Honda makes first hydrogen cars

[edesignuk]

Japanese car manufacturer Honda has begun the first commercial production of a zero-emission, hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicle.

The four-seater, called FCX Clarity, runs on hydrogen and electricity, emitting only water vapour.

Honda claims the vehicle offers three times better fuel efficiency than a traditional, gasoline-powered car.

Honda plans to produce 200 of the cars, which are initially only available to lease, over the next three years.

One of the biggest obstacles standing in the way of wider adoption of fuel cell vehicles is the lack of hydrogen fuelling stations. BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7456141.stm).

[iJohnHenry]

which are initially only available to lease

Ah, what GM did for their electric car prototype in the 80's, I believe.

Then when the future CA emission rules were relaxed, and they didn't need them anymore, they recalled every one (ignoring pleas to purchase) and shredded them all.

[edesignuk]

But Honda aren't GM ;)

[Abstract]

No, they're certainly not.

[remmy]

petrol stations wont supply the fuel for these cars as they'll say there is no demand and people in the future wont want them as there is no fuel easily avalible

[a456]

http://world.honda.com/news/2008/4080616First-FCX-Clarity/photo/images/05.jpg

I applaud environmental moves. However, even if we all drive clean cars, and by some miracle the manufacture and recycling becomes clean as well, we still have the huge environmental impact caused by roads. Not to mention the amount of human and animal death that comes with them. The world would still be a better and safer place with fewer cars full stop. The clean car often strikes me as an easing of guilt not a solution to global warming and environmental damage.

[Sun Baked]

Of all the vehicles, the oil companies and the petrol stations will resist electric cars.

Since there is no need to refuel those at current stations and can be done at home or work, which is why you are likely to see petrol companies put their stamp of approval on anything that requires a tank to fill up.

Last time I looked, they were selling a hydrogen generating station for use in gas stations and for business who want to store cheap off peak electricity as hydrogen.

[Col127]

very cool. i wonder how much it'd cost to fuel up!

[quagmire]

GM technically was the first to get a hydrogen vehicle out in the public with the Chevy Equinox Fuel Cell. Though there are only 100 of them out there compared to Honda's planned 200. It also uses GM's last gen hydrogen system( Gen IV). GM has a Gen V system, but wasn't ready in time for the Equinox Fuel Cell.

http://z.about.com/d/alternativefuels/1/0/c/9/-/-/EquinoxFC_rightfront.jpg

[iGav]

Japanese car manufacturer Honda has begun the first commercial production of a zero-emission, hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicle.

Technically it's not, the BMW Hydrogen 7 pre-dated it by almost 2 years. Though I suppose Honda's take on it is that by producing 200 cars, theirs is technically considered a production model, homologation applying and all that.

Though let's be honest, their claims of commercial production given the facts... extremely limited volume and extremely limited availability are tenuous at best.

A rather surprising move by Honda though, given until only a few years ago, they wouldn't even consider building a diesel engine... though obviously the decision to build one was purely an economic one, given their plummeting sales in Europe.

Honestly... I don't think any single fuel engine is the best solution, hybrid cars are the future.

Ah, what GM did for their electric car prototype in the 80's, I believe.

This is true, GM actually won the inaugural World Solar Challenge in 1987 with they super-furturistic Sunraycer, a car which Honda shamelessly copied for their first solar car, the Dream (or what looked like the Sunraycer with a Honda badge stuck on the front).

[carlgo]

petrol stations wont supply the fuel for these cars as they'll say there is no demand and people in the future wont want them as there is no fuel easily avalible

The place to start with hydrogen fuel cells is with fleet use, like UPS, Post Office, taxis, etc. They could have a commercial-sized hydrogen fueling site on their sites, have enough vehicles to make a difference and those vehicles stay close to home. This will help to get this all started in a meaningful way.

I could see oil companies selling hydrogen, but many people do not know that fuel cells can be made to run on natural gas, gasoline, diesel, alcohol, etc as well as hydrogen. Hydrogen is the holy grail, but don't forget it takes a lot of energy to produce hydrogen. Some people that know this stuff say we will have to build nuke plants to produce the power to make hydrogen.

Same with electric cars; if everyone went electric, we would have to build lots more power plants to handle the load.

[dmr727]

I got on the list for a Clarity, but wasn't chosen. Supposedly they had something like 50,000 applications for just under 200 cars to be released this summer.

Oh well.

[PlaceofDis]

while good in 'concept' its horrible in practice because of the amount of energy required to make hydrogen. its a step in a different direction, which is good, but its a step in the wrong one.

[pooky]

Honestly... I don't think any single fuel engine is the best solution, hybrid cars are the future.

