh for the OSWEC system. The cost of producing electric power from nuclear [Z] and coal-fired generation systems [S]. is compared with the estimated costs for the OSWEC system in Table I. As indicated in this table, the cost of producing power from ocean swells with the OSWEC system is substantially less than that of other methods of electric power production. The total power costs determined for both conventional power generation methods in this analysis are comparable to reported total power systems for 1990. These costs were stated as 100 -150 mils per kWh for nuclear power and 60-80 mils per kWh for coal/oil based power production [4]. As mentioned in the introduction to this paper, the primary cost for producing hydrogen through the electrolysis process is the cost of the electric power consumed. Therefore, the lower power production cost of the OSWEC system directly relates to lower costs for producing hydroqen.
BASE
Fig. 1. Reciprocating
generator.
consists of a float restrained in a hollow, open ended cylinder to permit only vertical motion of the float. As open-ocean swells pass by the cylinder, the hydraulic pressure of each wave causes the float inside the cylinder to rise and fall as the wave passes. The vertical motion of the float will directly drive the generator coil up and down through the magnetic flux lines, causing an electric e.m.f. to be generated in the coil. This type of system is illustrated in Fig. 4. Based on results of testing on proof-of-concept and prototype models, and the correlation of these tests with a computer simulation model, one reciprocating generator is capable of generating approximately 100 kW of power in a 1 m high ocean swell and approximately 400 kW in a 2 m swell. The size of the generator coil for an ocean system would be 1.5 m in diameter and 5 cm thick. By placing many of these new-concept generators out in the ocean, hundreds of MW could easily be produced, with no fuel cost involved and no pollution by-products. The cost of construction for this ocean energy system is estimated to be in the range of $2000 per kW of average power produced, or approximately 18 mils per kWh. The
3. OCEAN
HYDROGEN FOR THE KENNEDY SPACE CENTER
At a rate of eight Space Shuttle launches per year, The Kennedy Space Center consumes approximately 5,000,OOOgal (18.9 million I) of liquid hydrogen for those launches. This includes hydrogen required for testing and hydrogen lost through boil-off when transferring it from the launch-site storage vessels to the Space Shuttle’s external tank prior to each launch. The Kennedy Space Center estimates that about 100,000 gal (378,500 I) of hydrogen are lost each time hydrogen is transferred from the launch-site storage vessels to the Space Shuttle’s external tank [S]. The hydrogen for Space Shuttle operation is shipped to the Kennedy Space Center from New Orleans, Louisiana. Several weeks and close to fifty truckloads of liquid hydrogen are required to resupply the Kennedy Space Center after each launch. Transporting hydrogen this distance presents additional costs and hazards which need not be incurred. Creating hydrogen and oxygen at the oceanside launch site, in addition to reducing energy costs, will virtually eliminate transportation costs and the associated risk. A pilot plant is proposed which will utilize the energy in the ocean swells off the coast of the Kennedy Space Center to create hydrogen via electrolysis. The initial pilot plant will supply enough hydrogen to replace the amount lost through boiloff during each launch. Since
OCEAN
HYDROGEN
---_____
FOR LAUNCH
OPERATIONS
83
__--------m---m
----e-e-
-_
--
-
-_
---
----
--
,!XWAANENT MAGNETS
GENERATOR -‘COIL
-MAGNETIC FLUX LINES
CENTER POLE ‘FLUX CORE
-OUTER FLUX
Fig. 2. Reciprocating
POLE CORE
generator side view cross-section
PERMANENT MAGNETS
GENERATOR
CENTER POLE FLUX CORE
Fig. 3. Reciprocating
generator top-view cross-section.
T. C. WOODBRIDGE
and D. D. WOODBRIDGE RECIPROCATING /
oAEpNp:RR%ou:
k
FLOAT CONSTRAINT TUBE
-WAVE
-FLOAT
\
Fig. 4. Reciprocating
generator used in ocean swell wave energy conversion.
the cost of the electric power has been reduced by approximately 40%, the cost of the hydrogen created at the Kennedy Space Center will be less than purchasing hydrogen on the open market where power costs are high. Additionally, transportation costs for this hydrogen will be virtually eliminated. This recognizes that there
Table 1. Comparison
are still costs associated with piping the cryogenic hydrogen and oxygen from the the generation plant to the launch-pad storage vessels. The pilot plant will create 3,785,OOO 1 (l,OOO,OOO gal) of liquid hydrogen per year. This volume of hydrogen production will require a sea-water inlet flow of approx-
of power production
OSWEC 100 MW Capital investment depreciation
SUPPORT STRUCTURE LEGS
expense
18 mils/k Wh
cost
Nuclear* >400 MW
Coal firedt 600 MW
96 mils/kWh
22.5 mils/kWh
Fuel cost
0
9 mils/kWh
23.9 mils/kWh
Environmental
0
N/A
2.8 mils/kWh
Operation
control cost
maintenance cost
12 mils/kWh
Fixed costment (1.4 x investment cost)
25.0 mils/kWh
Total power production
55 mils/kWh
cost
* 1984 cost inflated at 5% to 1993. t 1983 cost inflated at 5% to 1993. $ It is assumed that the fixed cost was included in capital cost.
