Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Sunday April 16 2017, @01:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the solved-the-embrittlement-problem,-eh? dept.

Hydrogen fuel cell cars could one day challenge electric cars in the race for pollution-free roads—but only if more stations are built to fuel them.

Honda, Toyota and Hyundai have leased a few hundred fuel cell vehicles over the past three years, and expect to lease well over 1,000 this year. But for now, those leases are limited to California, which is home to most of the 34 public hydrogen fueling stations in the U.S.

Undaunted, automakers are investing heavily in the technology. General Motors recently supplied the U.S. Army with a fuel cell pickup, and GM and Honda are collaborating on a fuel cell system due out by 2020. Hyundai will introduce a longer-range fuel cell SUV next year.

"We've clearly left the science project stage and the technology is viable," said Charles Freese, who heads GM's fuel cell business.

Like pure electric cars, fuel cell cars run quietly and emission-free. But they have some big advantages. Fuel cell cars can be refueled as quickly as gasoline-powered cars. By contrast, it takes nine hours to fully recharge an all-electric Chevrolet Bolt using a 240-volt home charger. Fuel cells cars can also travel further between fill-ups.

Would you rather trade in your gas-guzzler for a hydrogen fuel cell car, or an electric car?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @03:06PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 16 2017, @03:06PM (#494830)

    The energy offered by fuel cells is going to be a fraction of the energy used to produce the hydrogen. They're sold as "green" but nearly all hydrogen is generated using steam methane reforming which aside from relying on methane also produces CO2 as a biproduct. It's pretty much the opposite of green. The constant pressurization, during transit, inside the station tanks, and finally just before going into a consumer cars, requires even more energy. You end up still pumping tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, you get terrible whole-process energy efficiency, and it's expensive as a result of all of these costs.

    The natural response is to suggest that the system can be made clean by using some sort of solar powered system - perhaps with electrolysis. In the distant future where we're producing quantities of solar energy grossly in excess of need I think this would be reasonable, but we're nowhere even remotely close to that point. By generating hydrogen fuel cells in these systems you're basically just wasting vast amounts of energy due to inefficiency that could be put to good use elsewhere, or stored in a battery at a much higher efficiency rate.

    The technology just doesn't make any sense from any point of view that I can see.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +3  
       Troll=1, Interesting=4, Total=5
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday April 16 2017, @04:44PM

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday April 16 2017, @04:44PM (#494859) Journal

    It'd make more sense if the hydrogen weren't made from fossil fuels, and if the energy that went into producing it were concentrated solar or nuclear. As it stands now the whole thing's a massive, massive scam.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
  • (Score: 2) by TheLink on Monday April 17 2017, @10:44AM

    by TheLink (332) on Monday April 17 2017, @10:44AM (#495199) Journal
    Hydrocarbon fuel cells would be interesting, if they can make them practical enough to use in a car (current ones are too heavy and big).

    If someone also figures out an efficient way to form hydrocarbons (e.g. energy + water + CO2/CO) then you could go wind/solar/nuclear power/biofuel -> hydrocarbons -> [car: fuel cell -> electricity -> electric motor -> wheels ]. Much of the existing infrastructure and distribution can then be reused.

    The US military has some motivation to figure out cost effective ways of forming hydrocarbons as an alternative to conventional petroleum- it's hard to get planes to fly at supersonic speeds with batteries, even Samsung ones ;).