The hydrogen economy. It sounds so good on paper. All of our vehicles driving around emitting nothing but water vapor fueled from hydrogen produced by power from the sun. It’s been a dream since before I was born.
I remember reading a copy of Popular Mechanics when I was in 7th grade that said the hydrogen economy was realistically a decade away… that was in the 80s. As each decade has come and gone since then, the hydrogen economy seems to be perpetually a decade away.
Is the hydrogen economy something we should just throw in the towel on (at least for now), or should we continue funding this area of research even though other technologies are more promising for the time being?
Back when Bush took office and used his first State of the Union address to tout the hydrogen economy and announce increased funding for hydrogen research, hydrogen experienced a bit of a rather short-lived rebirth. According to the movie, “Who Killed the Electric Car?”, that rebirth was one of the most important factors for the death of the first wave of modern battery-powered electric cars (remember the EV1?).
But ever since then, hydrogen has started to fall out of favor again. So much so, that when Steven Chu took over as the head honcho at the US Department of Energy just over a year ago, he drastically cut funding for all hydrogen research saying that it made much more sense to focus on battery powered electric cars. Of course, that funding was reinstated under pressure from industry, but now hydrogen has been marked, and is ever under the knife.
GM, having invested billions of dollars in hydrogen research over time, is, apparently, loathe to give up the farm on this one. Last September GM introduced a next generation fuel cell platform designed to take up only the space required by a traditional four-banger combustion engine and should be much cheaper to produce (some say current generation fuel cell vehicles cost as much as $1 million dollars each to build).
Well, now GM’s saying that this new fuel cell stack will reach production by 2015 and be placed into vehicles in GM’s already existing “Project Driveway” — a limited group of fuel cell test drivers. In a way, you gotta give it to them for sticking with it in the face of overwhelming odds. But you also wonder when they’ll finally say “enough is enough”? Even if some group of politicians further down the road says “Oh hey, what about that hydrogen thing?” and decided to give it some more funding again, you never know when that support will end as another group of politicians turns up.
There’s simply not enough stability in political opinion about the hydrogen economy to make it a good business plan to continue dumping money into research when the required government investment (infrastructure, research money) is so inconsistent. Plus, to be honest, if they are going to focus on spending money on only one thing to fix our problems, battery powered electric cars certainly make much more sense right now.
Even with that though, my own personal opinion is that we should continue to do research on ALL solutions because you never know when you’ll be up a creek without the right paddle and that one fuel cell in your back pocket will get you home. But I’m afraid that argument does not work on the political popularity battlefield where politicians are increasingly held to the fire for “unwisely” spending money.
Sources: GM, GM-volt.com
PDF 
World to GM: GO AWAY
World to GM: GO AWAY
World to GM: GO AWAY
World to GM: GO AWAY
UNLIKE ! Why because to poduce hydrogen you use electricity,to transport the hydrogen to the refuiling station you make carbon and so on ! IT IS THE SAME BIG OIL but now BIG HYDROGEN strategy.
SO GM STOP LOBING FOR THE MONOPOLISTS AND GIVE US 100% ELECTRIC CARS for the FREE PEOPLE !!!
UNLIKE ! Why because to poduce hydrogen you use electricity,to transport the hydrogen to the refuiling station you make carbon and so on ! IT IS THE SAME BIG OIL but now BIG HYDROGEN strategy.
SO GM STOP LOBING FOR THE MONOPOLISTS AND GIVE US 100% ELECTRIC CARS for the FREE PEOPLE !!!
UNLIKE ! Why because to poduce hydrogen you use electricity,to transport the hydrogen to the refuiling station you make carbon and so on ! IT IS THE SAME BIG OIL but now BIG HYDROGEN strategy.
SO GM STOP LOBING FOR THE MONOPOLISTS AND GIVE US 100% ELECTRIC CARS for the FREE PEOPLE !!!
Bad GM, You were supposed to put these toys away until you had the Chevy Volt into production!
When you drag out the Hydrogen Fuel Cell toys to distract people, I expect you are about to do something bad, like Kill an Electric Car or the Chevy Volt.
I don’t want Hydrogen station range anxiety and I don’t want to use a poor energy carrier like Hydrogen in my car.
