New Report shows Hydrogen Vehicles will drive change

[Timo]

Those nations that keep pace with the transition will fare better than those that don't. I agree that the transition will be long and very costly, and there will undoubtedly be times where we, as consumers, face declines in our current comfort levels. That said, the satus quo won't be around for much longer. Who ever starts altering their infrastructure now will be light years ahead of the rest of the planet, and will prosper economically much more than those who drag their feet.

I'll only offer this as my own opinion, and hope that it doesn't spiral downhill like so many other posts here at PO. When you look at the historical formations and practices of gevernments around the world, at least the last several hundred years worth, the US is pretty much the standard for not having evolved into its current state directly from a monarchy or some other totalitarian system. (I know US history well enough to know that we faught the battle of independence from a monarchy, but it was very remote and distant at the time.) Europe and Asia, culturally, have more recent experiences with top-down models of governence. Here in the US, our system was created as the opposite, bottom-up. This type of structure, IMO, will be the achilles heel of American society. There are simply too many people crying out different ideologies, all fighting for control, to convert our system to a top-down model that rightly or wrongly is deemed more efficient in serving everyone's needs. This chaos requisitely prevents any action being taken to collectively address the most serve and catostrophic needs of society. In other cultures, even if they are presently democracies, there is an underlying MO of top-down decision making, and the people usually accept the priorities set by the government and collectively work for the common good. Europe and China will lead the way into the future. Americans are too petty and self-centered to address the collective good.

[vision-master]

New Report shows Hydrogen Vehicles will change drive?

[Graeme]

More Than 5,200 Hydrogen Fueling Stations to Be Operational by 2020, According to Pike Researc

Hydrogen is widely used for its chemical properties in a range of industrial applications. Fuel cells that use direct hydrogen are opening up a new business opportunity for hydrogen suppliers – one with potentially high demand if some key markets take off. The key direct hydrogen fuel cell applications that are currently seeing traction are light duty vehicles, forklifts, buses, stationary power, and scooters. These fuel cell market present different infrastructure buildout pathways, with varying opportunities and challenges.

According to a new report from Pike Research, as a result of this infrastructure investment, more than 5,200 hydrogen fueling stations for cars, buses and forklifts will be operational worldwide by 2020, up from just 200 stations in 2010. The cleantech market intelligence firm forecasts that, by the end of that period, annual investment in hydrogen stations will reach $1.6 billion, with a cumulative 10-year investment totaling $8.4 billion. The increased utilization of hydrogen as a fuel will drive annual demand from approximately 775,000 kilograms (kg) in 2010 to 418 million kg by 2020.

“There is no one clear business model for the hydrogen infrastructure market at present,” says senior analyst Lisa Jerram.“Currently, the major players in hydrogen fueling are large multinationals: the industrial gas companies, and the energy and gas companies, both those that operate retail gas stations and those that provide fuels for the grid. These companies tend to favor large-scale hydrogen infrastructure options.”

businesswire

[Graeme]

Will Germany Become First Nation with a Hydrogen Economy?

Germany will become the first country completely accessible to fuel cell vehicles in 2015, when carmaker Daimler and the Linde technology group will build 20 new hydrogen filling stations. The result will quadruple the number of public stations available and make it possible for a fuel cell vehicle to reach any location in the country.

Daimler's plans to start mass-producing fuel cell vehicles next year were severely limited by the lack of public hydrogen filling stations in Germany. The carmaker realized that if its vision of battery-powered electric vehicles gaining mass appeal in tandem with fuel cell electrics was to come true, it needed to so something about the lack of hydrogen infrastructure.

Installation of the hydrogen refueling pumps will begin next year at existing gas stations currently operated by various oil companies. Daimler and Linde said their investment would be "in the tens of millions of euros," declining to be more specific. They said they were open to teaming up with other potential partners in the fuel, energy and automotive industry.

scientificamerican

[vision-master]

What's next, those gas bags........

[pstarr]

Nothing new here. This from the Way Back Machine (2005-07-23)

AEC owns a metallurgic formulation which separates hydrogen from water at low cost, requiring no electrical energy or external input, and without utilizing or producing any hazardous waste materials. AEC's process involves chemical reactions between a proprietary metal alloy mix and the liquid solution. These metals are plentiful, stable in cost and produce effective, highly purified hydrogen utilizing a catalytic process

Time for the Grand Unifying Theory of all such schemes:

Rich Idiot Investor + Scum Artist --> Poor Smart Investor+Rich Scum Artist

[The Practician]

This will benefit the top one percent twenty five years from now. You simply cannot replace 100 years of infrastructure with a scientific study.

