在本實驗中對甲醇水蒸氣重組器(MSR)提出一個簡單創新的燃料供給方法，利用單一熱源以被動的方式將固定比例之水和甲醇注入重組器中進行反應，控制熱源至蒸發塊之間熱通量即可控制燃料的蒸發量，以達到所需之固定燃料比例，其中調整熱源至蒸發塊之熱阻是主要控制熱通量的方式，在傳統進料方式需要兩個液體幫浦來達到此一目的，利用此方法可減少幫浦數量，因此系統可以更簡化，並減少使用幫浦能量的消耗，本實驗即對此方法的可行性進行驗證。
在第一階段以電加熱來驗證此方法的可行性，第二階段以一U型腔體之觸媒燃燒，以甲醇燃燒加熱取代電加熱，在不同反應溫度下水和甲醇進料比率為 0.8 ~ 1.47，並驗證了燃燒器在重組器中溫度高度均勻分佈，第三階段為燃燒器針對氣態氫氣和液態甲醇兩種燃料進行反應，主要目標是重組器啟動時以甲醇為升溫燃料，當反應開始進行後以燃料電池尾氣殘餘氫氣作為燃燒用之燃料來源，本實驗中以稀釋的燃燒觸媒來達到目標，無論甲醇或是模擬燃料電池尾氣之氫氣和二氧化碳的混合氣燃燒後都有高度的溫度均勻性。
在兩段式的升溫過程中，重組器須先燃燒甲醇，經過25分鐘達到270度C，之後轉為氫氣和二氧化碳混合氣，再經過20分鐘使重組器達到278度C穩定，此時重組甲醇反應率可達到95%，一氧化碳濃度為1.04%，氫氣濃度75.1%，二氧化碳濃度23.6%，最後以CO移除器將CO濃度降低，使燃料可由抗CO燃料電池堆使用。

This work presents a simple novel feeding method for a methanol steam reformer (MSR). Using a single heat source, a fixed ratio of water and methanol vapor can be fed into the reformer in a passive way. By adjusting the thermal resistances of the two separate heat paths, different amounts of heat, related to the stoichiometric ratio and heats of evaporation, are conducted to two separate evaporators to vaporize the liquid fuels. Compared with the conventional practice that the feeding ratios are actively controlled with two pumps, no pump is needed in this novel feeding system. Thus, the controlling system can be simplified and the auxiliary power consumption can be minimized. Experiments are conducted to verify the feasibility of this novel fuel-feeding method. In the first stage, an electric heater is used as the heat source. In the second stage, a methanol-burning catalytic combustor in a u-turn-channel is integrally machined under a two-turn serpentine channel reformer to replace the electric heater. Water/methanol feed ratios of 0.8~1.47 are managed under different reaction temperatures. Highly uniform temperature distributions throughout the reformer are demonstrated. The third stage is to make the catalytic combustor workable with both hydrogen and methanol fuels. The aim is to reutilize the exhaust hydrogen from a fuel cell under stable operation but burn methanol during the start-up. To resolve the highly different fuel reactivities, a suitably diluted catalyst formula demonstrates uniform temperature distributions burning with either liquid methanol or an H2/CO2 mixture simulating the exhaust gas from a fuel cell. In a two-stage process, it first takes 25 min to reach 270 ℃ by burning methanol. After the fuel is switched to the H2/CO2 mixture, another 20 min is needed to attain an optimal steady state which yields a high methanol conversion of 95% and acceptably low CO fraction of 1.04% at a reaction temperature of 278 ℃. The H2 and CO2 concentrations are 75.1% and 23.6%. Finally, the CO product in the reformate is successfully removed using the preferential oxidation (PROX) method. Thus, the reformate of the present novel MSR is readily applicable to anti-CO fuel cells.

[1] Kordesch K, Simader G. Fuel cells and their applications. New York: VCH; 1996.
[2] Brown LF. A comparative study of fuels for on-board hydrogen production for fuel-cell power automobiles. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2001; 26:381–97
[3] Velu S, Suzuki K, Osaki T. Selective production of hydrogen by partial oxidation of methanol over catalysts derived from CuZnAl-layered double hydroxides. Catal. Lett. 1998;62:159-167..
[4] Lindström B, Pettersson LJ. Development of a methanol fuelled reformer for fuel cell applications. J. Power Sources 2003;118:71–78.
[5] Reitz TL, Lee PL, Czaplewski KF, Lang JC, Popp KE, Kung HH. Time-resolved XANES investigation of CuO/ZnO in the oxidative methanol reforming reaction. J. Catal. 2001;199:193-201.
[6] Lindström B, Agrell J, Pettersson LJ. Combined methanol reforming for hydrogen generation over monolithic catalysts. Chem. Eng. J. 2003;93:91–101.
[7] Liu S, Takahashi K, Fuchigami K, Uematsu K. Hydrogen production by oxidative methanol reforming on Pd/ZnO: Catalyst deactivation. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2006;299:58–65.
[8] Breen JP, Ross JRH. Methanol reforming for fuel-cell applications: development of zirconia-containing Cu-Zn-Al catalysts. Catal. Today 1999;51:521-533.