Hydrogen Fuel Cells cars waste energy and are only clean at the tail pipe. Today all hydrogen gas is made with an extremely polluting process (cheapest) or one that wastes a lot of energy.
Build a battery electric version of the Volt; it will go two to three times as far using the same energy (Starting from initial energy generation to wheels turning on the road).
Bad GM, You were supposed to put these toys away until you had the Chevy Volt into production!
When you drag out the Hydrogen Fuel Cell toys to distract people, I expect you are about to do something bad, like Kill an Electric Car or the Chevy Volt.
I don’t want Hydrogen station range anxiety and I don’t want to use a poor energy carrier like Hydrogen in my car.
Hydrogen Fuel Cells cars waste energy and are only clean at the tail pipe. Today all hydrogen gas is made with an extremely polluting process (cheapest) or one that wastes a lot of energy.
Build a battery electric version of the Volt; it will go two to three times as far using the same energy (Starting from initial energy generation to wheels turning on the road).
And you STILL be developing it for another twenty years. Hydrogen fuel for automobiles is nothing more than an attempt to prolong our dependency on oil. They keep saying “we’re not going to invest in electrics because hydrogen is better” so we continue to wait for the “miracle fuel” while we could have transitioned to electrics long ago. Electricity is everywhere and we have an abundance of it during off peak hours already. Plus, individuals can produce their own electricity is they choose to do so and invest in solar. Hydrogen is nothing more than a RED HERRING to get our eye off an alternative fuel that we already have and have proved it will work.
And you STILL be developing it for another twenty years. Hydrogen fuel for automobiles is nothing more than an attempt to prolong our dependency on oil. They keep saying “we’re not going to invest in electrics because hydrogen is better” so we continue to wait for the “miracle fuel” while we could have transitioned to electrics long ago. Electricity is everywhere and we have an abundance of it during off peak hours already. Plus, individuals can produce their own electricity is they choose to do so and invest in solar. Hydrogen is nothing more than a RED HERRING to get our eye off an alternative fuel that we already have and have proved it will work.
And you STILL be developing it for another twenty years. Hydrogen fuel for automobiles is nothing more than an attempt to prolong our dependency on oil. They keep saying “we’re not going to invest in electrics because hydrogen is better” so we continue to wait for the “miracle fuel” while we could have transitioned to electrics long ago. Electricity is everywhere and we have an abundance of it during off peak hours already. Plus, individuals can produce their own electricity is they choose to do so and invest in solar. Hydrogen is nothing more than a RED HERRING to get our eye off an alternative fuel that we already have and have proved it will work.
i say keep working on hydrogen power guys please,we need it soon.
Hydrogen does make sense, if you take the time to really look into it. Germany, Japan, South Korea, Great Britain, Iceland, etc. all have hydrogen programs that they are actually expanding. They know it is good for their economy, the environment, public health, and national security.
Hydrogen funding was increased under the Clinton administration – it is not just a Bush program. Even a bad president can be right sometimes.
Batteries have been just around the corner for over 100 years! They still are not a panacea. We need all these technologies to get us off of oil, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. The movie “Who Killed the Electric Car” was filled with misinformation and was mostly propaganda. Did it present an “opposing” viewpoint – no.
With this type of negative thinking that has been propagated by “battery zealots”, we will be beholden to Germany and Japan for technology in which we should be leaders. GM is making the right decisions here and they should be congratulated.
Hydrogen does make sense, if you take the time to really look into it. Germany, Japan, South Korea, Great Britain, Iceland, etc. all have hydrogen programs that they are actually expanding. They know it is good for their economy, the environment, public health, and national security.
Hydrogen funding was increased under the Clinton administration – it is not just a Bush program. Even a bad president can be right sometimes.
Batteries have been just around the corner for over 100 years! They still are not a panacea. We need all these technologies to get us off of oil, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. The movie “Who Killed the Electric Car” was filled with misinformation and was mostly propaganda. Did it present an “opposing” viewpoint – no.
With this type of negative thinking that has been propagated by “battery zealots”, we will be beholden to Germany and Japan for technology in which we should be leaders. GM is making the right decisions here and they should be congratulated.
