Fuel Cells on the Road

I'm all for Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars.. except the irony of Hydrogen is that it's currently produced using a method that required carbon unfriendly methods. :-(

 

I doubt it.. your bigger problem will be all the nasty bugs/algae that will grow/thrive on the constantly wet roads..

 

Hydrogen fuel cells (HFC) per se - despite all the hype about them - do not solve the basic problem of fossil fuel use and global warming. HFCs only move the problem from the roads (vehicles) to the plants producing hydrogen, of which there are not many.
Currently, the most economical way of producing hydrogen is from heated natural gas, another fossil fuel source. Plus, energy is required for this process - more fossil fuel gets burned. As many have pointed out, even if we were to produce hyrdogen by electrolysis using nuclear power, if we built one new nuclear plant per month in the US for the next 30 years we would not have enough power to produce enough hydrogen through electrolysis.
It is ironic when people talk about a fuel cell hybrid that can get 180+ miles per gallon, or a plug in hybrid that gets 180+ miles per gallon. In my view that is simply incorrect. Those cars might get 180+ miles per gallon of fuel combusted on board, but they still require more energy than that, as eithe rthe hydrogen, or the plug in electricity, has to be produced. IMHO fuel cells are NOT the way to go: they will allow people to feel good about driving heavy, monster 'fuel cell' SUVs, while doing nothing to solve the underlying crisis.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius\";p=\"81416)</div>

Fuel cells are the last things we need in cars. Unless we obtain the hydrogen by solar, wind, nuclear, or hydro power, the production of hydrogen for cars is counter productive. We would be burning fossil fuel to extract hydrogen from (most likely) natural gas and coal that we would then burn in our cars. It makes more sense to burn the fossil fuel directly in the car (and do so efficiently). If we can obtain our hydrogen by wind, water, or sun, then I'm all for it. But we would have to develop those technologies first, and the Bushies are not interested in doing that. All they're interested in is giving more money to their friends and themselves.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MGBGT\";p=\"81445)</div>

Well put.

 

I agree with everyone above. The real thing to tackle here is not what to fuel cars with, but what will our near future energy source be. Are we working on "real" alternatives to fossil fuels, or are we just tinkering around. We are running out of time and our economies are so fragile that it takes only a few dolors more a gallon of gas and the western world will grind to a halt.

We need billions spent on fusion research, on geothermal power, on tidal power. If we wait to long, there won't be enough energy to power the machines that are needed to make the machine of the future. We have China, India trying to become superpower, and there are not enough resources to go around.

We must face the fact that transportation can no longer be thought of as separate from energy production. I am all for fusion power, a nearly limitless amount of fuel is available to us, and it's side effects are totally manageable. Fusion energy can buy us the time we need to come up with totally envronmentally clean technologies.

What I'm afraid of is that if only shareholder earnings drives our future, then we are in for a hell of a dark time. We have allowed the amoral nature of business to overtake our moral obligation to our childrens future. The governement that is suppose to server the people now serves the corporations. Sad.

NiMHPrius

 

another big and I mean big problem for fuel cells is the lifetime before failure. Most are in the range of 1-3000 hours. A mere pittance compared to an ICE of which most will do about 20,000 hours with proper maintainance. Their other failing is cost. Ya Ya I keep hearing cost will come down as production goes up. Maybe maybe not, but when they now cost 20-30,000$ it better come down on a grand scale and the MTBF has to dramatically improve before people will even begin to consider them as an alternative. What's the cost on Ford Focus HFC probably in the half million dollar range. The only ones buying them are governments and they have never been fiscally responsible. Also where's the refueling infrastructure. Pipe dream in the extreme.

 

Direct injection is where fuel is injected directly into the cylinder. Current fuel injection technology for gasoline engines primarily injects the fuel right at the intake valve in the manifold. DI has been slow to make it into gasoline engines, as the fuel management is way different from a diesel, which is run soley by varying the quantity of fuel injected into the cylinder.

 

there is always some residual fuel that doesn't make it's way into the cylinder as it's on the head of the valve. So the system has to be set a bit richer for proper combustion and increases fuel usage. Then when you decelerate the mixture is richer than needed and that contributes to higher pollution levels.