Hydrogen Vehicle Deals Signed
Created March 31, 2005, at 12:10 pm by Anonymous
Reprinted from the LA Times, 3-31-05
Hydrogen Vehicle Deals Signed
• GM and Daimler reach agreements with the Department of Energy to develop experimental fuel-cell-powered fleets.
From Associated Press
General Motors Corp. and DaimlerChrysler have signed agreements with the Department of Energy to develop hydrogen fuel cell vehicles over the next five years, the automakers said Wednesday.
GM, the world's largest automaker, plans to build a fleet of 40 hydrogen-fuel-powered vehicles. Under the program, GM will spend $44 million to distribute the vehicles in Washington, New York, California and Michigan. The Energy Department also will provide $44 million in the deal, which is set to expire in September 2009.
DaimlerChrysler, which has the largest fleet of fuel-cell-powered vehicles of any automaker, will invest more than $70 million in its partnership with the Energy Department, the German American company said.
"If our research program is successful, it is not unreasonable to think that we could be approaching commercialization and mass marketing of these kinds of vehicles in maybe 15 years," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said at the National Hydrogen Assn.'s annual conference in Washington, which coincided with the automakers' announcements.
Bodman said "learning demonstration teams" involving ChevronTexaco Corp., Hyundai Motor Co., DaimlerChrysler, BP, Ford Motor Co., Ballard Power Systems Inc., GM and Shell would evaluate the fuel cells under hot and cold conditions and consider production options and hydrogen infrastructure.
Under the agreement, DaimlerChrysler will place fuel-cell-powered vehicles with consumers who will give feedback on the vehicles' performance. The company said it already was testing 100 such vehicles in various locations around the world.
DaimlerChrysler is developing a range of fuel-cell-powered vehicles, including the Mercedes F-Cell, a four-door passenger car; the Dodge Fuel Cell Sprinter van; and a fleet of fuel-cell-powered Mercedes Citaro buses.
Fuel cells run on the energy produced when hydrogen and oxygen are mixed, rather than using gasoline. The only byproduct of a fuel cell is water. The technology has been used in experimental vehicles and as a power supply for some buildings.
Detroit-based GM also announced that Shell Hydrogen would set up five hydrogen refueling stations in Washington, New York, California and along the Eastern seaboard.
The automaker said the Army at Fort Belvoir, Va., and Quantum Technologies in Lake Forest would provide facilities for GM to store and maintain fuel cells.
President Bush has pushed a $1.7-billion research program to develop hydrogen as the U.S.' next energy source and predicted that Americans would drive cars operated by hydrogen-powered fuel cells in two decades.
Most major automakers are developing fuel cells but say the cost of the vehicles and a lack of fueling stations make them unmarketable at this time.
Most Popular Pages
6 years ago
looks like GM wants to play "aerospace company" and do research for years & years before bringing anything new to the market.
don't expect anything new & exciting for at least the 5 years noted.
by then hybrid technology should be pretty well established & toyota & honda will have the best market position for *new technology*.
even if fuel cells get somewhere the concept of recovering breaking energy is something that every car should be using.
see ya
6 years ago
I agree. YAWN!!! Hybrids are reality.
I don't know if I agree on Toyota and Honda -- I think Ford and Hyundai are going to make succesful pushes into the hybrid market.
6 years ago
but with ford using toyota's technology then toyota is still going to stay a clear leader for a long time.
too bad to see USA drop behind on technology so fast & so far. ~ on something really so straightforward as hybrids.
i saw trade magazines where hybrids were being tested in the early 80's. and no one wanted to bring the methods forward to the market until japan did...
see ya
6 years ago
Steve, GM wants to play "aerospace company" and milk the government for a few billions of dollars and then figure that the government will just cancel the project and cut funding before GM reaches the point where it actually has to deliver a working product.
6 years ago
that was exactly my take on the article. GM wants to make money on development & skip those pesky manufacturing & delivery issues!
see ya
6 years ago
hydrogen as an energy source is a myth on par with perpetual motion. Well, not quite, but close. It takes energy to make hydrogen- it's not free. Where are you going to get that? Nuclear power plants? Oh wait, we don't have many of those. Oil and natural gas? Oh, that makes great hydrogen , but I thought we were trying to get away from dependence on foreign oil?
Fuel cells have no more range than electric cars really, and they cost ten times more, wheather its a hydrogen storage tank or a gasoline-to-hydrogen reformer. I wonder how they expect them to ever be profitable? If electric cars failed, what makes them think hydrogen cars will succede.
I'd rather see them put money into researching ways to make lithium ion electric cars, or improved internal combustion engines and cheaper hybrid designs (ie, compresed air hybrids, nitrogen gas hybrids, etc.)
