SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the whats-better-than-twenty-electric-eels dept.
General Motors is the latest car company to unveil plans for an emissions-free future. On Monday morning, the US' largest automaker announced that the next 18 months will see two new electric vehicles join the Bolt EV in showrooms, and 18 more are due by 2023. "GM believes in an all-electric future and a world free of automotive emissions," said Mark Reuss, GM's executive VP for product development, purchasing, and supply chain. "When the Bolt EV was announced at CES it was described as a platform, and this is the next step."
[...] Many of these cars will be built on an evolution of the Bolt's architecture using a second-generation battery pack. But they won't just be battery EVs—GM's electric future will involve hydrogen fuel cells. "We need to meet customer needs, whether that's the school run, a fun summer drive, or towing 1,000s of lbs. It can't be a one-size-fits-all approach," Reuss said.
GM and Honda have been collaborating on hydrogen fuel cell technology since 2013, and more recently the US Army has been testing a hydrogen-powered Chevrolet Colorado truck. "Now we're taking the technology to launch," said Charlie Freese, GM's executive director of fuel cell business, citing commercial and military applications as the initial goal. The fuel cells will be built at its Brownstown plant, which also makes the batteries in the Bolt and Volt.
Time to unload that gas car before it loses all trade-in value?
(Score: 2) by theluggage on Tuesday October 03 2017, @12:24PM (2 children)
How about gasoline? I hear that has high energy density, is pretty easy to store and transport and works in just about any petrol engine without conversion... Or is there some reason why carbon-based fossil fuels are considered harmful? (if so, it hasn't received much publicity :-) )
Of course, a heck a lot of the energy used by electric cars comes from fossil fuels, too, but at least the vehicles and distribution infrastructure is largely independent of the source and a distribution network already exists (although it will need extending) plus it is zero-emission at the point of use (which makes it a vast improvement over gasoline even if you're an AGW skeptic).
Its also important to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good: getting 50% of vehicle traffic off of gasoline and onto electric would make our cities much nicer places and possibly increase consumer demand for "green" power (you've bought an EV, so why not sign up to a green power scheme so you can be sure you're not burning coal by proxy?). The current fuss about diesel is also an opportunity - electric works quite well for delivery vehicles and local busses with predictable routes and depots for charging.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 03 2017, @02:19PM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by theluggage on Tuesday October 03 2017, @03:56PM
Or, if you've got all that clean electricity (which is always the big "if" - the problem at the moment is that the methane and hydrogen tend to come from fossil fuel deposits) you could cut out the intermediate step and use it to power electric cars... Also (carbon footprint aside) maybe methane is cleaner-burning that gasoline but you're still going to get some soot, CO and other crap out of the tailpipe.
The other thing - electric cars are nicer to drive which is a pill-sweetener.
Methane, hydrogen, ethanol etc. may all have their place in a future transport scenario: as might more trains, trams, busses and taxis/self-driving JohnnyCabs. However, Electric seems to hit the spot for city driving and modest commutes (or less-modest commutes if you can afford a Tesla) - its mainly a question of the price coming down: current problem is that an EV "city car" costs more than a luxury, compact ICE that is still practical for the city and can take a 500 mile road trip in its stride. Cut the price and people might be more amenable to renting or taking the train for long distance...