I heard an interview on the radio with a Honda PR type about these cars. Although they aren't getting the idea across very well, this is a fully electric vehicle. The car is driven by an electric motor; the electricity comes from joining hydrogen and oxygen in a fuel cell. However, it is similar to a gas-electric hybrid in that it has a battery which recaptures and stores energy when the car is coasting, going downhill, and braking. I suppose you could call it an electric-electric hybrid, since it has two sources of electricity (fuel cell and battery). I would expect all hydrogen vehicles to be hybrids in this sense, since it adds minimal cost for large increases in fuel efficiency.

In terms of efficiency and fuel cost, if I remember correctly, the car should go around 200 miles on a single "tank," and the cost should be comparable to driving a gas vehicle if gasoline was around $2.50/gallon.

Will post a transcript if I can find one.

[iJohnHenry]

In terms of efficiency and fuel cost, if I remember correctly, the car should go around 200 miles on a single "tank," and the cost should be comparable to driving a gas vehicle if gasoline was around $2.50/gallon.


That's 66¢ a litre. :eek:

Sign me up!!!!! :D

[Prof.]

Human Engineering At Its Finest
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo_StoryLevel/080616/080616-fcx-bcol-730a.hmedium.jpg

TAKANEZAWA, Japan - Honda’s new zero-emission, hydrogen fuel cell car rolled off a Japanese production line Monday and is headed to Southern California, where Hollywood is already abuzz over the latest splash in green motoring.

The FCX Clarity, which runs on hydrogen and electricity, emits only water and none of the noxious fumes believed to induce global warming. It is also two times more energy efficient than a gas-electric hybrid and three times that of a standard gasoline-powered car, the company says.

Japan’s third biggest automaker expects to lease out a “few dozen” units this year and about 200 units within three years. In California, a three-year lease will run $600 a month, which includes maintenance and collision coverage.

Story (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25190604/)

[Chundles]

Yeah but where do you fill up?

Can't just sneak into a Zepplin maintenance yard like in the good old days.

[benmrii]

sweeeeeet

$600 a month... hopefully one day that technology will be affordable. Just need to get behind it.

[Frisco]

Hydrogen fueled cars are a scam and produce (via converting water to hydrogen through electricity) more carbon emissions than strictly electric cars.

[Abstract]

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=500956

[quagmire]

Hydrogen fueled cars are a scam and produce (via converting water to hydrogen through electricity) more carbon emissions than strictly electric cars.

We just need to develop new technology so we can produce hydrogen more efficiently. You think when a new technology/fuel comes onto the market it is being utilized and produced at 100% efficiency?

[Prof.]

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=500956
Oops! Post merge?

[Frisco]

I still think it's way too premature to buy/lease hydrogen fueled cars. Electric cars are the future.

[Scarlet Fever]

Hydrogen fueled cars are a scam and produce (via converting water to hydrogen through electricity) more carbon emissions than strictly electric cars.

Only through current methods of producing electricity. Power from wind turbines, solar panels and hydro stations is completely emission free.

Imagine covering the roof of your house or garage with solar panels to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen, and putting the collected hydrogen into your car. The only on-going cost would be water, which you could collect from rain with water tanks.

The only problem with hydrogen at the moment is storage. Because the hydrogen molecules are so small, they seep through any container they are put in. If that problem is solved, I honestly think the world's energy crisis will be solved. We will all get free, non-pollutive, plentiful energy.

[ErikCLDR]

I think the US really needs to get on the ball with nuclear energy that way we'll have plenty of energy with less environmental impact. Yes there is a risk but modern power plants are much safer than things like Chernobyl.

My dad's company is also developing clean burning fossil fuel burning power plants.

Is it true they get the Hydrogen from water + electricity or do they just get it from oil. I've heard it both ways.

[CANEHDN]

petrol stations wont supply the fuel for these cars as they'll say there is no demand and people in the future wont want them as there is no fuel easily avalible

Honda has also annouced that they are developing a home fuelling station. The system would use natural gas to create hydrogen. They also have plans for this system to power your home.

[ipodtoucher]

Yeah but where do you fill up?

Can't just sneak into a Zepplin maintenance yard like in the good old days.

The exact reason it is only coming out in certain ares. There are very few Hydrogen refuel stations. And the technology is not completely developed, seeing that I know I would be more scared to re-fuel my car with hydrogen, seeing that it is way more explosive than gasoline.

But none the less a very cool car!

[Rodimus Prime]

We just need to develop new technology so we can produce hydrogen more efficiently. You think when a new technology/fuel comes onto the market it is being utilized and produced at 100% efficiency?

yeah. Laws of chemisty and themodynamics say NO not going to happen. Hydrogen is not the way of the future. It is nothing more than feel good.

We already are facing massive water shortages world wide including in the US. Where the hell do you think we are going to get the hydrogen from. Sure has hell not going to be water.

