allowing for lesser use of the expensive Pt catalyst, thus
reducing the cost (Rosli et al. 2017). Lower thermal resistance Nafion membrane (<100 °C) can be avoided by using
acid-doped PBI membrane or composite membrane consisting of organic/inorganic component such as fluorinated
polymer/SiO 2 ,
PWA/PVA,
and
polyalkoxysilane/
phosphotungstic acid composite. The composite membrane
by far is the most promising candidate for the HT-PEMFC.
Generally, the DMFC may use the same membrane
electrolyte as PEMFC however with added catalyst layer at
the electrode. Since the inception DMFC traditionally uses
diluted methanol at concentration <1 M, effort now has
focused on using higher concentration methanol with concentration up to 4 M. The higher concentration methanol
enables higher energy density fuel storage, thus increasing
the prospect of DMFC as mobile power source. The challenge associated with the effort such as methanol crossover
is being researched actively. Methanol crossover from the
anode to the cathode reduces fuel efficiency and caused
mixed potential at the cathode (Li and Faghri 2013). This
problem may be controlled by using hydrophobic PTFE
coating at the electrode side, by employing gas diffusion
layer or by using vapor fed methanol fuel system. Vapor fed
DMFC has gained interest in recent years. In vapor fed
DMFC, the methanol fuel is vaporized first by external
heater or by pervaporation membrane and fed into the anode
of the SOFC in vapor phase. At the anode, the principle
operation of oxidation is the same as the liquid DMFC
(Mallick et al. 2016).
In both PEMFC and DMFC, control of the carbon
dioxide and water produced from the operation has been
identified to play crucial role in controlling the performance
of the fuel cell. Thus, research now targeted at improving the
management of the water at the electrode by improving the
GDL and the back layer (Majlan et al. 2018).
6 Conclusion
The implementation of membrane electrolyte in the fuel cell
has been extensively researched. Membrane technology
places an enormous benefit over prevalent products in terms
of efficiency. The focus has already been well-founded on
producing PEM for PEMFC and DMFC as well as ceramic
membrane for SOFC. All the accomplishments reported in
the fuel cell technology so far have been due to ongoing
studies on the membrane base fuel cell and generally
renewable energy. Improvement on catalysts, MEA elements, and bipolar plates is notably essential for PEMFCs
and DMFCs to overcome the two significant obstacles to
marketing (i.e., durability and price). While it is crucial for
SOFCs to improve the anode side in order to overcome the
phenomenon of carbon deposition before using hydrocarbon
such as methane in MT-SOFC, thus, further study on the
utilization of membrane electrolyte in fuel cell is still needed
to improve the overall fuel cell efficiency.
References
Ahmad, M. M., Kamarudin, S. K., Daud, W. R. W., & Yaakub, Z.
(2010). High power passive lDMFC with low catalyst loading for
small power generation. Energy Conversion and Management, 51,
821–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2009.11.017.
Akdeniz, Y., Timurkutluk, B., & Timurkutluk, C. (2016). Development
of anodes for direct oxidation of methane fuel in solid oxide fuel
cells. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 41, 10021–10029.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.03.169.
Allen, R. G., Lim, C., Yang, L. X., Scott, K., & Roy, S. (2005). Novel anode
structure for the direct methanol fuel cell. Journal of Power Sources,
143, 142–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2004.11.038.
Amirinejad, M., Madaeni, S. S., Lee, K.-S., Ko, U., Rafiee, E., & Lee,
J.-S. (2012). Sulfonated poly(arylene ether)/heteropolyacids
nanocomposite membranes for proton exchange membrane fuel
cells. Electrochimica Acta, 62, 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
electacta.2011.12.025.
Amjadi, M., Rowshanzamir, S., Peighambardoust, S. J., Hosseini, M.
G., & Eikani, M. H. (2010). Investigation of physical properties and
cell performance of Nafion/TiO 2 nanocomposite membranes for
high temperature PEM fuel cells. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 35, 9252–9260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.