[9] deWild PJ, Verhaak MJFM. Catalytic production of hydrogen from methanol. Catal. Today 2000;60:3–10.
[10] Agrell J, Birgersson H, Boutonnet M. Steam reforming of methanol over a Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalyst : a kinetic analysis and strategies for suppression of CO formation. J. Power Sources 2002;106:249-257.
[11] Lindström B, Pettersson LJ. Hydrogen generation by steam reforming of methanol over copper-based catalysts for fuel cell applications. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2001;26:923–933.
[12] Reuse P, Renken A, Haas-Santo K, Gokre O, Schubert K. Hydrogen production for fuel cell application in an autothermal micro-channel reactor. Chem. Eng. J. 2004;101:133-141.
[13] Won JY, Jun HK, Jeon MK, Woo SI. Performance of microchannel reactor combined with combustor for methanol steam reforming. Catal. Today 2006;111:158-163.
[14] Kim T. Micro methanol reformer combined with a catalytic combustor for a PEM fuel cell. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009;34: 6790-6798.
[15] Kundu A, Ahn JE, Park SS, Shul YG, Han HS. Process intensification by micro-channel reactor for steam reforming of methanol. Chem. Eng. J. 2008;135:113-119.
[16] Liao C, Erickson PA. Characteristic time as a descriptive parameter in steam reformation hydrogen production processes. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:1652-1660.
[17] Nagano S, Miyagawa H, Azegami O, Ohsawa K. Heat transfer enhancement in methanol steam reforming for a fuel cell. Energy Conversion and Management 2001;42:1817-1829.
[18] Terazaki T, Nomura M, Takeyama K, Nakamura O, Yamamoto T. Development of multi-layered microreactor with methanol reformer for small PEMFC. J. Power Sources 2005;145:691-696.
[19] Kwon OJ, Yoon DH, Kim JJ. Silicon-based miniaturized reformer with methanol catalytic burner. Chem. Eng. J. 2008; 140:466-472.
[20] Leu CH, King SC, Chen CC, Huang JM, Tzeng SS, Liu IH, et al. Investigation of the packed bed and the micro-channel bed for methanol catalytic combustion over Pt/A12O3 catalysts. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 2010;382:43-48.
[21] Lee JH, Do GS, Moon HJ, Kwon OC. An annulus-type micro reforming system integrated with a two-staged micro-combustor. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2010;35:1819-1828.
[22] Marchese AJ, Dryer FL, Colantonio RO, Nayagam V. Microgravity combustion of methanol and methanol/water droplets: drop tower experiments and model predictions. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Symposium (International) on Combustion/The Combustion Institute; 1996. p. 1209-1217.
[23] Chein RY, Chen YC, Chung JN. Thermal resistance effect on methanol-steam reforming performance in micro-scale reformers. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2012;37:250-262.
[24] Polman EA, Der Kinderen JM, Thuis FMA. Novel compact steam reformer for fuel cells with heat generation by catalytic combustion augmented by induction heating. Catal. Today 1999;47:347-351.
[25] Ryi SK, Park JS, Choi SH, Choa SH, Kima SH. Novel micro fuel processor for PEMFCs with heat generation by catalytic combustion. Chem. Eng. J. 2005; 113:47-53.
[26] Cao Y, Guo Z. Performance evaluation of an energy recovery system for fuel reforming of PEM fuel cell power plants. J. Power Sources 2002;109:287-293.
[27] Delsman ER, Uju CU, de Croon MHJM, Schouten JC, Ptasinski KJ. Exergy analysis of an integrated fuel processor and fuel cell (FP–FC) system. Energy 2006;31:3300–3309.
[28] Janicke MT, Kestenbaum H, Hagendorf U, Schüth F, Fichtner M, Schuberty K. The controlled oxidation of hydrogen from an explosive mixture of gases using a microstructured reactor/heat exchanger and Pt/Al2O3 catalyst. J. Catal. 2000;191:282–293.
[29] Narusawa K, Hayashida M, Kamiya Y, Roppongi H, Kurashima D, Wakabayashi K. Deterioration in fuel cell performance resultingfrom hydrogen fuel containing impurities: poisoning effects by CO, CH4, HCHO and HCOOH. JSAE Review 2003;24:41–46.
[30] Bhatia KK, Wang CY. Transient carbon monoxide poisoning of a polymer electrolyte fuel cell operating on diluted hydrogen feed. Electrochim. Acta 2004;49:2333–2341.
[31] Park ED, Lee D, Lee HC. Recent progress in selective CO removal in a H2-rich stream. Catal. Today 2009;139:280-290.
[32] Cipitì F, Pino L, Vita A, Laganà M, Recupero V. Model-based analysis of reactor geometrical configuration on CO preferential oxidation performance. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009;34:4463-4474.
[33] Oh SH, Sinkevitch RM. Carbon monoxide removal from hydrogen-rich fuel cell feed streams by selective catalytic oxidation. J. Catal. 1993;142:254-262.
[34] Incropera FP, DeWitt DP. Fundamentals of heat and mass transfer. 5th ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.; 2002.
[35] http://pro.tanaka.co.jp/products/group_f/f_5.html