Water is already a very short to supply so no that is not the solution.

[Scarlet Fever]

I think the US really needs to get on the ball with nuclear energy that way we'll have plenty of energy with less environmental impact. Yes there is a risk but modern power plants are much safer than things like Chernobyl.
I won't go into a fully-fledged argument here, but even though I do agree that it is better for the environment in the short term, it isn't a good source of energy to take us into the future.

Is it true they get the Hydrogen from water + electricity or do they just get it from oil. I've heard it both ways.

It is possible to get it either way. Have a look at the wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen#Production) to read up on it.

I reckon what Toyota, Honda, Lexus and othe manufacturers are trying to do with hybrid cars (batteries + engine) is a nice idea, but in reality, it's really not that much better than the standard internal combustion engine. Hydrogen is a renewable, low cost, highly efficient, and plentiful fuel source. We already have the resources to create it without causing any post-manufacture pollution (solar panels and water). We have the resources to convert hydrogen into useable energy (hydrogen fuel cells). If the storage can be sorted out, we will be set for the future.

I wholeheartedly support what Honda is doing with the FCX.

[DCBass]

Electric cars are the future. Though, liquid fuels will still have their role for a very long time to come.

I think that GM has the right idea when it comes to the Chevy Volt on the e-flex platform: an electric car with a fuel-generator attached. This platform can be adapted to use any liquid fuel.

Battery tech may not quite be up to task these days, but with the billions of dollars being invested, a solution is bound to come through that will work, and is affordable, for the average consumer.

The BIG BIG problem though, is where we're getting the electricity from in the first place. I cannot imagine that carbon capture and sequestration will ever work reliably enough to make coal clean. I do think that solar, wind, and hydropower will become economical enough for large scale use in the near future. Hopefully, this will happen before we build 50 more nuclear power plants.

DCBass

[Chaszmyr]

Not bad, I'm all for cleaner energy, but I'd rather have a BMW Hydrogen 7 :cool:

[Nabooly]

I wholeheartedly support what Honda is doing with the FCX.

Yup, same here. It's really exciting actually. :)

[Chundles]

We already are facing massive water shortages world wide including in the US. Where the hell do you think we are going to get the hydrogen from. Sure has hell not going to be water.

Water is already a very short to supply so no that is not the solution.

The Ocean - it's pretty big.

[CanadaRAM]

Hydrogen is an energy storage system
Gasoline is an energy storage system
Lithium Ion battery is an energy storage system

A plug-in electric car with Lithium batteries, or an ultracapacitor, or whatever has the same objection as a Hydrogen fueled car -- the electricity has to be generated.

The gasoline powered car uses energy that was captured millions of years ago.

What's more key to the question is what happens when the energy is released from the storage system to power an individual car. The Gasoline (diesel, natural gas, etc) powered car emits CO, CO2, and a bunch of other byproducts of combustion.
The Hydrogen car emits H2O and some miscellaneous byproducts of high temperature catalysis using air.
The battery powered car emits nothing - but generates a thousand pounds of battery waste when the batteries need replacing.

While a power plant that generates electricity from oil or coal generates CO2 and other gases, because of the economies of scale, it can be orders of magnitude more efficient (and less polluting) than a small army of internal combustion engines generating the same amount of power. It's much easier and costs fewer resources to fit a power plant with pollution reducing technology than to fit 1,000,000 cars.

A coal fired powerplant generates on average 2 Lb of CO2 per Kilowatt-hour (the US average in 2000 (http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/co2_report/co2emiss.pdf) for all types of powerplants is about 1.3 Lb/kWh)

An electric car consumes about 0.22 kWh/mi (http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/2007/october/hafemeister.html), which generated about .29 Lb./mi of CO2 back at the powerplant. Charging batteries and cracking water for H2 can be done with off-peak 'waste' electrical capacity.

A typical gasoline car at 30 MPG generates 223 g/km or .79 Lb/mi of CO2 - But those are highway miles on a relatively fuel efficient car. The battery or hydrogen electric consumes little or no power at idle, or in slow city traffic. The gasoline car still puts out significant amounts of CO2 at idle (zero MPG).

So an electric or hydrogen car generates roughly 1/3 the carbon of a gasoline powered car -- and that's without considering the carbon footprint of oil extraction, refining, and distribution -- which approximately doubles the carbon load. (you can't cost electricity with power plant emissions and not cost gasoline with refinery and oilfield emissions)

What we're really looking for is a low-emission production of energy, with very efficient transmission and storage, which can be deployed to cars (and other things) safely and conveniently, for power generation on demand, with little or no emissions in use.