My thoughts exactly. Everybody knows (or should know) that hydrogen is an energy sink, the only real benefit of which is that it can be used as a barely portable energy carrier- It can essentially be used to give electric vehicles the range and quick fill up ability of conventional vehicles. The only way this hydrogen economy thing is going to work is if the rich can really screw over the masses, and have everyone else bustin' their arse for nothing, enabling the rich to drive around in hydrogen powered barges so entropic in net energy terms they make a 1973 Coupe de Ville look like a Geo Metro.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Unless we can develop economical hydrogen vehicles within next 10 years, this supposed technology that will save our happy motoring ways is a myth.

Forget reports. How about a real, productive, quality automaker, which has been leading the world in real production energy efficient cars?

Toyota has an energy roadmap, that includes real-world consumer fuel cell vehicles cranking up in 2015. That gives PLENTY of time for them to be making a profit on these by 2020 or so.

http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/05/toy ... -says.html

The above link estimates them costing about $50K in 2015, and having fallen 50% in price from 2010 prices by then -- so 2020 sounds about right for a practical fuel cell car.

Even if this is off a bit -- this is far from just some report that some government or university ivory tower egghead jotted on a napkin.

[The Practician]

Unless we can develop economical hydrogen vehicles within next 10 years, this supposed technology that will save our happy motoring ways is a myth.

Forget reports. How about a real, productive, quality automaker, which has been leading the world in real production energy efficient cars?

Toyota has an energy roadmap, that includes real-world consumer fuel cell vehicles cranking up in 2015. That gives PLENTY of time for them to be making a profit on these by 2020 or so.

http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/05/toy ... -says.html

The above link estimates them costing about $50K in 2015, and having fallen 50% in price from 2010 prices by then -- so 2020 sounds about right for a practical fuel cell car.

Even if this is off a bit -- this is far from just some report that some government or university ivory tower egghead jotted on a napkin.

Did you hear that guys? Toyota has an ENERGY ROAD MAP! We're saved! 100 bucks says they had the Underpants Gnomes from south park draw it up for them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBiSI6OdqvA

Hydrogen is viable as an energy storage medium for rich peoples toys, but it is not going to be powering any sort mass motoring society any time soon without a significant amount of spare electrical capacity. This may be possible on a certain scale, but its going to mean motoring will be a whole lot less democratic and societys lower classes will not have as much access to energy.

[efarmer]

I already have been driving hydrogen powered vehicles for 38 years.
I put hydrogen mixed with carbon in a tank by buying a substance called
gasoline. I burn the hydrogen in combustion cylinders and shoot carbon dioxide
out of my tailpipe. Sometimes I eat burritos and shoot methane out of my tailpipe
as well, but this energy is lost and just dissipates into the atmosphere.

When the hydrogen is in it's atomic pure form, it is a small atom and sneaks out
of tanks and is hard to store enough to have long range vehicles without driving
around in a bomb posing as a vehicle.

[Expatriot]

What is with this Graeme dude?
Seriously?
The guy has been posting cornucopian fantasies for as long as I've known about PO.com.

Here's a 6 year old thread he started on hydrogen:
post140920.html?hilit=hydrogen#p140920

In part:
"Engineers who have reviewed the technology say that this system is capable of producing energy at a price competitive with the current fossil fuel kWh cost of energy. "

6 years later and where are they now?

I really would love to know what drives this dude to post all this spam. Hydrogen vehicles will not populate the roadways - ever.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Did you hear that guys? Toyota has an ENERGY ROAD MAP! We're saved! 100 bucks says they had the Underpants Gnomes from south park draw it up for them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBiSI6OdqvA

Hydrogen is viable as an energy storage medium for rich peoples toys, but it is not going to be powering any sort mass motoring society any time soon without a significant amount of spare electrical capacity. This may be possible on a certain scale, but its going to mean motoring will be a whole lot less democratic and societys lower classes will not have as much access to energy.

Yeah, I like South Park too. It makes fun of virtually every aspect of our troubled society, which is great, IMO.

Unlike you, at least South Park's creators AND Toyota have REAL entities that are actually trying to do something about society's ills.

