The aviation industry is an integral phenomenon in the modern world since it provides people with benefits and introduces many disadvantages. Greenhouse gas emissions and the non-renewable nature of traditional fuels pose the necessity to look for an alternative and sufficient energy source for aeronautical transportation systems, specifically for airplanes. For that purpose, this research paper will focus on solid fuel cells and present scientific reasoning to demonstrate that it is a better energy source compared to jet fuel.
To begin with, one should mention that solid fuel cells are a generic term that unites many fuel sources, but the present research will consider solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC). This energy source deserves attention since it has “a great fuel flexibility, higher quality waste heat efficiency and is environmentally friendly with less emissions” (Guillern 1). These specific features demonstrate that positive outcomes can be achieved. Evrin and Dincer also admit that the SOFC impresses with the relatively high exergy and energy efficiencies that are 85% and 80%, respectively, while the present systems have 57% energy and 47% exergy efficiencies (9674). Simultaneously, Guillerm argues that the power source under analysis has low activation losses, increased power density, and the ability to have high specific power (1). This information demonstrates that the SOFC offers a few essential benefits that can justify its use in the aeronautical transportation industry.
Simultaneously, it is reasonable to comment on how solid fuel cells are a better energy source compared to jet fuel. On the one hand, the information above demonstrates that the SOFC impresses with general benefits, including decreased gas emissions, increased energy efficiency, and others. On the other hand, one should rely on specific characteristics to compare the two energy sources fairly and impartially. Firstly, it is reasonable to consider the hydrogen to carbon ratio since it is associated with greenhouse emissions. Holladay et al. clarify that this ratio is 1.94 for average jet fuel (11). Simultaneously, Guillerm mentions that the SOFC impresses with a 1.5 coefficient (4). It supports the claim that the SOFC is more environmentally friendly.
Secondly, it is necessary to look at the fuels’ physical features. The SOFC implies a solid electrolyte that is more convenient in use compared to the liquid one in jet fuel (Energy.gov). Thirdly, Chevron admits that the freezing point for jet fuel is -40ºC, while it seems that the SOFC can operate under lower temperatures since it has a solid base (17). Finally, it is reasonable to focus on the fuels’ energetic possibilities. According to Holladay et al., the specific energy of jet fuel is 43 MJ/kg (11). Simultaneously, the SOFC has a 60% electrical efficiency, which is a good result (Energy.gov). The table below will present the comparison of fuel jet and the SOFC.
In conclusion, the given research paper has overviewed the specific type of solid fuel cells and commented on how this fuel can be used in the aeronautical transportation industry. Evidence from scholarly articles and professional websites has been found and synthesized to demonstrate that solid fuel cells can be considered a good energy source. Furthermore, the paper has located adequate evidence to reveal that solid fuel cells are better than jet fuel.
References
Chevron. “Aviation Fuels: Technical Review.” n.d. Web.
Energy.gov. “Comparison of Fuel Cell Technologies.” n.d. Web.
Evrin, Reza Alizade, and Ibrahim Dincer. “Development and Evaluation of an Integrated Solid Oxide Fuel Cell System for Medium Airplanes.” International Journal of Energy Research, vol. 44, no. 12, 2020, pp. 9674-9685.
Guillerm, Antoine-Amaury. Assessment of a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Powering a Full Electric Aircraft Subsystem Architecture. Thesis, School of Engineering Sciences, 2020.
Holladay, Johnathan, et al. “Sustainable Aviation Fuel: Review of Technical Pathways.” Energy.gov, 2020. Web.