Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars
I think we all know the cons (I can't think of any pros) of gasoline; it's filthy dirty in terms of emissions, it's getting very expensive (especially here lately), and some day what we need to make it will all be gone. But what about alternative power? I think of hybrids as a step in the right direction, but not a large enough step.
First off, I think development of hybrid vehicles is moving along way too slowly. By now, just about every vehicle that's currently available powered solely by an internal combustion engine should also be available as a hybrid. No doubt I'd have a hybrid now (because I hate spending money on gas) if a model that suits my needs were available. Secondly, although hybrids use much less gas than ordinary vehicles, they still use it.
CNG powered vehicles would be a step further than hybrids because their emissions are almost zilch. CNG is very clean burning, but the problem I see this creating would be with the supply of natural gas. There have already been times when the industry has blamed low supplies for price spikes. Sound familiar? Now that most people heat their homes with natural gas, if everyone started powering their vehicles with CNG, the energy burning consumer would once again be at the mercy of the greedy energy providers.
It seems to me hydrogen power would be the best of all for the obvious reasons, although if they became the norm, I'm sure consumers would charged for water accordingly. The one thing that puzzles me the most is why it's taking the auto makers so long to develop alternative powered vehicles. I've heard a couple different theories on this. One centers around the idea that big oil companies are doing everything they can to slow down development of APV's because they realize if these vehicles are produced and sold in large numbers, this would end their strong hold on the world market. This is similar to the theory that cancer researchers don't want to find a cure for cancer because the massive amounts of money now flowing their way would stop. Another theory is that auto makers just aren't devoting enough R&D into APV's because of the expense. I haven't been able to varify any of these claims, so as far as I know, they're just theories. Whatever the reason, something or someone needs to light a fire under the butts of the auto makers to get them to expedite development before these never ending increases in gas prices completely destroy the world's economy.
First off, I think development of hybrid vehicles is moving along way too slowly. By now, just about every vehicle that's currently available powered solely by an internal combustion engine should also be available as a hybrid. No doubt I'd have a hybrid now (because I hate spending money on gas) if a model that suits my needs were available. Secondly, although hybrids use much less gas than ordinary vehicles, they still use it.
CNG powered vehicles would be a step further than hybrids because their emissions are almost zilch. CNG is very clean burning, but the problem I see this creating would be with the supply of natural gas. There have already been times when the industry has blamed low supplies for price spikes. Sound familiar? Now that most people heat their homes with natural gas, if everyone started powering their vehicles with CNG, the energy burning consumer would once again be at the mercy of the greedy energy providers.
It seems to me hydrogen power would be the best of all for the obvious reasons, although if they became the norm, I'm sure consumers would charged for water accordingly. The one thing that puzzles me the most is why it's taking the auto makers so long to develop alternative powered vehicles. I've heard a couple different theories on this. One centers around the idea that big oil companies are doing everything they can to slow down development of APV's because they realize if these vehicles are produced and sold in large numbers, this would end their strong hold on the world market. This is similar to the theory that cancer researchers don't want to find a cure for cancer because the massive amounts of money now flowing their way would stop. Another theory is that auto makers just aren't devoting enough R&D into APV's because of the expense. I haven't been able to varify any of these claims, so as far as I know, they're just theories. Whatever the reason, something or someone needs to light a fire under the butts of the auto makers to get them to expedite development before these never ending increases in gas prices completely destroy the world's economy.
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
kirstie_h
Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
2. Hydrogen is good an clean but currently it is very expensive to produce. Maybe there could be mega-size nuclear refineries to produce hydrogen.
Current focus of Hybrid was on economy only, Newer generations are becoming performance aware.
CNG has always been equivalent performance but the $2,000 conversion cost put most people off, especially individuals. The government never embraced or pushed CNG.
Hydrogen is a possibility and if it targets economy vehicles first it will fail. However safety and production cost issues need to be be resolved up front.
YMMV,
MidCow
I wouldn't mind paying the $2K for a CNG conversion as its benefits over gasoline are almost endless......except for, of course, its availability for automotive use.
The "hydrogen economy" would only provide a different way to consume fossil fuel, not replace it.