Complaining about the terminogy to describe Toyota's future energy plan for their cars (you like that better?), doesn't change it. Complaining about the fact that there is an income disparity doesn't change THAT either.

(BTW, I am NOT a Toyota shill.
I am a Toyota customer who is enthusiastic about their progress on car technology, recent product offerings like the 2012 Camry Hybrid, and likely future offerings like the 2013 (for the general U.S.) Prius. And, despite your whining that all the problems aren't solved yet, the coming POTENTIAL revolution in practical fuel cell cars. (IMO, if someone does it, Toyota has a good shot. If it doesn't work -- SO WHAT? It's not like they hurt YOUR narrow minded fanny by trying). They spent THEIR money trying to make a profit AND make the world a better place).

One would think the leftists would LIKE such efforts.

Toyota is both bringing cleaner and more efficient cars utilizing several different technologies into the world AND making them cheaper. This reminds me of a company that did a LOT to make a product better and cheaper, but the left hated them because they dared to be profitable. Let me think -- I worked for them for 27 years, I am sure I can recall it...

Oh yes. It was IBM, which did more to democratize computers than any of its peers in the 60's and 70's (and became huge and very profitble in the process), so Uncle Sam sued them and helped screw up the company for DECADES. Kind of like they did for MSFT more recently.

Of course, folks like you and Uncle Sam are good for:

a). Complaining about people who produce things.
b). Trying to take their money and give it to those who don't or won't (because, of course, life is UNFAIR).
c). Screwing such people over if taking their money doesn't do enough damage to suit you.
d). Bailing out FAILING entities (generally unionized) like GM and Chrysler.

Well, thank you SO much. If you can't do something productive or suggest something constructive, please get the he** out of the way. (And have a nice day).

[peeker01]

Nice rant OS! I especially like the Prius plug-in with it's 12 mile range. Who needs a "Map" when
you can't get out of town?

[Outcast_Searcher]

Nice rant OS! I especially like the Prius plug-in with it's 12 mile range. Who needs a "Map" when
you can't get out of town?

Brilliant! More complaints is the best you can do?

It's a first generation (Plug-in) effort, based on a balance of COST and range. For me, 12 miles (I think it's 13 actually) is plenty for the battery range for 5 or 6 days a week on average. Then on the other days, well, after 13 miles, I go to gasoline, at about 50 mpg.

Now which is better for the planet? A 12ish mpg giant SUV or Hummer, or a plug in Prius, imperfect as that car will be? (I know, much of the GOP will get that one wrong)...

By the way -- just in case you are trying to distort things on the range. The short mileage you cite is the PURE electric range. After that, it's standard hybrid driving -- which is WHY you can get 50ish MPG in the city for gasoline power. So, you CAN get out of town. Are you willfully ignorant, or just lying to support your doomerist position?

Notice, BTW, how this performance blows the VOLT away in all known categories except the battery range, which is really more like 25 miles when new, for the VOLT. Knowing Toyota -- I'm willing to bet on a price at least $10,000 less than the 2013 Volt sticker, at least for the base model -- but we don't know that yet.

And hopefully the 2nd or 3rd generations will be better, perhaps much better. Or fuel cells will be good by then, etc.

But nah. Better to ignore ALL of that from a real auto company with an outstanding track record (overall), and complain that some issue may not work out.

[The Practician]

Did you hear that guys? Toyota has an ENERGY ROAD MAP! We're saved! 100 bucks says they had the Underpants Gnomes from south park draw it up for them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBiSI6OdqvA

Hydrogen is viable as an energy storage medium for rich peoples toys, but it is not going to be powering any sort mass motoring society any time soon without a significant amount of spare electrical capacity. This may be possible on a certain scale, but its going to mean motoring will be a whole lot less democratic and societys lower classes will not have as much access to energy.

Yeah, I like South Park too. It makes fun of virtually every aspect of our troubled society, which is great, IMO.

Unlike you, at least South Park's creators AND Toyota have REAL entities that are actually trying to do something about society's ills.

Complaining about the terminogy to describe Toyota's future energy plan for their cars (you like that better?), doesn't change it. Complaining about the fact that there is an income disparity doesn't change THAT either.

(BTW, I am NOT a Toyota shill.
I am a Toyota customer who is enthusiastic about their progress on car technology, recent product offerings like the 2012 Camry Hybrid, and likely future offerings like the 2013 (for the general U.S.) Prius. And, despite your whining that all the problems aren't solved yet, the coming POTENTIAL revolution in practical fuel cell cars. (IMO, if someone does it, Toyota has a good shot. If it doesn't work -- SO WHAT? It's not like they hurt YOUR narrow minded fanny by trying). They spent THEIR money trying to make a profit AND make the world a better place).

