Honda "may" mass produce fuel cell car in 10 years

[bfivelover]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... 1jZTypWBBM

So much for fuel cell vehicles in the next few years

[JimmyHiggins]

Well, I was pretty sure that fuel cells weren't that close. We lack the infrastructure for that anyway. Heck, I think 10 years is pretty close.

[james]

Good news, I think, unless they also develop a fuel cell that runs off liquid fuel. Looking at what's involved in producing, storing & distributing large quantities of hydrogen, it seems pretty obvious to me that the losses in infrastructure far outweigh anything you gain in vehicle efficiency.

But there is good news in that article, buried near the bottom: "...also developing the CR-Z hybrid sports car and will add a hybrid option to the Fit..." Of course by then I may be able to buy an Aptera

[Dgate]

Video link to the Clarity....... http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarit ... aspx?Num=1

DGate

[bfivelover]

Originally Posted by james

Good news, I think, unless they also develop a fuel cell that runs off liquid fuel. Looking at what's involved in producing, storing & distributing large quantities of hydrogen, it seems pretty obvious to me that the losses in infrastructure far outweigh anything you gain in vehicle efficiency.

But there is good news in that article, buried near the bottom: "...also developing the CR-Z hybrid sports car and will add a hybrid option to the Fit..." Of course by then I may be able to buy an Aptera

I don't think you can buy an Aptera outside of California until at least 2010, maybe longer. The thing about Honda's fuel cell vehicle, they have a home fueling station available. I wonder if the Government is not allowing them to sell it, or if there is some other problem with it? Maybe they think the car and the home fueling station would be to expensive at this point in time. I really wanted my next car to be an Aptera or a fuel cell. Wonder if my Insight can make it to 500,000 miles? Almost half way there now.

[james]

Yeah, that's why I said "may be able" - though I do work in the Bay Area (mostly telecommuting, but I have to go there sometimes), so I suppose I could fake a residence. The big problem, though, is my deep-seated objection to buying new cars. But I'm planning to be one of the first in line for used Aperas

On the home hydrogen generator for fuel cell vehicles, I suggest you look into the efficiency & economics of the whole cycle. Hydrogen power just doesn't make sense, at least without major technical breakthroughs of the practical fusion power sort. It was just used as a distraction by certain politicians, so people wouldn't think about the fact that someday, sooner or later, they'd have to change their sacred gas-guzzling lifestyle. Well, if you read about changes in car sales, it seems as though someday is just about here, so maybe now we can dump the hydrogen hype.

[JimmyHiggins]

If Honda is developing it, I wouldn't necessarily call it hype.

[ElectricTroy]

Originally Posted by james

Good news, I think, unless they also develop a fuel cell that runs off liquid fuel. Looking at what's involved in producing, storing & distributing large quantities of hydrogen, it seems pretty obvious to me that the losses in infrastructure far outweigh anything you gain in vehicle efficiency.

Bring back the EV1!!! The infrastructure is already there (power lines) as is the technology (NiMH or Lithium batteries) to achieve acceptable range (200-250 miles) to get a person to work. And there is a growth path to eliminate coal and use solar energy captured off rooftops, thereby making it a clean renewable fuel.

I don't have any great love for EVs, but they make a hell of a lot more sense than cracking water, trucking the hazardous hydrogen across the U.S. (ticking timebombs), and then reversing the process to get water again. EVs are simply more efficient.

[budomove]

Originally Posted by ElectricTroy

I don't have any great love for EVs, but they make a hell of a lot more sense than cracking water, trucking the hazardous hydrogen across the U.S. (ticking timebombs), and then reversing the process to get water again. EVs are simply more efficient.

This is definitely true, at least with the technology we have now anyway.

[james]

I don't think pure EVs make sense either, with current technology. So you have say a 200 mile range: what if you want to travel 250 miles? You have to stop somewhere and spend several hours recharging. Then you have issues with for instance cabin heat in the winter. Electric heat in a Minnesota winter might turn that 200 mile range into 20. Then you have all the parasitic weight of batteries...

What does make sense is the series hybrid. Primary electric drive with a 40 mile or so range, so the batteries aren't too heavy. A small auxilary power unit that comes on line either to extend range or provide heat, which only needs to be large enough to provide cruising power (10-15 hp, maybe), so would be small & light, and could be a much more efficient gas turbine or Stirling engine.