Hoewever, there may be hope. Existing chemical plants that produce Chlorine also produce Hydrogen as a byproduct. However, today is is usually just burned off. However, in the future it might be a fule celle Hydrogen source
If only pure water is the discharge from the tail pipes of fuel cell vehicles, what does one do in the winter? Do we park these vehicles or do we keep them in heated garages. Will the water turn the roads into skating rinks in Minnesota and here in Canada? Will the major cities that now have smog problems have ice fog problems from all the vapour coming out of thousands of fuel cells?
Someone explain this side of the equation.
Article from Canadian Driver
News Item from Honda World News
The current cost of fuel cells used in the automotive industry is quite comparable to that of fuel cells used in stationary applications. The present cost of an 80 kilowatt fuel cell, which is the size necessary to compete with a standard gasoline engine, is about $160,000. [40] With the cost of the average 80 kW gasoline engine at $3,500, this $2,000 per kW price tag of an automotive fuel cell is quite high. [41]
http://solstice.crest.org/articles/static/1/995303594_7.html#d
With the technical problems yet to be sorted out, no infrastructure in the works, and the exorbitant additional cost to buy a hydrogen vehicle, I can't see it ever coming to pass.
I think they will eventually get it sorted out. Production costs will go down once the technology is stable and production lots can increase. It will be a while before it hits "critical mass", but it will come.
Unless, of course, some other technology appears that is better and easier...
========================================
Hydrogen is not an energy source. It's an energy carrier (like a battery). You still need another energy source like solar or nuclear to make the H2.
In case of Honda FCX, the electrical energy is used to drive the 80 HP electric motor. In addition, FCX also uses ultra capacitor pack (recharged using regenerative braking) to provide assist charge to propel the vehicle.
OIL = exists naturally
COAL = exists naturally
WOOD = exists naturally
HYDROGEN = does NOT exist naturally
The oil/coal/wood is easy to obtain (dig it out of the ground & burn it), but the hydrogen is not easy to get, because you have to MAKE it.
.
Prediction: Now you'll tell me I'm wrong. Okay fair enough. :-) Answer this question: "Hydrogen doesn't grow on trees. Where do we get the hydrogen from?"
The answer is:
"Use other energy forms like oil/coal/solar/nuclear to make it." Making hydrogen is equivalent to charging a battery. It acts as an energy carrier, not a source.
Troy
Extracted from what? Using what energy source?
.
NOTE TO MODS: Hydrogen fuel cells are hybrids.
Remember again, energy is transformed, not created. This is true, regardless of the kind of fuel we're using.
Culliganman (back to our future)
.
Which is what I originally said: "Hydrogen is not an energy source. It's an energy carrier (like a battery). You still need another energy source like solar or nuclear to make the H2."
And you say there's no difference, but there is. It's the math:
PRODUCE - YIELD-IN-CAR
oil 100watt - 1000 watt
H2 100watt - 10 watt
The hydrogen fuel cell hybrid is a lossy system. You spend 100 watts to make it, and only get 10 watts back. The hydrogen Hybrid makes no sense.
Troy
H2 Production Cost = 100 watt
H2 Yield-In-Car = 10 watt
The hydrogen fuel cell hybrid is a lossy system. You spend 100 watts to make it, and only get 10 watts back. The hydrogen fuel-cell hybrid makes no sense.
Gasoline - $2.09 / Gallon
Diesel - $1.49 / GGE (Gasoline Gallon Equivalent)
Biodiesel - $ 2.50 / GGE
Ethanol - $3.00 / GGE
Hydrogen (nuclear) $4.00 / GGE
Hydrogen (wind) $6.00 / GGE
Hydrogen (pv) $10 / GGE
.
Thanks for the details on cost, but my main concern is energy. To me it makes no sense to spend 100 watts to make H2, when you only get 10 watts back in the car.
And for changing natural gas--->hydrogen, that makes no sense either. If you're going to use natural gas, just buy a natural-gas car, and burn it directly! (Like the Civic GX.)
Troy
HES II is the further evolution of a joint development effort by Honda and Plug Power to produce a home refueling unit that provides hydrogen from natural gas for vehicle refueling, heat for domestic hot water use and electricity for the home.