One would think the leftists would LIKE such efforts.

Toyota is both bringing cleaner and more efficient cars utilizing several different technologies into the world AND making them cheaper. This reminds me of a company that did a LOT to make a product better and cheaper, but the left hated them because they dared to be profitable. Let me think -- I worked for them for 27 years, I am sure I can recall it...

Oh yes. It was IBM, which did more to democratize computers than any of its peers in the 60's and 70's (and became huge and very profitble in the process), so Uncle Sam sued them and helped screw up the company for DECADES. Kind of like they did for MSFT more recently.

Of course, folks like you and Uncle Sam are good for:

a). Complaining about people who produce things.
b). Trying to take their money and give it to those who don't or won't (because, of course, life is UNFAIR).
c). Screwing such people over if taking their money doesn't do enough damage to suit you.
d). Bailing out FAILING entities (generally unionized) like GM and Chrysler.

Well, thank you SO much. If you can't do something productive or suggest something constructive, please get the he** out of the way. (And have a nice day).

Look, you're right: Toyota has the right to manufacture whatever kind of vehicles they want, and consumers have the right to buy them, but that doesn't make them viable as mass transportation in the absence of infrastructure to support them. (the proverbial "?" in the underpants gnomes 3 step plan). I have reviewed the case for and against hydrogen and other alternative "fuels" and their potential to supplant gasoline and diesel in a post cheap oil world, and in my opinion the evidence weighs heavily against them. All the shrill screaming to the contrary is not going to change that opinion.

As for you extrapolating my entire value system from a very few sentences where all I said was that a low EREOI transport system, based on large privately owned vehicles is going to be inherrently undemocratic, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't do that. I dohope beating the S#it out of all those straw men was good for your self esteem though.

[Outcast_Searcher]

As for you extrapolating my entire value system from a very few sentences where all I said was that a low EREOI transport system, based on large privately owned vehicles is going to be inherrently undemocratic, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't do that. I dohope beating the S#it out of all those straw men was good for your self esteem though.

Nope, I was extrapolating your value system from the following quote at the end of your previous post in this thread. The key words like "rich peoples [sic] toys" and "societys [sic] lower classes" -- standard fare for the likes of MSNBC leftist "news". If you want to deny that -- have a fabulous time.

BTW, your straw men are the dollars that the people who carry the country around on their back EARN, but I wouldn't expect anyone who, for example, support's Obama's economic policies to understand, much less admit that.

Hydrogen is viable as an energy storage medium for rich peoples toys, but it is not going to be powering any sort mass motoring society any time soon without a significant amount of spare electrical capacity. This may be possible on a certain scale, but its going to mean motoring will be a whole lot less democratic and societys lower classes will not have as much access to ener

[Outcast_Searcher]

Look, you're right: Toyota has the right to manufacture whatever kind of vehicles they want, and consumers have the right to buy them, but that doesn't make them viable as mass transportation in the absence of infrastructure to support them. (the proverbial "?" in the underpants gnomes 3 step plan). I have reviewed the case for and against hydrogen and other alternative "fuels" and their potential to supplant gasoline and diesel in a post cheap oil world, and in my opinion the evidence weighs heavily against them. All the shrill screaming to the contrary is not going to change that opinion.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. If that actually stems from a review of the evidence, then good for you. (It often doesn't around here).

Given Toyota's reputation, and the fact that their effort implies a lot of very smart and practical engineers clearly have a DIFFERENT opinion -- I will bet on Toyota's opinion. We will have an inkling in about 5 years, and know (I believe) in 10, based on what production fuel cell cars cost to make.

With solar power (electricity) and water (for example) hydrogen can be produced. It's a question of infrastructure and cost. If the fuel cell cars are practical AND hydrocarbons are horribly expensive AND AGW effects look more dire -- then I am willing to bet the needed infrastructure WILL be forthcoming.
Society will "vote" on the least painful available choice.

Calling an opinion that differs from yours "shrill screaming" adds nothing to the conversation, or your credibility, BTW. If my capitalizing certain words for emphasis equates to that in your eyes, um, I'd suggest you see your doctor about a tranquilizer.