Hydrogen does make sense, if you take the time to really look into it. Germany, Japan, South Korea, Great Britain, Iceland, etc. all have hydrogen programs that they are actually expanding. They know it is good for their economy, the environment, public health, and national security.
Hydrogen funding was increased under the Clinton administration – it is not just a Bush program. Even a bad president can be right sometimes.
Batteries have been just around the corner for over 100 years! They still are not a panacea. We need all these technologies to get us off of oil, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. The movie “Who Killed the Electric Car” was filled with misinformation and was mostly propaganda. Did it present an “opposing” viewpoint – no.
With this type of negative thinking that has been propagated by “battery zealots”, we will be beholden to Germany and Japan for technology in which we should be leaders. GM is making the right decisions here and they should be congratulated.
Hydrogen does make sense, if you take the time to really look into it. Germany, Japan, South Korea, Great Britain, Iceland, etc. all have hydrogen programs that they are actually expanding. They know it is good for their economy, the environment, public health, and national security.
Hydrogen funding was increased under the Clinton administration – it is not just a Bush program. Even a bad president can be right sometimes.
Batteries have been just around the corner for over 100 years! They still are not a panacea. We need all these technologies to get us off of oil, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. The movie “Who Killed the Electric Car” was filled with misinformation and was mostly propaganda. Did it present an “opposing” viewpoint – no.
With this type of negative thinking that has been propagated by “battery zealots”, we will be beholden to Germany and Japan for technology in which we should be leaders. GM is making the right decisions here and they should be congratulated.
I continue to be amazed at the number of people who think that electricity is the “magic bullet”. It’s not. And that somehow it is free. It is far from it.
40% of the electricity in the US comes from coal fired plants. Is that REALLY what you are all jumping up and down about and wetting your pants over? Sheesh….
In addition, getting the electricity from where it’s made to where it’s used involves transmission losses that approach 50%. Oh, yeah, that’s the key to our salvation right there. Double sheesh….
Plus, too and also, electric cars require batteries and batteries have their own environmental issues with regard to manufacture and disposal. In fact,there is a commentary piece right here on this site warning of the dangers of losing control over the “rare earth” elements that are essential to battery production. Did you know China presently controls 95% of the world supply of those rare earth minerals? No? If not, aren’t you unqualified to wax eloquent about the limitless wonders of electricity? T’aint so. : <
Going forward, electric cars have a place in the mix. So do fuel cells (Did you know Honda sells a fuel cell car in California?)Probably the most intelligent option at the moment is a diesel electric powertrain making its own electricity and running on bio-fuel. Did you know that bio-ethanol from straw was used last week in Formula One? That information is available on this website also.
The United States MUST uncouple itself from the nipple of Big Oil. The US military says it is vital to our national security to do so. But while that may be true, wouldn't it be prodigiously stupid to make ourselves dependent on other foreign countries for other vital natural resources? That's not progress. That's what they used to call in the Nixon Administration "sideways waffling.
So before you all jump on the electric car bandwagon, please take the time to educate yourselves about the pluses and minuses of electric vehicles. They are a mixed blessing, to say the least.
I continue to be amazed at the number of people who think that electricity is the “magic bullet”. It’s not. And that somehow it is free. It is far from it.
40% of the electricity in the US comes from coal fired plants. Is that REALLY what you are all jumping up and down about and wetting your pants over? Sheesh….
In addition, getting the electricity from where it’s made to where it’s used involves transmission losses that approach 50%. Oh, yeah, that’s the key to our salvation right there. Double sheesh….
Plus, too and also, electric cars require batteries and batteries have their own environmental issues with regard to manufacture and disposal. In fact,there is a commentary piece right here on this site warning of the dangers of losing control over the “rare earth” elements that are essential to battery production. Did you know China presently controls 95% of the world supply of those rare earth minerals? No? If not, aren’t you unqualified to wax eloquent about the limitless wonders of electricity? T’aint so. : <
Going forward, electric cars have a place in the mix. So do fuel cells (Did you know Honda sells a fuel cell car in California?)Probably the most intelligent option at the moment is a diesel electric powertrain making its own electricity and running on bio-fuel. Did you know that bio-ethanol from straw was used last week in Formula One? That information is available on this website also.