2010.01.005.
Ariono, D., Khoiruddin, S., & Wenten, I. G. (2017). Heterogeneous
structure and its effect on properties and electrochemical behavior of
ion-exchange membrane. Materials Research Express, 4, 024006.
https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aa5cd4.
Awang, N., Ismail, A. F., Jaafar, J., Matsuura, T., Junoh, H., Othman,
M. H. D., & Rahman, M. A. (2015). Functionalization of polymeric
materials as a high performance membrane for direct methanol fuel
cell: A review. Reactive & Functional Polymers, 86, 248–258.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reactfunctpolym.2014.09.019.
Azzolini, A., Sglavo, V. M., & Downs, J. A. (2015). Production and
performance of copper-based anode-supported SOFCs. Journal of
the Electrochemical Society, 68, 2583–2596.
Bochentyn, B., Chlipała, M., Gazda, M., Wang, S. F., & Jasiński,
P. (2019). Copper and cobalt co-doped ceria as an anode catalyst for
DIR-SOFCs fueled by biogas. Solid State Ionics, 330, 47–53.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssi.2018.12.007.
Brandão, L., Boaventura, M., & Ribeirinha, P. (2012). Single wall
nanohorns as electrocatalyst support for vapour phase high
temperature DMFC. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy,
37, 19073–19081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.09.133.
Cho, E.-B., Luu, D. X., & Kim, D. (2010). Enhanced transport
performance of sulfonated mesoporous benzene-silica incorporated
poly(ether ether ketone) composite membranes for fuel cell
application. Journal of Membrane Science, 351, 58–64. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2010.01.028.
Chun, J. H., Kim, S. G., Lee, J. Y., Hyeon, D. H., Chun, B.-H., Kim, S.
H., & Park, K. T. (2013). Crosslinked sulfonated poly(arylene ether
sulfone)/silica hybrid membranes for high temperature proton
exchange membrane fuel cells. Renewable Energy, 51, 22–28.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.09.005.
122
S. M. Jamil et al.
reducing the cost (Rosli et al. 2017). Lower thermal resistance Nafion membrane (<100 °C) can be avoided by using
acid-doped PBI membrane or composite membrane consisting of organic/inorganic component such as fluorinated
polymer/SiO 2 ,
PWA/PVA,
and
polyalkoxysilane/
phosphotungstic acid composite. The composite membrane
by far is the most promising candidate for the HT-PEMFC.
Generally, the DMFC may use the same membrane
electrolyte as PEMFC however with added catalyst layer at
the electrode. Since the inception DMFC traditionally uses
diluted methanol at concentration <1 M, effort now has
focused on using higher concentration methanol with concentration up to 4 M. The higher concentration methanol
enables higher energy density fuel storage, thus increasing
the prospect of DMFC as mobile power source. The challenge associated with the effort such as methanol crossover
is being researched actively. Methanol crossover from the
anode to the cathode reduces fuel efficiency and caused
mixed potential at the cathode (Li and Faghri 2013). This
problem may be controlled by using hydrophobic PTFE
coating at the electrode side, by employing gas diffusion
layer or by using vapor fed methanol fuel system. Vapor fed
DMFC has gained interest in recent years. In vapor fed
DMFC, the methanol fuel is vaporized first by external
heater or by pervaporation membrane and fed into the anode
of the SOFC in vapor phase. At the anode, the principle
operation of oxidation is the same as the liquid DMFC
(Mallick et al. 2016).
In both PEMFC and DMFC, control of the carbon
dioxide and water produced from the operation has been
identified to play crucial role in controlling the performance
of the fuel cell. Thus, research now targeted at improving the
management of the water at the electrode by improving the
GDL and the back layer (Majlan et al. 2018).