I am certainly glad to see you agree with my point that Toyota has the right to manufacture the vehicles they want. Since they have a strong recycling program, that is also consistent with efforts not to completely screw up a resource constrained planet.

May the best technology that does the most for the planet, win.

[Graeme]

Mercedes-Benz F125 Concept Bridges Hybrid and Hydrogen

The Mercedes-Benz F125 concept unveiled here this week is one of those vehicles that give auto salons a reason for being.

It is a dream car. And dreaming of a gilded future for automobiles, and those who drive them, is what these shows are about.

According to Mercedes, the F125 suggests what an automobile might look like in the year 2025, and what might propel it.


But Mercedes-Benz is willing, perhaps even eager, to go out on a limb here, claiming vehicles should look even more sleek, sensuous and desirable, like the F125, no matter what government safety, emissions and fuel economy regulations may be thrown their way.

Such vehicles, Mercedes posits, will be capable of ranging 1,000 kilometers (621 miles) or more between fill-ups of hydrogen, which would be pumped through fuel cells to produce the energy that would turn electric drive motors at each wheel. This would be supplemented by a plug-in hybrid system, with lightweight lithium-sulfur batteries capable of giving the F125 50 km (31 miles) of purely electric range. Semiautonomous telematics systems would help take over some of the driving duties from humans: changing lanes, passing other cars and crawling unassisted through heavy traffic.

The F125 would be constructed of materials so light — carbon fiber, aluminum, advanced plastics and rare-earth elements — that it might seem able to gracefully spread its wings and fly away.

nytimes

[Graeme]

New Hydrogen Storage Method Could Replace Petroleum with Little Fuss

Hydrogen really could be the energy of the future. It is renewable, abundant, and 100% environmentally friendly. The obstacles restricting its global use are the difficulties of collecting it (pure hydrogen doesn’t occur naturally) and storing it in the quantities necessary for producing significant energy levels. Scientists at the University of Oregon have recently developed a way of storing hydrogen in a liquid form that is stable in both air and moisture, and workable at room temperature. It could minimise the current obstacles to storage and transportation, enabling an eventual transition to a hydrogen based energy infrastructure.


The compound, BN-methylcyclopentane, remains as a liquid and can be “charged” by introducing hydrogen atoms. Iron chloride is then used as a catalyst to release the hydrogen in a clean, fast and controllable manner.

The research was funded by the US Department of Energy in the push to discover a viable carrier for hydrogen fuel by 2017. Many believe that this new approach could prove more useful than other techniques currently studied because it is liquid, rather than the solid metal hydrides, absorbent materials and ammonia borane upon which most efforts currently focus. A liquid based form of storage would ease a transition from petroleum to hydrogen as existing templates and systems would require little modification.

As Liu said, "The availability of a liquid-phase hydrogen storage material could represent a practical hydrogen storage option for mobile and carrier applications that takes advantage of the currently prevalent liquid-based fuel infrastructure."

oilprice

[The Practician]

New Hydrogen Storage Method Could Replace Petroleum with Little Fuss

Hydrogen really could be the energy of the future. It is renewable, abundant, and 100% environmentally friendly. The obstacles restricting its global use are the difficulties of collecting it (pure hydrogen doesn’t occur naturally) and storing it in the quantities necessary for producing significant energy levels. Scientists at the University of Oregon have recently developed a way of storing hydrogen in a liquid form that is stable in both air and moisture, and workable at room temperature. It could minimise the current obstacles to storage and transportation, enabling an eventual transition to a hydrogen based energy infrastructure.


The compound, BN-methylcyclopentane, remains as a liquid and can be “charged” by introducing hydrogen atoms. Iron chloride is then used as a catalyst to release the hydrogen in a clean, fast and controllable manner.

The research was funded by the US Department of Energy in the push to discover a viable carrier for hydrogen fuel by 2017. Many believe that this new approach could prove more useful than other techniques currently studied because it is liquid, rather than the solid metal hydrides, absorbent materials and ammonia borane upon which most efforts currently focus. A liquid based form of storage would ease a transition from petroleum to hydrogen as existing templates and systems would require little modification.

As Liu said, "The availability of a liquid-phase hydrogen storage material could represent a practical hydrogen storage option for mobile and carrier applications that takes advantage of the currently prevalent liquid-based fuel infrastructure."

oilprice

I bet the EROEI of this "BN-methylcyclopentane" stuff makes pure hydrogen look like Libyan light-sweet by comparison.