Gasoline is popular because it is an energy dense storage, and the distribution system is so well established. IF the battery problem (deployment storage) can be solved, electric has a lot going for it, including distribution to about 99% of homes already in place. Hydrogen is a possible, IF the distribution and storage can be done effectively, and IF the energy density of hydrogen and the fuel cell is better than the density of batteries.

[SamIchi]

Hydrogen is ...

What he said.... :D Look at the whole picture.

[rhsgolfer33]

The Ocean - it's pretty big.

Seriously, it only covers what, 71% of the Earth? We could always invest in a few more desalination plants :rolleyes:

There are some hydrogen BMW 7 series that are being tested around where I live in California, the fire chiefs are driving them, they're way cool but can only go about 200-250 miles before a fill up.

[Badandy]

Earth? We could always invest in a few more desalination plants :rolleyes:

Which are powered by what?

[CanadaRAM]

There are some hydrogen BMW 7 series that are being tested around where I live in California, the fire chiefs are driving them, they're way cool but can only go about 200-250 miles before a fill up.

200 - 250 Mi would be ducky for me -- I don't have to commute, so I only put on about 4,000 mi per year.

[redAPPLE]

http://world.honda.com/news/2008/4080616First-FCX-Clarity/photo/images/05.jpg

I applaud environmental moves. However, even if we all drive clean cars, and by some miracle the manufacture and recycling becomes clean as well, we still have the huge environmental impact caused by roads. Not to mention the amount of human and animal death that comes with them. The world would still be a better and safer place with fewer cars full stop. The clean car often strikes me as an easing of guilt not a solution to global warming and environmental damage.

in a way, you are right. but how would your solution re: "fewer cars full stop" be?

i don't see the reasoning behind trying to create clean cars to be "easing of guilt".

[Chundles]

So how many kilometres per kilogramme of Hydrogen is that? I presume the US will go properly metric now that petrol is on it's way out.

Or will we be going with moles? Cents per mole? Moles per parsec? I can get 40 parsecs to the dollar on just 85 moles of Hydrogen. Geeze - I've got a degree in Chemistry and even I know that makes no sense.

[CorvusCamenarum]

200 - 250 Mi would be ducky for me -- I don't have to commute, so I only put on about 4,000 mi per year.
Here too. For city driving it'd be great, but anywhere out of town I'd like to drive it's in the 250 mile range or so. I'd prefer not to run out of juice just as I'm pulling in to wherever.

Or will we be going with moles? Cents per mole? Moles per parsec? I can get 40 parsecs to the dollar on just 85 moles of Hydrogen. Geeze - I've got a degree in Chemistry and even I know that makes no sense.

The real question is if you can do the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs. ;)

[Evangelion]

We already are facing massive water shortages world wide including in the US. Where the hell do you think we are going to get the hydrogen from. Sure has hell not going to be water.

Water is already a very short to supply so no that is not the solution.

Um, clean drinking-water might be in short-supply, but there's absolutely no shortage of water as such. Hell, take a look at the world map one day. You will notice that most of this planet is covered with water!

[Rodimus Prime]

The Ocean - it's pretty big.

Um, clean drinking-water might be in short-supply, but there's absolutely no shortage of water as such. Hell, take a look at the world map one day. You will notice that most of this planet is covered with water!

Seriously, it only covers what, 71% of the Earth? We could always invest in a few more desalination plants :rolleyes:

There are some hydrogen BMW 7 series that are being tested around where I live in California, the fire chiefs are driving them, they're way cool but can only go about 200-250 miles before a fill up.

another problem with that. You first have to remove the salt from it to be able to complete the process. And let not forget that process takes a lot of energy as well to complete.

Oh and btw the brine left over is classified as toxic waste and it is very toxic. You now have an entire another problem to deal with....

And that brine is going to be left no matter how you cut it and it is very toxic to life.

Sorry to bust everyone bubble on the ocean but desalination is not as crack up as it seems. Information brought to by the my environmental engineering class I took in college while I was working on my degree in Civil Engineering.

[Blue Velvet]

Oops! Post merge?

Threads merged. :)

[EricNau]

I can get 40 parsecs to the dollar on just 85 moles of Hydrogen.
You get 1,234,000,000,000,000 kilometers on just 3 kg of H2? Please, share your secret. :)

[CanadaRAM]

You get 1,234,000,000,000,000 kilometers on just 3 kg of H2? Please, share your secret. :)

Fusion.

Next question?

[Evangelion]

another problem with that. You first have to remove the salt from it to be able to complete the process. And let not forget that process takes a lot of energy as well to complete.

