Electroforming Underpins a Stronger, Greener EU

Some of the largest industries in Europe are becoming more efficient, more competitive and more secure as a result of a nickel electroforming, a simple process that can be used in a myriad of ways.

Take aerospace, for instance, an industry that has an annual turnover of Euro 80 billion and employs almost half a million people. Manufacturers in that field are reducing the weight and fuel consumption of their airplanes, while increasing lifespan, by using electroformed moulds to make precision parts.  Having a stronger, lighter wing edge, tail rudder or nose cone can make the difference between completing the sale of an airplane and being sent back to the drawing board.

Or textiles:  Europe has been able to remain competitive in this industry despite losing market share to less developed countries by guaranteeing high levels of precision and accuracy while increasing production levels. Nearly 15% of world-wide textile production takes place in the European Union (EU), supporting more than 2.5 million jobs, according to recent research by the Brussels-based Weinberg Group, a scientific and regulatory consulting firm.

In the case of textiles, it is not moulds but rotary screens that make the difference. Electroforming creates precise, finely patterned screens, which in turn transfer intricate and colourful patterns to textiles, wallpaper, and carpets.

The common denominator in both moulds and rotary screen technology is nickel. During the electroforming process, perfected in Germany in the mid-1800s, nickel or other metal in solution is electroplated onto a mandrel in order to reproduce the pattern on the mandrel’s surface. Although gold, silver and copper can all be electroformed, nickel is the metal of choice because it is versatile, has excellent heat, corrosion and abrasion resistance, and can be electro-deposited quickly.

Another lesser known application of nickel electroforming is the production of the millions of small, detailed holograms that are embedded in bank cards and notes as a security feature. Banks rely on electroforming technology to create the high precision moulds needed to protect the integrity of both cash and non-monetary transactions. The Weinberg groups says this kind of protection is  becoming more important as identify theft and other attacks on payment integrity continue, while the use of cash in the EU grows.

The billions of albums, films and computer games produced each year rely on a similar kind of high-precision replication technology enabled by electroforming. Roughly 20 billion CDs and DVDs are produced worldwide every year, according to the Content Delivery and Storage Association (CDRA), and each electroformed mould can produce about 100,000 of them. In the EU, entertainment applications of this sector generate annual sales of Euro 40 billion and support 400,000 jobs, according to the Weinberg Group.

The Weinberg report concludes that nickel electroforming supports the competitiveness of some of the largest industrial and service sectors in the EU. By supplying a platform for continued improvements in efficiency, sustainability and innovation, the process also plays a key role in reducing resource and energy consumption.

Find New Markets Fast, Battery Makers Told

The future for nickel batteries lies with electric vehicles as well as other potential applications such as hobby batteries, telecom and electric bikes, says a new report on the global nickel battery market from Frost & Sullivan, a New York-based research service.

Traditionally, the industrial sector has been the main end user of nickel batteries, including nickel-cadmium (NiCad) and nickel metal hydrides (NiMH), because the batteries are relatively inexpensive, resistant to harsh environments and temperature flucuations and have high discharge rates. Recent growth in portable devices, such as laptops and mobile phones, has diversified the market. 

However, the report warns that unless nickel battery manufacturers make a significant investment in research and development, they risk losing more market share to newer battery chemistries that have enhanced features such as longer run times, decreased weight and compact size. These newer battery chemistries include lithium-ion (Li-ion), lithium ion polymer (Li-ion Poly) and lithium sulpher.

“”With the threat of substitution by newer battery chemistries, there is an urgent need to incorporate additional features such as miniaturization, portability and greater energy density,” say the authors of World Nickel Battery Markets. “Further, rigorously finding new applications or geographical regions in order to ensure market expansion remains the prime challenge for future sustainability.” 

For new geographic markets, the report suggests manufacturers target countries outside the declining nickel battery markets in Europe and North America. The Asia Pacific region, where cheap labour, excellent infrastructure and abundant raw materials ensure higher profit margins, is singled out for its potential for growth. Lower production costs give these countries particular leverage during the current high commodity price environment.