"If you go by the rules, there is no source of energy! If you say hydrogen is only a carrier of energy, you shouldn't disagree that gasoline or diesel are too! That's my point of contention to yours." -robertsmx
The above statement is true. Oil/gasoline/cng are all nothing but storage vessels, batteries if you will, for energy. The only source of energy currently known and available to this planet is the sun, and the fuels we use most today - oil/coal/etc are simply leftover solar energy. These solar reserves have been unused and accumulating for millions of years. Because we have this 'savings account' of energy stored underground, we have been able to spend more energy per day than is being provided to us by the sun.
The problem with Hydrogen is that Water is not a source of hydrogen. Water is the result of spent hydrogen and to "recharge" that hydrogen means we need to pull energy from somewhere else (coal/oil/nuclear).
So you see, hydrogen doesn't "fix" anything. We still need the fossil fuels to produce it.
.
The answer to our eventual energy problems is two-fold, one we must eventually use no more energy in day than the sun can provide us, and two, we must utilize that energy as close to the source as possible. The fewer changes we put it through the more efficient it will be. This means wind and hydro for electricity and vegetable oils for high mobility energy needs.
Robert Harder
Hydrogen may not be the ultimate solution, but in the foreseeable future, it has a potential to be a fuel. How we get it is another issue being researched at this time.
What do you think about the HESII?
Vegetables are bio-solar cells. They absorb solar energy, we mash them into oil, and then we burn it.
.
Also... no offense intended, but I don't think you understood the last message's main points:
- We've been burning a "savings account" of several million years of stored solar (coal, oil, cng).
- But if we convert water-to-hydrogen, we still need to tap into another source of energy to make that conversion.
- So the question remains, "What energy do we use to convert water-to-hydrogen?"
Troy
We have not discussed the HESII yet. Apparently, it takes in CNG, and utilizes the “energy” carried within to deliver electricity (a generator for home), provide hot water for the home and with it supposedly is an integrated process that extracts hydrogen as well! If technology can lead us into this direction, don’t you think some of the issue is already being looked into?
Errr... no? You just dump seeds on the ground, and plants sprout. I suppose you need to burn some of the veggie oil to run your tractor, but since the sun shines on your plants all summer, you're absorbing LOTS more energy than you use.
Net result = You have excess energy.
And you're right. Land would become scarce. That's why we'll need to learn to conserve & drive >100 mpg cars for sustainability.
Question:
Why waste time converting the CNG to H2, and then dumping it into a fuel cell? Why not just use the CNG directly for electricity creation/heating?
And we have been dumping seeds into fertile land (or have created our own) for eons. That’s nothing new. If we were to depend on vegetation for energy supply as well, we will need a lot more of it, and take a guess about everything that will need to be involved with it, in addition to fertilizers (and those chemical industries will also need some energy source).
I'm not against conservation. Besides, that would make for a separate thread.
Yes I think so. I'm perfectly satisfied to keep my house running on electricity & my car on liquid fuel.
.
Besides I've pointed out before... converting Water to H2, and then back to Water, is NOT an efficient process. You spend 100 watts and get back 10 watts. I refuse to endorse it.
My home uses CNG to go with electricity after all! And if there comes a system that can deliver energy in its various forms at the same time (gas for heating needs as well as electricity for its intended purpose and delivering liquid fuel aka hydrogen as a bye-product) I don't see why I would have issues with it. Not there yet, but looks promising if it does.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/- www/story/12-09-2004/0002591782&EDATE=
"Auto-industry ads depict hydrogen cars as the vehicular route to clean, blue skies.
President Bush and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger are among their biggest champions.
The politicians' enthusiasm for the technology -- a leading proposal to solve global warming -- is shared by many scientists. "...More>>
(1) Instead of relying on oil, we'll be relying on CNG. That means... we're still dependent on foreign nations... and still have to fear running out.
(2) Or if you extract Hydrogen straight from water, then you waste 10 kilowatts for every 1 kilowatt of H2 produced. It's a horribly inefficient idea.
troy
"Imagination is more important than knowledge"
Without imagination, we would be...?