There are few things to consider here. Hydrogen by itself is a clean source of energy. It's emissions are mostly water. Of course, there's the question on how we get that hydrogen. But that is a separate (yet connected) issue. Will it require energy to make hydrogen? Sure! But that energy in turn can be created with non-polluting means. Besides, if we start taking the energy spent creating hydrogen in to the discussion, then we also need to consider the resrouces being spent on oil-exploration, drilling, transportation of oil, refining etc. in to the mix as well.

If we compare the use of gasoline and diesel to using _and_ creating hydrogen, then we are comparing apples and oranges. If we want a valid comparison, we need to either compare the use of hydrogen as fuel to use of gasoline and diesel as fuel, or compare hydrogen as a fuel + the resources needed to create that fuel to gasoline/diesel as fuel + the resources needed to create that fuel.

I bet that in either case, hydrogen wins, as far as pollution is concerned.

[jodelli]

The real question is if you can do the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs. ;)

Wow, that's less than 40 LY, only the distance to Eta Cassiopeia A and back. Some kind of worm hole.

[Dagless]

So what happens when all the hydrogen runs out?
wink

[Rodimus Prime]

There are few things to consider here. Hydrogen by itself is a clean source of energy. It's emissions are mostly water. Of course, there's the question on how we get that hydrogen. But that is a separate (yet connected) issue. Will it require energy to make hydrogen? Sure! But that energy in turn can be created with non-polluting means. Besides, if we start taking the energy spent creating hydrogen in to the discussion, then we also need to consider the resrouces being spent on oil-exploration, drilling, transportation of oil, refining etc. in to the mix as well.

If we compare the use of gasoline and diesel to using _and_ creating hydrogen, then we are comparing apples and oranges. If we want a valid comparison, we need to either compare the use of hydrogen as fuel to use of gasoline and diesel as fuel, or compare hydrogen as a fuel + the resources needed to create that fuel to gasoline/diesel as fuel + the resources needed to create that fuel.

I bet that in either case, hydrogen wins, as far as pollution is concerned.

As a fuel sorce Hydrogen is just not a good option. Water is sadly in shorter supply than gas. Gather Hydrogen from natural gas or oil is just a waste of energy because you will loss so much of the energy from the fuel and it does not remove the problem of fossil fuels.

I think the future lies in genitic engineer baterical able to instead of making ethnoal make oil and gas from there. There you renewable fuel source that has a lot more energy output than hydrogen.

Mix this with hybrid technology like the Volt coming to market which I would call a 2nd generation hybrid. Just hydrgen is all hype but a poor fuel way to power our energy needs.

[Abstract]

So what happens when all the hydrogen runs out?
wink

We'll have to conserve hydrogen by drinking H1O. :(

[quagmire]

So what happens when all the hydrogen runs out?
wink

Since we won't be around for the next 5 billion years, I am sure the sun won't mind if we steal some of its hydrogen fuel. ;)

[jodelli]

So what happens when all the hydrogen runs out?
wink

Well, the helium that's left will continue to fuse for a while after.

[pooky]

Some folks seem to be missing that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles ARE electric vehicles. There is no internal combustion engine, only an electric motor. The energy to generate the electricity is stored in hydrogen, rather than the lithium in a Li-ion battery.

The major disadvantages to batteries are that energy density is much lower, meaning that, for the same fuel weight, you get farther on hydrogen than you do on a battery, and recharge time is much larger on a battery. For long distance trips, this is crucial. If I have to drive 500 miles, and I have to wait 3 hours every 150 miles to recharge my battery, I'm not going to bother. Put a hydrogen fueling station every 100 miles along my route, each one equipped with solar/wind power for producing hydrogen fuel, and I have a solution that's as convenient as gasoline, produces no pollution, and emits no carbon.

It can work if we have the will to get fueling stations installed and upgrade our energy production means to something better than carbon-based fuel burning.

[Prof.]

The exact reason it is only coming out in certain ares. There are very few Hydrogen refuel stations. And the technology is not completely developed, seeing that I know I would be more scared to re-fuel my car with hydrogen, seeing that it is way more explosive than gasoline.

But none the less a very cool car!
For the most part, the technology is complete. The only problem is getting enough money to support the production of more hydrogen cars and fueling stations. California is planning to build the "Hydrogen Highway (http://hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/)".

As for paying? I'd much rather pay $7.00 a litre for hydrogen that will not pollute our atmosphere and our lungs then pay to fill my car up with gasoline.

[rhsgolfer33]

Which are powered by what?

If we were smart we would power them using solar panels, wind turbines, heat from power plants, etc. Or place them near areas with lots of wave action and tap into the amazing amount of energy being released there, or we could power them using a nuclear power source (probably one of the more viable options). There's quite a few ways to power them in a relatively clean manner.

As for the waste, we could treat it in the our sewage treatment plants or we could dry it out and dispense of it in landfills similar to those used for batteries (since its really just salts and some heavy metals). Or it could be stored in special areas, the salted processed, and then sold. There are a few ways we could do this and have it be fairly environmentally friendly, its just going to cost a few bucks.