6 years ago
you make a good point on "why not" make better combustion engines.
i'm not a car engineer, but am a mechanical engineer and have been using computer aided design software for many years. today's solid molding software combined with finite element analysys software can enable virtual designs to be reviewed BEFORE making anything.
also, for the past 4 years i was instrumental in buying rapid prototyping machines ~ star trek replicators in a sense ~ that enable parts to be made in what was otherwise impossible configurations. i have made a ball inside a ball inside a ball for demostration use. i have run the machine ( 3d system's vanguard) that can make parts direct to plastic, wax, or various metals all form a computer file.
i would think that the basic piston-cylinder could be designed to more properly extract the explosive energy then via a basic "flat top".
mating surfaces - in some explosive parabolic shape - would possibly gain a few percent more from the gas. explore the micro-second balloon occuring from the spark to the full expansion & shape a cylinder to match this. what's the gain? i never heard work of this in any trade magazines.
point is so much of car design is really "the way we always did it" and not taking into account the design tools or new manufacturing processes available today.
www.3dsystems.com
www.solidworks.com
see ya
6 years ago
Alot of power is lost through the transmission in a car- the automatic transmission losing a certain percentage of the energy as heat. A computer shifted manual transmission is the way to go. Many cars in Europe are starting to come out with these types of transmissions. Sierra Club is pushing CVT's, but they are wrong on that issue; a CVT still has a torque converter and still loses power to heat. It's not caused by the gear ratios being fixed, rather its caused by the torque converters fluid coupling. Indeed, CVT's can have just as bad, or worse, fuel economy than a traditional 4-speed automatic. Auto transmissions now days do so well vs. the older ones because the final gears are higher, but this also makes them a little slower than manuals.
Another thing they could attack for fuel efficiency- weight. Most cars now days weigh alot, being made of steel, even in places that don't really benefit the car much (the hood, for instance). Plastic body panels not only are immune to dents, they also weigh less and don't rust out. There's plenty of evidence that the weight of a vehicle doesn't matter in a crash, so much as the size (cars with crumple zones do better than those without- the VW Lupo does better in crash tests than the Smart). Aluminum cars are capable of being as safe as a steel car, and could shave off a couple hundred pounds.
Tires/wheels are another area where cars lose alot of energy. It takes effort just to get the wheel moving. The rolling resistance of tires could be improved. Of course, low rolling resistance tires are not cheap but many will pay for themselves over the lifetime of the tire. Aluminum alloy wheels also reduced the effort needed just to turn the wheels.
The biggest obstacle, though, is simply the idea that it is unacceptable for any car to accelerate to 60 mph in no less than 10 seconds. Indeed, many sedans now days accelerate 0-60 in less than 7 seconds. This kind of acceleration is simply not needed if people are A) obeying the speed limits and B) driving with good habits, especially lane discipline.
6 years ago
Hydro/elc car would be good Hybrid
6 years ago
Liquid Hydrogen Tanks + Fuel Cells + Electric engine =
IMO would be good idea for a hybrid.
6 years ago
The thing that renewable energy bloggers seem to get but seems to be missed her is that a hydrogen fuel cell IS JUST A BATTERY. its just a chemical way of storing ELECTRICITY. This means that any car maker who doesnt already have commercially marketed vehicles with elecric motors is going to be way behind the game when/if fuel cells reach market. I could quite possible see a government and industry subsidised initiative to replace the battery packs in hybrids with fuel cells, after all technology that makes use of existing infrastructure will always be most rapidly phased in.
Did any body else notice that the article stated 44 million from manufacturers AND 44 million from government subsidies to provide a 40 vehicle fleet!!. 2,200,2000 dollars per vehicle, and they want us to beleive theyll have a marketable (presumable around $30,000) vehicle in 10 to 15 years!
For that price almost 3000 plug in hybrids could be bought outright. Or even better 6000 half subsidised (who wouldnt pay $15,000 for a car that gets 150mpg.)
What a waste of money
6 years ago
sorry that $2,200,000 per vehicle
6 years ago
Hydrogen highway. Cal is useing gas hydro cars for some reson, even tho the hydro refueling stations get the hydro in liquid form. But it is a start.
6 years ago
Sorry Folks,
To all of you Nay Sayers my question is why not try. Almost all inventions, discoveries in medinces, genome, cloning and etc. was born out of attempts to do the impossible. Like most of these impossible tasks, E=mc2 and the speed of light has never been proven or achieved to any point of certainity.
However, look at the side products of such attempts. The big bang theory has never been proven to complete certainty. Yet it has propel astronomy to mythic proportions with such things actives search of and prove of black holes, quasars, pulsars, stellar gases, radio astronomy, etc. Dreams are just part of the beginning. Let them fool around hydrogen cars, and someday your car might be drinking the same water as you. Or you will see the disposable car, where you buy it and its when its out of fuel ten years later; you trade it in for another. So, In the act of trying to do the impossible(as the nay sayers claim) you might just might find the possible. And a hundred of years from now 4 graders will be taught the very same thing we can't even comprehend. Yes, we all take for granted the light bulb, electricity, and the telephone. That is unless you are a 4th grader.
So, dream on hybriders, and hopefully my great, great grand son will ask me what makes the __________- go.
6 years ago
Dont get me wrong, i believe that fuel cells will absolutely have a place in vehicles in the future. I just dont think it will be in personal cars for at least 20-30 years, probably longer. The size and expense of the systems will make them suitable for large trucks, commercial vehicles, but i dont think that we will see fuel cell cars drop from 2,200,000 to a resonable level in the near future. Remember the cost of these vehicles will probably need to remain high to subsidize the complete replacement of the refueling infrastructure.
When you consider that most of the public and media think that the 3000-4000 extra that a hybrid costs makes it prohibitively expensive i cant see how fuel cell cars will be competitive in my lifetime (im 23). Even small fuel cells, far too small to power a car can cost more than a car price. My personal opinion is that we have a good way to store electricity already, theyre called batteries. The only real problem with batteries is longevity, so with some research into battery life improvements, and power density i think battery electric vehicles are far more realistic.
Post a new comment