Revenue in the nickel battery market was $1.77 billion in 2004. The researchers expect this number to decline to $1.69 billion by 2011 unless new markets are developed soon.

Inconel 625 shows its mettle in WTE plants

Ongoing research at a Danish university is showing that Inconel 625, a nickel-chromium-molybdenum alloy, remains the best choice of alloy to combat the increasingly corrosive environment of waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration plants.

Because landfilling is discouraged in Denmark, almost all of the country’s waste ends up at WTE plants built from low-alloyed carbon steel. But as this waste becomes more corrosive, possibly as a result of increasing contents of PVCs that contain heavy metal chlorides, demand for corrosion-resistant alloys is rising.

Waste-to-energy plant

Meanwhile, European plants are being updated not only to adhere to stricter EU legislation, but also to increase efficiency and reduce maintenance and operational costs to be competitive in a common market.  

Over the past decade, Inconel 625 has become a popular solution to corrosion in European WTE plants, usually in the form of a weld overlay on the existing structure. The alloy is known for its strength at high temperatures, excellent corrosion resistance, and resistance to intergranular attack and stress-corrosion cracking.

Denmark-based Babcock & Wilson Volund, one of the main suppliers to European plants, reports that it has sold about 5,000 square metres of Inconel-protected heating surfaces to approximately 30 separate WTE plants up to 2004.   

But in a recent study presented at Corrosion, an annual conference hosted by NACE International, researchers from the Technical University of Denmark tested the performance of other nickel-based alloys similar to Inconel 625 to see if there was a better alternative that could handle the increasingly corrosive waste at Haderslev, a WTE plant commissioned in Denmark in 1993.

Haderslev has two parallel furnace and boiler lines. The boiler has three passes consisting of two empty radiation passes and one convection pass. Three-quarters of the first pass is refractory lined to protect the membrane walls from corrosion. The remaining quarter was weld overlaid with Inconel 625 in 1998 when corrosion rates became unacceptably high.

The Inconel 625 preformed as expected, but the researchers were interested in testing similar alloys, namely Inconel alloys 622 and 686, to see if they could do a better job. To do so, they installed a wall panel made up of various types of weld alloy into the original rear wall and waited 1-2 years for results.

Their conclusion was that 625 showed similar corrosion resistance to 686 and is not as susceptible to dendritic attack as 622. Therefore, because 625 is the least expensive of the three alloys, it remains the most practical choice for corrosion resistance in WTE plants.

“From the results presented at NACE, we think that Inconel 625 is the best alloy for the job,” says Melanie Montgomery, the lead researcher on the project, from the Department of Manufacturing Engineering. “It is easily available compared to 622 and 686 and is not as expensive.”

The environment at Haderslev is only moderately aggressive, so Montgomery has moved the research project to Mabjerg, another WTE plant believed to have a more aggressive environment.This time, she expects to be able to collect more information on the role of additional elements in alloys, such as molybdenum and niobium, in corrosion resistance.

Market Welcomes Nickel-Bearing Fuel Cells

Parts of the world with high electricity costs are welcoming fuel cells made of nickel and stainless steel as an alternative to traditional power generation.

Connecticut-based FuelCell Energy Inc., which delivered its first commercial unit of the nickel-bearing fuel cells at the beginning of 2003, has already installed 35 power plants around the world including Germany, Japan, Spain and the United States. And the market is broadening. 

“Our targets are areas of the world where there are high electricity costs and substantial incentive funding (for green power),” says Steven Eschbach, director of investor relations and communications for FuelCell Energy. “California and Japan are the most prolific markets today, but we think there are opportunities in the northeast (U.S.) where there are high electricity costs and lots of pollution.”

In the third quarter ended July 31 alone, FuelCell’s product sales reached US$3.6 million. The company expects to ship another 4 to 6 power plants to customers in Japan and the United States by the end of the fiscal year.

The company’s Direct FuelCells (DFC), so-called because they do not require external hydrogen generation but operate directly on available fuels such as natural gas, are high-temperature, high-efficiency molten carbonate fuel cells designed for stationary applications.