The United States MUST uncouple itself from the nipple of Big Oil. The US military says it is vital to our national security to do so. But while that may be true, wouldn't it be prodigiously stupid to make ourselves dependent on other foreign countries for other vital natural resources? That's not progress. That's what they used to call in the Nixon Administration "sideways waffling.
So before you all jump on the electric car bandwagon, please take the time to educate yourselves about the pluses and minuses of electric vehicles. They are a mixed blessing, to say the least.
I continue to be amazed at the number of people who think that electricity is the “magic bullet”. It’s not. And that somehow it is free. It is far from it.
40% of the electricity in the US comes from coal fired plants. Is that REALLY what you are all jumping up and down about and wetting your pants over? Sheesh….
In addition, getting the electricity from where it’s made to where it’s used involves transmission losses that approach 50%. Oh, yeah, that’s the key to our salvation right there. Double sheesh….
Plus, too and also, electric cars require batteries and batteries have their own environmental issues with regard to manufacture and disposal. In fact,there is a commentary piece right here on this site warning of the dangers of losing control over the “rare earth” elements that are essential to battery production. Did you know China presently controls 95% of the world supply of those rare earth minerals? No? If not, aren’t you unqualified to wax eloquent about the limitless wonders of electricity? T’aint so. : <
Going forward, electric cars have a place in the mix. So do fuel cells (Did you know Honda sells a fuel cell car in California?)Probably the most intelligent option at the moment is a diesel electric powertrain making its own electricity and running on bio-fuel. Did you know that bio-ethanol from straw was used last week in Formula One? That information is available on this website also.
The United States MUST uncouple itself from the nipple of Big Oil. The US military says it is vital to our national security to do so. But while that may be true, wouldn't it be prodigiously stupid to make ourselves dependent on other foreign countries for other vital natural resources? That's not progress. That's what they used to call in the Nixon Administration "sideways waffling.
So before you all jump on the electric car bandwagon, please take the time to educate yourselves about the pluses and minuses of electric vehicles. They are a mixed blessing, to say the least.
GM sings the weeps about “losing $1 billion” on the EV1, but BRAGS about dumping $1.6 billion into the fuel-cell-car fiasco.
Even now, there are hundreds more Electric cars on the road that FC cars — even though GM promised, back in 2003, “scads” of FC cars. There are still more than 300 OWNED Toyota RAV4-EV in the hands of OWNERS, despite GM and Chevron working together to kill the program (sued Toyota who stopped production in Nov., 2002).
THERE IS NOT ONE OWNED FUEL CELL CAR!!
They are ALL leased, and always will be, because if they sold you one, you could dismantle it for the parts and triple your money on ebay!
FC work in space, or if you have technical-grade Oxygen as well as technical-grade H2; but no FC car carries Oxygen, they get it from the air, meaning that it degrades the FC stack in 3 years. Imagine having to replace a $300,000 fuel cell stack every 3 years!!
Fuel Cell cars don’t take “research”, we KNOW they are impractical unless there were free Hydrogen, free fuel cells, free money, and free high-tech tanks.
Technical-grade H2 costs $17/gge, about 35 kWh; takes a FC car 30 to 60 miles. Imagine paying $17/gallon for a fuel that leaks out of your tank, and the tanks wear out in 5 years!
GM should admit it’s a hangover from their old, failed “managers” like Lutz and Wagoner who drove the once-huge company into dissolution and bankruptcy.
GM sings the weeps about “losing $1 billion” on the EV1, but BRAGS about dumping $1.6 billion into the fuel-cell-car fiasco.
Even now, there are hundreds more Electric cars on the road that FC cars — even though GM promised, back in 2003, “scads” of FC cars. There are still more than 300 OWNED Toyota RAV4-EV in the hands of OWNERS, despite GM and Chevron working together to kill the program (sued Toyota who stopped production in Nov., 2002).
THERE IS NOT ONE OWNED FUEL CELL CAR!!
They are ALL leased, and always will be, because if they sold you one, you could dismantle it for the parts and triple your money on ebay!
FC work in space, or if you have technical-grade Oxygen as well as technical-grade H2; but no FC car carries Oxygen, they get it from the air, meaning that it degrades the FC stack in 3 years. Imagine having to replace a $300,000 fuel cell stack every 3 years!!