[ErikCLDR]

Hydrogen seems like it's really is not a great option.

1) If we're getting the H from oil... how does that help

2) If you do the electricity through water method, where are we getting all this power from. Coal? You can say hydroelectric and wind and solar but those really aren't great options. Solar currently is too expensive, not efficient enough, and won't work in the dark. Wind doesn't work everywhere either. Hydroelectric is good but only if you're in a place where you can build one.

Nuclear is the most efficient technology we have. Yes there are the waste issues but other countries such as France and Germany somehow deal with it. Radioactive materials are carried around anyways.

There are cons to everything and nothing will ever get done if everyone fights. I am sure that if they tried to build a hydroelectric plant somewhere people would complain it would affect fish migration. Very very very few power plants are being built now because of environmentalists, meanwhile our energy reserve is dwindling and pretty soon everyone's electrical bills are going to go up more in addition to power issues caused by the lack of power being produced.

I still think in the long run Electric cars are the best option, so long as we can get energy to charge them.

[monke]

As for paying? I'd much rather pay $7.00 a litre for hydrogen that will not pollute our atmosphere and our lungs then pay to fill my car up with gasoline.

For nearly everyone, paying $7.00 a litre would be more then unreasonable. Gas is already enough at $1.50 a litre and that's all people complain about.

The whole point of hydrogen vehicles is to save the environment. If hydrogen costs $7.00 a litre to fill up, the majority of people would much rather pay $1.50 for gas, thus not helping the environment at all. If hydrogen was say $1.00-$2.00 a litre I could see it, but saving the environment won't happen unless it comes down to about the same price as gas.

I'd much rather see it at the same price of gas. $1.50 per litre wouldn't be so bad using hydrogen, but even cheaper would be nice. :)

[Prof.]

Once Hydrogen gets mainstreamed, I heard it will be about $.70 a litre.:eek:

[pooky]

For nearly everyone, paying $7.00 a litre would be more then unreasonable. Gas is already enough at $1.50 a litre and that's all people complain about.

Except a liter of hydrogen will take you much farther than a liter of gasoline, unless you are driving an exceptionally efficient gasoline car.

[Rodimus Prime]

Except a liter of hydrogen will take you much farther than a liter of gasoline, unless you are driving an exceptionally efficient gasoline car.

LOL now that is funny....

There is so much more energy in a liter of Gas than a liter of hydrogen....

I keep forget how much BS and myths there are out there about hydrogen...l.

[makku]

LOL now that is funny....

There is so much more energy in a liter of Gas than a liter of hydrogen....

I keep forget how much BS and myths there are out there about hydrogen...l.

You are forgetting hydrogen tech uses electric motors which is much more efficient than combustion engines.
A little off topic but a company called Genepax recently introduced a car that runs on water. If it's not a scam to draw investors I wonder if there is any market for them in the future.

[bov]

I still think it's way too premature to buy/lease hydrogen fueled cars. Electric cars are the future.

But how are we going to get all of our electricity? ALL the ways we get our electricity are very pollutant to the environment, except i suppose wind farms, but that only accounts for about 5% of the US's electricity prodcution, and it also takes up huge amounts of land, and can harm bird wildlife. Even dams create problems for nature since it requires huge flooding of preceding land.

[Rodimus Prime]

You are forgetting hydrogen tech uses electric motors which is much more efficient than combustion engines.
A little off topic but a company called Genepax recently introduced a car that runs on water. If it's not a scam to draw investors I wonder if there is any market for them in the future.


Again I repeat my self. At getting 50% of the energy from gas, which is about what car engines can do, it still has more energy per volume.

As for the water car. 100% bs. It is impossible to do that because it takes a lot of energy to crack water into hydrogen oxygen. H2O is an very stable molecule and the laws of chemistry and Thermodynamic both say it is impossible.

[EricNau]

But how are we going to get all of our electricity? ALL the ways we get our electricity are very pollutant to the environment, except i suppose wind farms, but that only accounts for about 5% of the US's electricity prodcution, and it also takes up huge amounts of land, and can harm bird wildlife. Even dams create problems for nature since it requires huge flooding of preceding land.
Solar and nuclear are our best bets.

You are forgetting hydrogen tech uses electric motors which is much more efficient than combustion engines.
A little off topic but a company called Genepax recently introduced a car that runs on water. If it's not a scam to draw investors I wonder if there is any market for them in the future.
And that's exactly what it is - a scam.

[Digital Skunk]

The only problem I have with hydrogen is who's going to be controlling it.

If the gas bastards that control the fuel now are just vying for time to get their hydrogen station up to charge us a little less for the "H" than the gas I am going to be royally pissed.