6 Conclusion
The implementation of membrane electrolyte in the fuel cell
has been extensively researched. Membrane technology
places an enormous benefit over prevalent products in terms
of efficiency. The focus has already been well-founded on
producing PEM for PEMFC and DMFC as well as ceramic
membrane for SOFC. All the accomplishments reported in
the fuel cell technology so far have been due to ongoing
studies on the membrane base fuel cell and generally
renewable energy. Improvement on catalysts, MEA elements, and bipolar plates is notably essential for PEMFCs
and DMFCs to overcome the two significant obstacles to
marketing (i.e., durability and price). While it is crucial for
SOFCs to improve the anode side in order to overcome the
phenomenon of carbon deposition before using hydrocarbon
such as methane in MT-SOFC, thus, further study on the
utilization of membrane electrolyte in fuel cell is still needed
to improve the overall fuel cell efficiency.
References
Ahmad, M. M., Kamarudin, S. K., Daud, W. R. W., & Yaakub, Z.
(2010). High power passive lDMFC with low catalyst loading for
small power generation. Energy Conversion and Management, 51,
821–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2009.11.017.
Akdeniz, Y., Timurkutluk, B., & Timurkutluk, C. (2016). Development
of anodes for direct oxidation of methane fuel in solid oxide fuel
cells. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 41, 10021–10029.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.03.169.
Allen, R. G., Lim, C., Yang, L. X., Scott, K., & Roy, S. (2005). Novel anode
structure for the direct methanol fuel cell. Journal of Power Sources,
143, 142–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2004.11.038.
Amirinejad, M., Madaeni, S. S., Lee, K.-S., Ko, U., Rafiee, E., & Lee,
J.-S. (2012). Sulfonated poly(arylene ether)/heteropolyacids
nanocomposite membranes for proton exchange membrane fuel
cells. Electrochimica Acta, 62, 227–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
electacta.2011.12.025.
Amjadi, M., Rowshanzamir, S., Peighambardoust, S. J., Hosseini, M.
G., & Eikani, M. H. (2010). Investigation of physical properties and
cell performance of Nafion/TiO 2 nanocomposite membranes for
high temperature PEM fuel cells. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 35, 9252–9260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.
2010.01.005.
Ariono, D., Khoiruddin, S., & Wenten, I. G. (2017). Heterogeneous
structure and its effect on properties and electrochemical behavior of
ion-exchange membrane. Materials Research Express, 4, 024006.
https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aa5cd4.
Awang, N., Ismail, A. F., Jaafar, J., Matsuura, T., Junoh, H., Othman,
M. H. D., & Rahman, M. A. (2015). Functionalization of polymeric
materials as a high performance membrane for direct methanol fuel
cell: A review. Reactive & Functional Polymers, 86, 248–258.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reactfunctpolym.2014.09.019.
Azzolini, A., Sglavo, V. M., & Downs, J. A. (2015). Production and
performance of copper-based anode-supported SOFCs. Journal of
the Electrochemical Society, 68, 2583–2596.
Bochentyn, B., Chlipała, M., Gazda, M., Wang, S. F., & Jasiński,
P. (2019). Copper and cobalt co-doped ceria as an anode catalyst for
DIR-SOFCs fueled by biogas. Solid State Ionics, 330, 47–53.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssi.2018.12.007.
Brandão, L., Boaventura, M., & Ribeirinha, P. (2012). Single wall
nanohorns as electrocatalyst support for vapour phase high
temperature DMFC. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy,
37, 19073–19081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.09.133.
Cho, E.-B., Luu, D. X., & Kim, D. (2010). Enhanced transport
performance of sulfonated mesoporous benzene-silica incorporated
poly(ether ether ketone) composite membranes for fuel cell
application. Journal of Membrane Science, 351, 58–64. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2010.01.028.
Chun, J. H., Kim, S. G., Lee, J. Y., Hyeon, D. H., Chun, B.-H., Kim, S.
H., & Park, K. T. (2013). Crosslinked sulfonated poly(arylene ether
sulfone)/silica hybrid membranes for high temperature proton
exchange membrane fuel cells. Renewable Energy, 51, 22–28.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.09.005.
122
S. M. Jamil et al.