Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30804192›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2019

Expert assessments of the cost and expected future performance of proton exchange membrane fuel cells for vehicles.

Michael M Whiston, Inês L Azevedo, Shawn Litster, Kate S Whitefoot, Constantine Samaras, Jay F Whitacre

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Subsize Pt-based intermetallic compound enables long-term cyclic mass activity for fuel-cell oxygen reduction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Is the HInternational journal of hydrogen energy · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michael M WhistonDepartment of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.ORCID 0000-0002-2629-345X
Inês L AzevedoDepartment of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.ORCID 0000-0002-4755-8656
Shawn LitsterDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.ORCID 0000-0003-1973-1834
Kate S WhitefootDepartment of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.ORCID 0000-0001-8961-5367
Constantine SamarasDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.ORCID 0000-0002-8803-2845
Jay F WhitacreDepartment of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213; whitacre@andrew.cmu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3439-4111

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite decades of development, proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEMFCs) still lack wide market acceptance in vehicles. To understand the expected trajectories of PEMFC attributes that influence adoption, we conducted an expert elicitation assessment of the current and expected future cost and performance of automotive PEMFCs. We elicited 39 experts' assessments of PEMFC system cost, stack durability, and stack power density under a hypothetical, large-scale production scenario. Experts assessed the median 2017 automotive cost to be $75/kW, stack durability to be 4,000 hours, and stack power density to be 2.5 kW/L. However, experts ranged widely in their assessments. Experts' 2017 best cost assessments ranged from $40 to $500/kW, durability assessments ranged from 1,200 to 12,000 hours, and power density assessments ranged from 0.5 to 4 kW/L. Most respondents expected the 2020 cost to fall short of the 2020 target of the US Department of Energy (DOE). However, most respondents anticipated that the DOE's ultimate target of $30/kW would be met by 2050 and a power density of 3 kW/L would be achieved by 2035. Fifteen experts thought that the DOE's ultimate durability target of 8,000 hours would be met by 2050. In general, experts identified high Pt group metal loading as the most significant barrier to reducing cost. Recommended research and development (R&D) funding was allocated to "catalysts and electrodes," followed in decreasing amount by "fuel cell performance and durability," "membranes and electrolytes," and "testing and technical assessment." Our results could be used to inform public and private R&D decisions and technology roadmaps.

Indexed as

costdurabilityexpert elicitationfuel cell electric vehiclepower density

Identifiers

PMID30804192
PMCPMC6421432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.