18.6 mils/kWh
7.3 mils/kWh
1
31.3 mils/kWh
123.6 mils/kWh
87.8 mils/kWh
OCEAN
HYDROGEN
FOR LAUNCH
OPERATIONS
85
OCEAN SWELL ENERGY ’ ELECTRIC ; ENERGY
I I I I
HYDROGEN
LIQUID OXYGEN
I
’ ELECTRIC Fig. 5. Block diagram, combined OSWEC-electrolysis
imately 300 1 (79.3 gal) per hour. This inlet flow rate is less than a normal garden hose. The inlet water will be desalinated by distillation or reverse osmosis prior to the electrolysis process. The hydrogen and oxygen produced will be stored as compressed gas to avoid losses due to boil-off. When needed, the hydrogen and oxygen will be cooled to cryogenic temperatures and piped directly to the launch-site storage tanks for use in launch operations. Figure 5 shows a block diagram of the combined OSWECelectrolysis process for low cost hydrogen generation. The OSWEC system converts the energy in the ocean swells to useful electric power, which is distributed to the different functions of the overall hydrogen generation process. This figure also illustrates an added plus to using sea water, in that other useful chemicals can be obtained from the salt brine. The major elements (greater than 0.3 kg/1000 1 (0.5 lb/1000 gal)) in sea salt that can be extracted for commercial use are chlorine, sodium, magnesium, sulfur, calcium, potassium, carbon, and bromine [6]. Several of these elements or compounds of these elements are currently being commercially produced from sea water. The OSWEC system for the pilot plant will consist of twelve reciprocating generators located approximately 2 km off the launch site in the Atlantic ocean. The electric power will be brought to shore via submerged cables to the electrolysis plant. An advantage of this system is that it can easily be scaled-up to supply all of the hydrogen and oxygen required for launch operations at the Kennedy Space Center and the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, with the addition of more reciprocating generators and electrolysis cells. An estimated 100 reciprocating generators would be required to provide the electric
cALsIlJh4 FOTASSIUM
I I
’ ENERGY I ----------_----------------
hydrogen generation process.
power for producing all of the liquid hydrogen required for launch operations at the Kennedy Space Center.
4. CONCLUSION The goal of hydrogen research is to ultimately reduce the cost of its production, which for the electrolysis process is the cost of the electric power consumed. The OSWEC system provides a means of generating a sufficient amount of non-polluting electric power from the oceans to make it significantly less expensive than either nuclear or oil-based electric power. By utilizing the cheap energy available from the OSWEC system for the electrolysis of water, the cost of producing hydrogen will be reduced significantly as well. The Kennedy Space Center, with its ocean-side launch sites and its substantial need for hydrogen make it ideal for the combination of such a system. Having the hydrogen generation process at or near the launch site has the added advantage of eliminating the risk and added costs of transporting the liquid H, from New Orleans. In conclusion, utilizing the OSWEC system in concert with electrolysis of water to create hydrogen and oxygen for launch operation is economically feasible and is a lower risk method of providing fuel for the Space Shuttle system and other future launch vehicles.
REFERENCES 1. M. S. Casper, Hydrogen Manufacture by Electrolysis, Thermul Decomposition and Unusual Techniques, (p. 112). Noyes Data Corp. Park Ridge, NJ (1978).
86
T. C. WOODBRIDGE
and D. D. WOODBRIDGE
2. ‘Stretch-Outs’ Raise Nuclear Cost Over Coal. Elecfricul World, December, p. 15 (1986). 3. A. J. Fiehn and RI J. Vondrasek, Cost of Electric Power. Marks’ Stundard Handbook for Mechnnicul Enpineers (eds E. A. Avallone and T. Baumeister, III), 9th ed., ppy 17-35-l 7-45. McGraw-Hill, New York (1987).
4. J. Ward, A New Look At Reducing Electric Rates. Americun City & Country, January, pp. 36-38 (1991). 5. B. Buckingham and J. Ewing, KSC Staff Oversees Propellent Use for all of NASA. Smzceoort News. Januarv. D. 5 (1992). 6. R. C. Weast, CRC H&book of Chemistry clnd physics, 56th ed., p. F-199. CRC Press. Cleveland. OH (1975).