I am reminded of the old project management joke where the last activity in a schedule is "A miracle occurs".
Not exactly. And hydrogen does fix a lot of things.
The points about chemical fuels being energy carriers are exactly correct. That's all they are. The question is how do you get them.
You can make hydrogen from all sorts of sources - wind, solar, hydro, even nuclear. The common point is that you have to put energy into the system to liberate elemental hydrogen - generally from water.
You can also "reform" hydrogen from fossil fuels directly. There are chemical processes that remove hydrogen from natural gas, oil, coal, etc and liberate the CO2 in the process. This is a lot more efficient than burning the fuels to make electricity to then make hydrogen by electrolysis. But you can make hydrogen by all sorts of methods.
As to what you do with whatever energy carrier (fuel) to then make a car go, burning is about the least efficient. Only about 15% of the energy in gasoline makes it to the wheels to make a car move. The rest is thrown away as heat. However, depending on a number of factors, you can put almost 50% of the energy in hydrogen to the wheels in a fuel cell vehicle with an electric motor.
So the question about bypassing hydrogen and sticking with fossil fuels or burning things like vegetable oils is a very complex one. There are efficiencies everywhere that must be considered before you can make blanket statements on which is the more efficient use of energy.
And the fact of the matter is that hydrogen fuel cells are very efficient compared to the internal combustion engine. There are problems, however, with hydrogen storage, fuel cell durability, and fuel cell cost.
So anyone who wants to try to discount a technology with a paragraph or two is oversimplifying the problem.
.
Really? How about this idea? "Evolution proves that Aryans are superior to Jews (circa 1930 Germany)" or "Examination of facial features proves slaves are inferior (circa 1800s America)." THOSE ARE BAD IDEAS.
So too is hydrogen.
You say H2 is not an energy source, but still serves as energy storage (like a liquid battery or oil). Fine. I agree with that 100%. BUT we shouldn't just stop there. We should also examine the *energy efficiency* and compare it to other storage methods:
.
Collecting billions of gallons of water, breaking the water apart, compressing the hydrogen into tanks, transporting it around the country, and then reconstituting the water inside your car..... you have multiple conversions & multiple energy losses.
There are far simpler ways (and therefore fewer conversion losses) to store energy - for example solar roof--->car battery. Or nuclear--->car battery.
.
solar->car battery -or- nuclear->car battery are both FAR simpler/energy efficient methods than the complicated solar-->water-->H2-->transport-->car. Those extra three steps are un-necessary and energy inefficient.
troy
Any form of fuel is energy storage medium. That is a fact. There is no creation involved with energy, only transformation. Going to the topic of energy efficiency, we need to have an IDEA of everything that surrounds trapping, storing and transforming the energy for the intended purpose. Do we? I don’t think so.
But, nobody here is saying technology to harness hydrogen as an energy source has matured and we’re simply waiting for the day to arrive. It is a work in progress, and will continue to be, potentially until some discovery is made, or somehow tied to an overlooked way of processing it. This won’t happen without effort. There is no free lunch to be served.
Hydro, solar and wind power are something that interest me a lot, but don’t limit my expectation to see development of technology around hydrogen power.
http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1805.html
kirstie_h
Roving Host
Host, Smart Shopper & Future Vehicles discussions
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
Hybrid Vehicle
A hybrid vehicle costs between US$ 20,000 - 25,000, travels nearly 500 miles on a tank of fuel and the fuel which costs $ 1.8 / gallon is available all over the World.
It took nearly 7 years to reach sales volume of 350,000 units in the World.
Hydrogen Vehicle
It costs more than US $ 250,000, travels 200 miles on a tank and the fuel which costs $ 5 + / gallon equivalent is available only in very few places.
So how many years will it take for this vehicle to reach sales volume of 350,000.
For the time being, a hydrogen powered vehicle is only for research and not for commercial use. No one can afford such an expensive vehicle.
As for cheaper production of Hydrogen, nuclear power is a better candidate as the High Temperature Reactor under research can generate hydrogen at 60 % efficiency by combining
heat & electricity.