Fuel Cell cars don’t take “research”, we KNOW they are impractical unless there were free Hydrogen, free fuel cells, free money, and free high-tech tanks.
Technical-grade H2 costs $17/gge, about 35 kWh; takes a FC car 30 to 60 miles. Imagine paying $17/gallon for a fuel that leaks out of your tank, and the tanks wear out in 5 years!
GM should admit it’s a hangover from their old, failed “managers” like Lutz and Wagoner who drove the once-huge company into dissolution and bankruptcy.
GM sings the weeps about “losing $1 billion” on the EV1, but BRAGS about dumping $1.6 billion into the fuel-cell-car fiasco.
Even now, there are hundreds more Electric cars on the road that FC cars — even though GM promised, back in 2003, “scads” of FC cars. There are still more than 300 OWNED Toyota RAV4-EV in the hands of OWNERS, despite GM and Chevron working together to kill the program (sued Toyota who stopped production in Nov., 2002).
THERE IS NOT ONE OWNED FUEL CELL CAR!!
They are ALL leased, and always will be, because if they sold you one, you could dismantle it for the parts and triple your money on ebay!
FC work in space, or if you have technical-grade Oxygen as well as technical-grade H2; but no FC car carries Oxygen, they get it from the air, meaning that it degrades the FC stack in 3 years. Imagine having to replace a $300,000 fuel cell stack every 3 years!!
Fuel Cell cars don’t take “research”, we KNOW they are impractical unless there were free Hydrogen, free fuel cells, free money, and free high-tech tanks.
Technical-grade H2 costs $17/gge, about 35 kWh; takes a FC car 30 to 60 miles. Imagine paying $17/gallon for a fuel that leaks out of your tank, and the tanks wear out in 5 years!
GM should admit it’s a hangover from their old, failed “managers” like Lutz and Wagoner who drove the once-huge company into dissolution and bankruptcy.
Steve, FYI, we drive two EVs on the energy from one solar rooftop system; it takes 250 kWh of energy to drive 1000 miles per month, about what two beer-boxes take.
Yes, we have looked at electricity!! It works. Electric trains, Electric car, Electric motors.
Much more efficient for electrons to do the movement than greased gears and hi-temp pistons with boiling water and hot oil!
EVs have, essentially, one moving part — the motor rotor — and it’s going in the right direction, same as the wheels. No trans gearing needed, no up-and-down pistons, no crankshaft, no timing belt, no fuel injection, no valves, no wrist pins, no muffler, no fuel pump, no fuel filter, less brake wear, less tire wear, no smog check, no tune up, no oil changes, and on and on…
Steve, FYI, we drive two EVs on the energy from one solar rooftop system; it takes 250 kWh of energy to drive 1000 miles per month, about what two beer-boxes take.
Yes, we have looked at electricity!! It works. Electric trains, Electric car, Electric motors.
Much more efficient for electrons to do the movement than greased gears and hi-temp pistons with boiling water and hot oil!
EVs have, essentially, one moving part — the motor rotor — and it’s going in the right direction, same as the wheels. No trans gearing needed, no up-and-down pistons, no crankshaft, no timing belt, no fuel injection, no valves, no wrist pins, no muffler, no fuel pump, no fuel filter, less brake wear, less tire wear, no smog check, no tune up, no oil changes, and on and on…
Steve, too other mis-apprehension or ignorance on your part: THE HONDA FUEL CELL FCX CLARITY IS NOT SOLD!! NOT IN CALIFORNIA, NOT ANYWHERE!
Secondly, the idea that we’d run out of metals is painfully naive; we recycle all metals. Did you know that 75% of our Nickel comes from recycling, or that it’s mostly used in stainless steel and monel? The same batteries that wear out, after 100K or 200K miles (we don’t yet know how long our batteries will last, certainly more than 100K miles, we’re there now) when they wear out, THE SAME BATTERIES can be melted down, using THE SAME METALS, and reformed into NEW BATTERIES at a fraction of the cost of using new metals.
The same economics rationalized our steel production; instead of new iron ore, we now use electric furnaces which melt down scrap iron — which has the right mixture of Carbon, Manganese, Copper, etc., to make the desired steel.
The existing “urban resource” of mined metals forms a basis for reuse. Very little new stuff is needed, certainly not Lanthanum, Vanadium, and rare-earth metals, those would all be in the old batteries.