The last thing we need are the old grey haired oil company execs selling us hydrogen at $3 a gallon when it could be $1 a gallon just because we are used to shelling out $4.50 a gallon.

And forget about it if Hydrogen is more expensive than gasoline. There is no way in the world I would adopt a hydrogen powered car if I have to shell out $7 a gallon for a 10 gallon tank and I am getting the same fuel efficiency. I'd rather drive my regular gas car and continue pumping toxins in the ozone.

Reminds me of those nut job nutritionists and "eat organic" supports that are starving because they can't afford an $8 muffin or $12 loaf of organic bread.

p.s. I never heard about a water powered car that converts H2O to H then uses the H to power the motor, but I have heard and seen a water powered car that just uses a tank of compressed H2O to push the car around. Or was that compressed air.... I forget. :confused:

[pooky]

LOL now that is funny....

There is so much more energy in a liter of Gas than a liter of hydrogen....

I keep forget how much BS and myths there are out there about hydrogen...l.

Sigh, I'll try again.

Yes, you are correct, there is more total free energy in 1 L of gasoline. In a typical internal combustion engine 80% of that energy is wasted, either due to incomplete combustion or (mostly) heat.

Via honda's fcx website, the clarity captures roughly 60% of the energy. We'll take their word for it for lack of better data.

See your problem?

Also, from Honda's website: the fcx goes 280 miles on 4.1 kg of compressed hydrogen gas. Gasoline has a density of 0.784 kg/L, so to go the same distance on 4.1 kg of gasoline, so 4.1 kg of gasoline is roughly 5.23 L. To go 270 miles of 5.23 L of gasoline is an efficiency of 80.88 km/L, or 1.24 L/100 km. For Americans, this equates to about 195 miles per gallon.

This is making some assumptions, and the real world numbers seem to be closer to about 100 mpg equivalent, but this argument that that hydrogen contains less energy than gasoline is completely specious, since we can't even approach getting all of that energy out of gasoline.

Of course, some batteries carry an even higher efficiency, but that's another story.

Link to Honda website:
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/specifications.aspx

[iJohnHenry]

In a typical internal combustion engine 80% of that energy is wasted, either due to incomplete combustion or (mostly) heat.

OK, I hear that, and I also noted Rodimus Prime said 50%, which is a pipe dream.

I believe I read that it is closer to 30%.

Still highly inefficient, compared to other fuels.

Diesel for one.

[Rodimus Prime]

Sigh, I'll try again.

Yes, you are correct, there is more total free energy in 1 L of gasoline. In a typical internal combustion engine 80% of that energy is wasted, either due to incomplete combustion or (mostly) heat.

Via honda's fcx website, the clarity captures roughly 60% of the energy. We'll take their word for it for lack of better data.

See your problem?

Also, from Honda's website: the fcx goes 280 miles on 4.1 kg of compressed hydrogen gas. Gasoline has a density of 0.784 kg/L, so to go the same distance on 4.1 kg of gasoline, so 4.1 kg of gasoline is roughly 5.23 L. To go 270 miles of 5.23 L of gasoline is an efficiency of 80.88 km/L, or 1.24 L/100 km. For Americans, this equates to about 195 miles per gallon.

This is making some assumptions, and the real world numbers seem to be closer to about 100 mpg equivalent, but this argument that that hydrogen contains less energy than gasoline is completely specious, since we can't even approach getting all of that energy out of gasoline.

Of course, some batteries carry an even higher efficiency, but that's another story.

Link to Honda website:
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/specifications.aspx

Yeah no... Btw way you waste heat stuff.

The real number is between 50-60% lost to heat. Not 80%....

Oh btw that "extra range" you forget you have the battery which have to be drained to 30% or so before the hydrogen is going to start being used...... So that really messes with the numbers.

That 280 needs be reduced by a hell of a lot to work. Take the Toyta Hybrid (first generation) and see what it pulls. The things like the Volt pull a hell of a lot more MPG.

Sorry hydrogen is so full of feel good and BS.....

[albusseverus]

Honda is a great company, but we still need to show them the way.

Hydrogen vehicles were introduced as a bait & switch by car manufacturers as part of the process of killing the CA zero emissions laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_killed_the_electric_car

Honda's home 'hydrogen' power system actually runs on natural gas (a fossil fuel). The hydrogen cells are just storage (at a loss, of course). It's old-thinking from companies mired in 'old ways'.

Electric vehicles worked in the 1990s. They'd be even better today if there was a will to do it. Support Tesla any way you can. http://www.teslamotors.com/ They run off home solar panels and cost $4 per recharge giving 200 miles!!