The DFCs consist of a ceramic-based matrix layer sandwiched between an anode made of porous nickel strip and a cathode made of nickel oxide strip. A hydrocarbon, such as natural gas, is fed to the anode while air is fed to the cathode. In a process called reforming, hydrogen is extracted from the fuel and mixes with the air inside the fuel cell to produce electricity, heat and water.

Nickel is used to make the anodes and cathodes because it is a good conductor of heat and is resistant to corrosion.  

Although the cost of generating electricity from carbonate fuel cells is much higher (16 cents per kilowatt hour at current natural gas prices) than the average cost of electricity from traditional sources (about 10 cents per kilowatt hour), the environmental benefits are significant. FuelCell’s DFCs emit considerably less CO2 than engine-based technologies because they are twice as efficient.

Another advantage DFC technology has over its main fuel cell competitor, proton exchange membrane (PEM) technology, is that the heat generated by the unit can be captured and used as thermal energy. At a Sheraton hotel in New Jersey, for example, heat generated by the 250 kilowatt DFC power plant is used to heat the hotel’s water. At a Michelin plant in Germany, the heat is used to generate steam for tire vulcanization.

And the unit can run on any hydrocarbon fuel, not just natural gas. At the Kirin brewery in Japan, the power plant runs on brewery gas. At a Los Angeles wastewater treatment facility, DFCs successfully operated on biogas generated by the treatment process in field trials.

Currently, all of FuelCell’s current customers require government subsidies to cover the cost premium for the green electricity. But Eschbach says the company is working hard to lower the cost of its units. By the year 2007, the company aims to have reduced the cost of its units by 75%.

Smog Laws Beget Stainless Steel Fuel Tanks

Tougher environmental laws have triggered a new application for 304 stainless steel: fuel tanks for cars. 

In response to increasingly stringent emission standards in the United States, several European car manufacturers are fitting certain models (e.g. Volkswagen Beetle) bound for U.S. markets with stainless steel tanks, reports ThyssenKrupp, the world’s largest producer of stainless steel flat products.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

Example of conventional Stainless Steel fuel tank on truck

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.

Building the fuel tanks requires approximately 6,000-8,000 tonnes of NIROSTA® 4301 stainless steel on an annual basis, the German company says.

The tanks will help car manufacturers conform to environmental laws designed to control smog. The state of California, for instance, has introduced legislation that limits hydrocarbon emissions to two grams per day per vehicle. That limit is set to drop further by 2004 while other states and some European countries are expected to follow California’s example.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vehicles account for about 60 percent of the country’s total emissions of carbon monoxide, 31 percent of nitrogen oxides, 30 percent of volatile organic compounds, and eight percent of particulate matter.

One source of these emissions is fuel vapour that permeates the walls of conventional plastic tanks at a rate of about two grams per day. Both carbon steel and stainless steel prevent this leakage, but stainless steel has the added advantage of longevity because of its resistance to corrosion.

Since the California legislation requires car manufactures to guarantee zero emissions for at least 15 years or 240,000 kilometres, longevity is a crucial feature.

“This (requirement) is a problem for conventional steel,” says Jochen Krautschick from ThyssenKrupp’s technical development department, although the company says that recent developments in anti-corrosion coatings could eventually make carbon steel just as long-lasting.

For years, plastic has been the material of choice for fuel tanks because it can be blow-molded to fit into almost any space. But new techniques such as parallel-plate hydroforming and hydromechanical sheet forming now allow steel to be manipulated into equally complex shapes.

The major obstacle to the use of stainless steel in cars is cost. Although Krautschick would not divulge numbers, the stainless steel tank is expected to be significantly more expensive than either carbon steel or plastic tanks, especially since current production is so limited.

“At the moment, only the vehicles for the U.S. market will have the stainless steel tank, and that’s only the upper class cars from the European manufacturers,” he says.

But as “zero emission” legislation continues to spread beyond Californian borders (and as long as viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine, such as fuel cell technology, remain a distant goal), demand for stainless steel tanks is expected to grow.

“While the plastics industry and tank system manufacturers have developed new products which reduce emissions, they fail to match the performance of the stainless steel solution,” ThyssenKrupp stated in a press release.

The stainless steel tanks are 100% recyclable.