Steve, too other mis-apprehension or ignorance on your part: THE HONDA FUEL CELL FCX CLARITY IS NOT SOLD!! NOT IN CALIFORNIA, NOT ANYWHERE!
Secondly, the idea that we’d run out of metals is painfully naive; we recycle all metals. Did you know that 75% of our Nickel comes from recycling, or that it’s mostly used in stainless steel and monel? The same batteries that wear out, after 100K or 200K miles (we don’t yet know how long our batteries will last, certainly more than 100K miles, we’re there now) when they wear out, THE SAME BATTERIES can be melted down, using THE SAME METALS, and reformed into NEW BATTERIES at a fraction of the cost of using new metals.
The same economics rationalized our steel production; instead of new iron ore, we now use electric furnaces which melt down scrap iron — which has the right mixture of Carbon, Manganese, Copper, etc., to make the desired steel.
The existing “urban resource” of mined metals forms a basis for reuse. Very little new stuff is needed, certainly not Lanthanum, Vanadium, and rare-earth metals, those would all be in the old batteries.
Steve, too other mis-apprehension or ignorance on your part: THE HONDA FUEL CELL FCX CLARITY IS NOT SOLD!! NOT IN CALIFORNIA, NOT ANYWHERE!
Secondly, the idea that we’d run out of metals is painfully naive; we recycle all metals. Did you know that 75% of our Nickel comes from recycling, or that it’s mostly used in stainless steel and monel? The same batteries that wear out, after 100K or 200K miles (we don’t yet know how long our batteries will last, certainly more than 100K miles, we’re there now) when they wear out, THE SAME BATTERIES can be melted down, using THE SAME METALS, and reformed into NEW BATTERIES at a fraction of the cost of using new metals.
The same economics rationalized our steel production; instead of new iron ore, we now use electric furnaces which melt down scrap iron — which has the right mixture of Carbon, Manganese, Copper, etc., to make the desired steel.
The existing “urban resource” of mined metals forms a basis for reuse. Very little new stuff is needed, certainly not Lanthanum, Vanadium, and rare-earth metals, those would all be in the old batteries.
jjpro, YOU should look into it!! Even in Iceland, which has excess power from hydro and geothermal, they ABANDONED the “hydrogen program” because it’s impractical.
If you believe in the Fuel Cell Car hoax, ask yourself ONE thing: WHY NOT CNG CARS?? They are here, now, scale from compacts to trash trucks, a proven technology, allows you to ride in HOV lanes as a CLEAN FUEL, is plentiful, cheap, less wear-and-tear than gas or diesel, and we ALREADY HAVE an infrastructure to deliver it. It’s a proven, cheap, REAL technology.
So why not CNG?? The reason, obviously, that they ignore it is because it would WORK, and provide a real alterntive to oil; so the oil companies want idiots and gullible fools to suck down the fuel cell slop, because they KNOW fuel cell cars are never going to be practical.
That’s the question you should ask: IF the goal is to get off foreign oil, why not solar PV and EV plug-in cars, and/or CNG cars, trucks and buses?
NO OIL NEEDED.
But too simple for the con-men and hucksters who are killing us with oil, because they work and don’t need research.
If you could break the Chevron-GM patents (now handed off to Bosch-Samsung) you could make millions of plug-in cars like our Toyota RAV4-EV, like our HondaEV (Honda crushed), or our EV1 (GM crushed).
Get off the Hydrogen gas, it’s all hot air and hogwash.
jjpro, YOU should look into it!! Even in Iceland, which has excess power from hydro and geothermal, they ABANDONED the “hydrogen program” because it’s impractical.
If you believe in the Fuel Cell Car hoax, ask yourself ONE thing: WHY NOT CNG CARS?? They are here, now, scale from compacts to trash trucks, a proven technology, allows you to ride in HOV lanes as a CLEAN FUEL, is plentiful, cheap, less wear-and-tear than gas or diesel, and we ALREADY HAVE an infrastructure to deliver it. It’s a proven, cheap, REAL technology.
So why not CNG?? The reason, obviously, that they ignore it is because it would WORK, and provide a real alterntive to oil; so the oil companies want idiots and gullible fools to suck down the fuel cell slop, because they KNOW fuel cell cars are never going to be practical.