CA leads the world at cleaning up electricity generation. And the US already has electricity generation capacity to charge 80% of vehicles, without building any new power stations. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061211221149.htm

Hybrids should also be avoided. The Toyota Prius now has a 1.3 litre petrol engine. It wasn't that long ago, a car that size was entirely powered by a 1.3 litre petrol engine!! The original Prius used a quarter of the fuel of its petrol counterpart. Now it uses half the fuel ! More bait & switch, I'm afraid.

Fusion reactors still require more power input than they output.

Focus on the future - electric. Don't be distracted.

[Wotan31]

Hydrogen is a load of crap. It'll never happen and it doesn't make sense anyways. Waste of a perfectly good couple $B of R&D. It's the farcical dream of the fruits-n-nuts loonies who run CARB. They believe cars will exhaust rainbows and unicorns if they legislate it so. :rolleyes:

[Wotan31]

Focus on the future - electric. Don't be distracted.

And in the mean time, encourage the use of technology like Clean Diesel, which is here right now today, and can give 40-50 MPG's in your average sedan or 60+ MPG's in a hatchback.

[rhsgolfer33]

And in the mean time, encourage the use of technology like Clean Diesel, which is here right now today, and can give 40-50 MPG's in your average sedan or 60+ MPG's in a hatchback.

And costs about $5.15 per gallon around here. Like I'm going to buy a car that uses fuel that costs more than what I'm currently using when I could just buy a hybrid that gets the similar MPG with cheaper fuel. :rolleyes:

I'm just going to buy a Tesla.

[albusseverus]

And in the mean time, encourage the use of technology like Clean Diesel, which is here right now today, and can give 40-50 MPG's in your average sedan or 60+ MPG's in a hatchback.

Electric works right now and gets 135 mpg. What's it going to be, the past or the future? The only choice you can make is - now.

Toyota had an all electric 4x4 in the mid 1990s - you can have anything you want, just keep asking for it. You vote every time you spend a dollar. Vote wisely.

If all government departments chose to run electric-only tomorrow, you'd have electric vehicles by Friday.

[kabunaru]

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7456141.stm).

I would buy one of these in a heartbeat if I had the chance. ;)

[Abstract]

Honda's home 'hydrogen' power system actually runs on natural gas (a fossil fuel). The hydrogen cells are just storage (at a loss, of course). It's old-thinking from companies mired in 'old ways'.


Does it? If that's the case, why not just pump natural gas directly into our cars? That's "lossless" storage.

[Rodimus Prime]

Does it? If that's the case, why not just pump natural gas directly into our cars? That's "lossless" storage.

but that would not give some one the feel good factor of making water vapor exhausted.

Even though over all they are putting more pollution in the air than if they just burned the fossil fuels to begin with.

[carwaterguide]

p.s. I never heard about a water powered car that converts H2O to H then uses the H to power the motor, but I have heard and seen a water powered car that just uses a tank of compressed H2O to push the car around. Or was that compressed air.... I forget. :confused:


You don't have to try something to understand that it works.
I've seen facts on the news and all over the Internet, that running a car on water IS possible. Even that you haven't tried doing it, it doesn't mean that it's impossible.please see ....http://carwaterguide.blogspot.com

[Digital Skunk]

You don't have to try something to understand that it works.
I've seen facts on the news and all over the Internet, that running a car on water IS possible. Even that you haven't tried doing it, it doesn't mean that it's impossible.please see ....http://carwaterguide.blogspot.com

You sound more like an advertisement, as does the link you gave. But either-way I meant HOW the car uses water to run.

I have never heard of a water powered car that takes the H molecule from water (using energy to do so) and takes that H molecule to power the vehicle.

[iJohnHenry]

You sound more like an advertisement, as does the link you gave.

2 posts, joined today. Duh. :rolleyes:

I have never heard of a water powered car that takes the H molecule from water (using energy to do so) and takes that H molecule to power the vehicle.

I believe this is the theory of lifting yourself up by your own boot-straps. :p

What a doofus. (Him, not you.) http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/Smilies/MMafter03.gif

[ChrisA]

Hydrogen fueled cars are a scam and produce (via converting water to hydrogen through electricity) more carbon emissions than strictly electric cars.

I seriously doubt anyone other then high school chemistry students are making hydrogen from water. That uses to much electric power to be cost effective. The cheaper industrial process strips the hydrogen from hydrocarbons. Water vapor at high temperature is mixed with methane to make carbon monoxide and H2.

Yes it does take energy to do this too. but only to heat the water into thousand degree steam. In the US methane is relatively cheap.

Even so it takes more energy to make H2 then you get back in the car but I think the process is still better then if you burned the methane inside the car's engine. Car engines only recover about 20% of the energy in the fuel the rest is waste heat that goes out the radiator or goes to internal friction