Comments on: Hydrogen fuel cell cars are a dead end from a technological, practical, and climate perspective — Chu & Obama are right to kill the program, Part 1

By: Mark Mathias

Mark Mathias — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:16:48 +0000

In answer to Scatter above on the $6/kg delivered H2 price in 2009 dollars:

There is wide variation in the projections for future H2 price. Based on my searching, H2 from methane reforming would be lower than $6/kg and zero-carbon H2 (from renewable-electricity/electrolysis or biomass gasification) would be higher initially but would drop to less than $6/kg at significant market penetrations. Will be interested to hear Joe Romm’s opinion — my personal expertise is on the vehicle cost side.

By: Greg Blencoe

Greg Blencoe — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 22:32:08 +0000

Presentations by Toyota, Honda, GM, and Mercedes (Daimler) at the Congressional briefings yesterday in support of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles

http://hydrogendiscoveries.wordpress.com/ 2009/ 06/ 13/ presentations-by-toyota-honda-gm-and-mercedes-daimler-at-the-congressional-briefings-yesterday-on-hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicles/

Take a look at the Toyota presentation. The Toyota FCHV is a mid-size SUV that gets over 400 miles of range in real-world driving. Cost and durability issues will be worked out by the time the vehicles are commercialized in 2015. The only issue is building the hydrogen fueling infrastructure.

Greg Blencoe
Chief Executive Officer
Hydrogen Discoveries, Inc.
“Hydrogen Car Revolution” blog

[JR: Uhh, nice try. First off, the infrastructure problem is unsolved and no one has ever proposed a solution for hydrogen. There is no evidence a solution exists and I'm quite certain it doesn't. Second, yes, if you hypothesize a 100-fold improvement in fuel cells but no improvement for PHEVs, then the cars are almost equally good, except for that dang infrastructure that no one will ever build. That'll be Part 2.]

By: Greg Blencoe

Greg Blencoe — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 21:19:21 +0000

Here are three excerpts from a MUST-READ article by Jim Motavalli titled “Toyota’s Problem With Plug-in Hybrids” that was published on June 2, 2009 on Bnet.com:

“Instead of the 100 miles per gallon equivalent that some proponents claim, the plug-in reality is between 50 and 55 mpg…”

“Miller said that the promise of the lithium-ion battery pack—used in both PHEVs and pure battery EVs—has led to ‘inflated expectations beyond the technical realities.’”

“Miller said that battery technology has lagged behind that of hydrogen fuel cells.”

http://industry.bnet.com/ auto/ 10001607/ toyotas-problem-with-plug-in-hybrids/

I HIGHLY recommend reading the entire article which is outstanding.

Greg Blencoe
Chief Executive Officer
Hydrogen Discoveries, Inc.
“Hydrogen Car Revolution” blog

[JR: Worth reading, if for no other reason that to see how even a smart car company can put out amazingly bad analysis. Since HFCVs are a dead end for multiple reasons, this only makes sense as a head fake. I would note that Toyota will have multiple commercial EVs and PHEVs out before they ever have a single commercial HFCV out.]

By: parallel

parallel — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:14:36 +0000

James Newberry said “Parallel – what do you think the engine in the car is for? For motion or electric generation you are still burning fuel and the trailer increases consumption vs. just the car.”

In the case I suggested, the vehicle is all electric and doesn’t have an IC engine. For most of the time you would not be carrying the motor generator set, saving weight, space and cost over a car that had it all on-board. According to the statistics I see (don’t know how accurate they are) most people could manage with a range of 40 miles. Give them the option of purchasing the size of battery they require and use the towed motor/generator for the occasional longer trips, visiting granny. Of course the normal charge would be at home, from the mains at night.

Another possibility, if the hype comes to pass, is to use a super-capacitor, that could be charged at a filling station, in just a few minutes. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor This has been delayed often enough to cast doubt, but there is some hope it might work one day.

By: Icarus

Icarus — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:23:58 +0000

“Icarus;
It’s been mentioned here before, but you may have missed it…
PHEV’s are still 4x more efficient re CO2 than standard vehicles even when the electricity comes from coal plants.”

Thanks Brewster – yes I’ve only just started reading about this stuff so it’s all new to me. Thanks for the information. It’s good to know that there is that much of a benefit.

By: Brewster

Brewster — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 02:44:04 +0000

Icarus;

It’s been mentioned here before, but you may have missed it…

PHEV’s are still 4x more efficient re CO2 than standard vehicles even when the electricity comes from coal plants.

By: hapa

hapa — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 02:03:13 +0000

joe, tangential but, it was a sad day last weekend when i learned that formula one racing had gone hybrid (in-car flywheels!) not from you or any other green news site but from a sports announcer on tv.
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2009/ 04/ 25/ sports/ othersports/ 25prix.html

By: Icarus

Icarus — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:18:36 +0000

I know virtually nothing about the different options for future transport fuel, so I found this article very interesting. What strikes me first is that I think very few people will put environmental impact at the top of their list of criteria for choosing a new vehicle (or deciding whether or not to change their existing vehicle). Cost to buy and cost to run would surely be more important for most people. I do find the idea of being able to ‘fill up’ at home through an electricity outlet very appealing, but that will only be of benefit to people who have a garage at home – what about the millions of cars which have to be parked on the street? How do we get electricity into them without rewiring every street on the planet? Also, running your car on electricity isn’t going to help avert climate change if that electricity is still being produced from fossil fuels – isn’t there a more immediate benefit if we can find a way to produce sufficient quantities of bio fuel?

By: James Newberry

James Newberry — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:16:17 +0000

Parallel – what do you think the engine in the car is for? For motion or electric generation you are still burning fuel and the trailer increases consumption vs. just the car.

Thanks for the background, Joe. I hope you have moved past the inaccurate rhetoric of “zero-carbon sources such as . . . nuclear energy.” From mining, to decomissioning radioactive plant sites and guarding fission products for centuries to come the carbon contribution is significant, and certainly not “clean.”.

By: parallel

parallel — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:22:24 +0000

Couldn’t agree with you more Dr. Romm. I wrote much the same thing when the idea was first suggested.

One small variant of the hybrid/electric car appeals to me. Buy the car with sufficient battery storage for daily use and have a v. small trailer (possibly rented) with an efficient IC engine/generator for the occasional trip further afield. Some years back I saw photos of a home brewed version of this in Australia. The trailer is small enough not to present much of a problem for backing up.