That’s the question you should ask: IF the goal is to get off foreign oil, why not solar PV and EV plug-in cars, and/or CNG cars, trucks and buses?
NO OIL NEEDED.
But too simple for the con-men and hucksters who are killing us with oil, because they work and don’t need research.
If you could break the Chevron-GM patents (now handed off to Bosch-Samsung) you could make millions of plug-in cars like our Toyota RAV4-EV, like our HondaEV (Honda crushed), or our EV1 (GM crushed).
Get off the Hydrogen gas, it’s all hot air and hogwash.
jjpro, YOU should look into it!! Even in Iceland, which has excess power from hydro and geothermal, they ABANDONED the “hydrogen program” because it’s impractical.
If you believe in the Fuel Cell Car hoax, ask yourself ONE thing: WHY NOT CNG CARS?? They are here, now, scale from compacts to trash trucks, a proven technology, allows you to ride in HOV lanes as a CLEAN FUEL, is plentiful, cheap, less wear-and-tear than gas or diesel, and we ALREADY HAVE an infrastructure to deliver it. It’s a proven, cheap, REAL technology.
So why not CNG?? The reason, obviously, that they ignore it is because it would WORK, and provide a real alterntive to oil; so the oil companies want idiots and gullible fools to suck down the fuel cell slop, because they KNOW fuel cell cars are never going to be practical.
That’s the question you should ask: IF the goal is to get off foreign oil, why not solar PV and EV plug-in cars, and/or CNG cars, trucks and buses?
NO OIL NEEDED.
But too simple for the con-men and hucksters who are killing us with oil, because they work and don’t need research.
If you could break the Chevron-GM patents (now handed off to Bosch-Samsung) you could make millions of plug-in cars like our Toyota RAV4-EV, like our HondaEV (Honda crushed), or our EV1 (GM crushed).
Get off the Hydrogen gas, it’s all hot air and hogwash.
Nick – Good lord. I guess I’m not the only person pissed at GM.
Interesting board. I have a few comments -
Richard Baker – You do not speak for the world. Stop it.
Constantin – Proof your work before submitting. And ease up on the capitals. We’re talking here, not screaming.
jjpro – Clinton signed off on hydrogen just to score points, his interest was purely political, a straight feel-good vote. Bush’s interest was purely financial, as he knew hydrogen was still decades off and could not compete with his oil buddies. Otherwise, why not prime the pump with electric or CNG? And “Electric Car” was a documentary and doesn’t require any viewpoint other than its own. Still, a decent flick.
Steve – I understand your concern with the “bandwagon” effect. However, electric is, in fact, the only altfuel choice available NOW. There are electric outlets everywhere, it’s simply a matter of time needed to fill a charge. And your right on the coal point, but try to be realistic. This is technology still in its infancy, just learning to crawl, not even walking yet. Hell, five years ago virtually nobody knew what EV meant, much less could discuss the matter. So give it some time. More solar and wind farms will come on line. Coal will slowly be replaced with those and possibly some hard-core biofuels for its generators. Batteries will become cheaper, safer, and with better charge densities. The tech will come around as it develops. Hell, companies are creating paint and ink that create electricity! So, mellow out, give it a little time. This ain’t I Dream of Jeannie. We can’t blink our eyes and it All Right.
My two cents? I say throw it all on the wall and see what sticks. There’s no reason we can’t have multiple fuel choices. Have hydrogen cars and electric cars. Make hybrids that run on electric and bio-diesel. Hell, I’d buy a car that ran on chicken shit and fresh urine if it was cheap enough. And it’d have to be…
Nick – Good lord. I guess I’m not the only person pissed at GM.
Interesting board. I have a few comments -
Richard Baker – You do not speak for the world. Stop it.
Constantin – Proof your work before submitting. And ease up on the capitals. We’re talking here, not screaming.
jjpro – Clinton signed off on hydrogen just to score points, his interest was purely political, a straight feel-good vote. Bush’s interest was purely financial, as he knew hydrogen was still decades off and could not compete with his oil buddies. Otherwise, why not prime the pump with electric or CNG? And “Electric Car” was a documentary and doesn’t require any viewpoint other than its own. Still, a decent flick.
Steve – I understand your concern with the “bandwagon” effect. However, electric is, in fact, the only altfuel choice available NOW. There are electric outlets everywhere, it’s simply a matter of time needed to fill a charge. And your right on the coal point, but try to be realistic. This is technology still in its infancy, just learning to crawl, not even walking yet. Hell, five years ago virtually nobody knew what EV meant, much less could discuss the matter. So give it some time. More solar and wind farms will come on line. Coal will slowly be replaced with those and possibly some hard-core biofuels for its generators. Batteries will become cheaper, safer, and with better charge densities. The tech will come around as it develops. Hell, companies are creating paint and ink that create electricity! So, mellow out, give it a little time. This ain’t I Dream of Jeannie. We can’t blink our eyes and it All Right.
My two cents? I say throw it all on the wall and see what sticks. There’s no reason we can’t have multiple fuel choices. Have hydrogen cars and electric cars. Make hybrids that run on electric and bio-diesel. Hell, I’d buy a car that ran on chicken shit and fresh urine if it was cheap enough. And it’d have to be…
Korthof – You kinda scare me, dude.
Korthof – You kinda scare me, dude.
Korthof – You kinda scare me, dude.
Korthof – You kinda scare me, dude.
jjpro Did you ever bother to read The Hype About Hydrogen by Josepth J. Romm (he was a Clinton advisor working for the DOE)?
Here is another link for you to look at:
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html
P.S. Please quote a reputable source in your responces. I will read them, as long as they are not from some very biased hydrogen lobbiest like Greg
Blencoe.
jjpro Did you ever bother to read The Hype About Hydrogen by Josepth J. Romm (he was a Clinton advisor working for the DOE)?
Here is another link for you to look at:
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html
P.S. Please quote a reputable source in your responces. I will read them, as long as they are not from some very biased hydrogen lobbiest like Greg
Blencoe.
Hydrogen highway supporters like to tout how they can produce hydrogen using electrolysis powered by solar panels.
Well, that example points out exactly why the hydrogen highway vision is a total scam that the oil companies wish to spring on the world.
Electrolysis blows at least half the electricity produced from solar in producing hydrogen.
Compare that to directly charging an electric battery that powers an electric brushless motor at closer to 90% efficiency.
Every single hydrogen supporter on this planet is completely blind to the math – and that math says hydrogen make NO sense.
Steven Chu is more qualified to make that decision than anyone here – and he made the right choice.
Deal with it.
Hydrogen highway supporters like to tout how they can produce hydrogen using electrolysis powered by solar panels.
Well, that example points out exactly why the hydrogen highway vision is a total scam that the oil companies wish to spring on the world.
Electrolysis blows at least half the electricity produced from solar in producing hydrogen.
Compare that to directly charging an electric battery that powers an electric brushless motor at closer to 90% efficiency.
Every single hydrogen supporter on this planet is completely blind to the math – and that math says hydrogen make NO sense.
Steven Chu is more qualified to make that decision than anyone here – and he made the right choice.
Deal with it.
Hydrogen highway supporters like to tout how they can produce hydrogen using electrolysis powered by solar panels.
Well, that example points out exactly why the hydrogen highway vision is a total scam that the oil companies wish to spring on the world.
Electrolysis blows at least half the electricity produced from solar in producing hydrogen.
Compare that to directly charging an electric battery that powers an electric brushless motor at closer to 90% efficiency.
Every single hydrogen supporter on this planet is completely blind to the math – and that math says hydrogen make NO sense.
Steven Chu is more qualified to make that decision than anyone here – and he made the right choice.
Deal with it.
Hydrogen highway supporters like to tout how they can produce hydrogen using electrolysis powered by solar panels.
Well, that example points out exactly why the hydrogen highway vision is a total scam that the oil companies wish to spring on the world.
Electrolysis blows at least half the electricity produced from solar in producing hydrogen.
Compare that to directly charging an electric battery that powers an electric brushless motor at closer to 90% efficiency.
Every single hydrogen supporter on this planet is completely blind to the math – and that math says hydrogen make NO sense.
Steven Chu is more qualified to make that decision than anyone here – and he made the right choice.
Deal with it.