Honda manager Stephen Ellis frustrated with anti-hydrogen "EV zealots"
Honda is holding a media event this week to show off their FCX fuel cell car that is due to go into limited production beginning in 2008. AutoblogGreen is here to learn about the FCX and get a chance to drive it at the Laguna Seca racetrack. During a wide-ranging discussion over dinner, Stephen Ellis, Manager of Fuel Cell Marketing for American Honda Motor Company talked about his company's philosophy, as well as hydrogen critics.
Honda has always been an engineering-centered company. They see technical problems and regulatory requirements as engineering opportunities. Honda is working on many different paths toward more environmentally friendly transportation including diesels, natural gas, hydrogen fuel cells and electric vehicles. The key is that all of these technologies (and others) have potential to reduce carbon emissions to varying degrees. At this stage of development, everything is still evolving and it's too early to rule out any path. There are costs and benefits to all of these approaches and Mr. Ellis, who is actively promoting alternative fuels in Southern California, wants to see all potential solutions developed. However, he says there is a group of "EV Zealots" who are constantly criticizing all hydrogen related work based on flawed arguments and without examining all the costs of a plug-in system. The "EV Zealots" complain about the costs of producing hydrogen, the storage systems, and the fact that a lot of hydrogen is produced from natural gas or methane while ignoring the costs of producing electricity, along with the transmission losses and battery issues. He would prefer that instead of dismissing ideas out of hand, people should look at the potential costs and benefits from a complete end-to-end perspective. Much more on Honda's thoughts on hydrogen coming soon!
[Source: Stephen Ellis]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
pkuhl 1:40PM (11/14/2006)
Unfortunately, producing, storing, and transporting hydrogen is much less efficient than producing, storing, and transporting electricity. When you get your electricity from Solar or Wind, it is still true.
Here's a presentation on that from the European Fuel Cell Forum:
http://www.efcf.com/reports/E17.pdf
Reply
Howard Lee Harkness 1:58PM (11/14/2006)
"However, he says there is a group of "EV Zealots" who are constantly criticizing all hydrogen related work based on flawed arguments..."
What flawed arguments? There is no scenario for using hydrogen to power a car that can't be made more economical, more efficient, safer, simpler, and greener by just leaving out the hydrogen part. A solution to all of those shortcomings requires the repeal of several laws of chemistry and physics, along with the invention of several completely new technologies. Calling an argument flawed does not make it so, and wishful thinking is not an adequate substitute for science or engineering.
Using hydrogen to power a car is insanely stupid, which Mr. Ellis will find out for himself after losing lots of money for his employer (and possibly his own job). The 9000+ cycle nanoSafe battery (http://www.altairnano.com/documents/NanoSafeBackgrounder060920.pdf) should put an end to all of that nonsense. One could hope, anyway.
Reply
Mike Z. 2:09PM (11/14/2006)
Nasdaq Symbol: ALTI
Put your money where your mouth is.
Honda clearly is on the other side of the debate. It makes no sense to criticise someone's decision when instead you could profit profit from it.
Reply
pkuhl 2:29PM (11/14/2006)
Mike Z,
Please consider the science. Yes, the person posting may benefit in some small way from Hydrogen failing. But the science is true regardless. I was a huge Hydrogen fanboy, and I really wanted this car, until I found out about all the losses in efficiency, particulary when compared to EV. The link I post above is from a *Fuel Cell* forum that found their own technology to be a poor substitute for electricity.
It's like McDonald's telling you that hamburgers and chicken nuggets are no good.
Reply
Renewable Energy Blog 2:59PM (11/14/2006)
"EV Zealots"?
I'm almost lost for words.
EV enthusiasts have been buying EVs on eBay for more than they cost new and have done much of the development work on plug-in hybrids (almost forcing major automakers and policy makers to take them seriously). They are enthusiastic and passionate individuals spending their own money without the benefit of corporate advertising, PR and spin.
Most major automakers have hydrogen prototype programs and have done for more than a decade. Commercial hydrogen vehicles were already supposed to be on the road by now. No one is ruling out hydrogen vehicles but where is Honda's Manager of Electric Vehicle Marketing?
If Stephen Ellis wants to debate the facts of fuel cells vs. EVs I suggest he heads over to the Tesla Motors blog where they have an end-to-end perspective. Somehow I doubt he will.
Reply
Mike Z. 3:11PM (11/14/2006)
I prefer EV to Hydrogen
But then again I accept the fact that I could be wrong--in which case a diversity of research being done is a good thing.
The fact there is investment in research into Hydrogen may be wrong (I think it is) BUT the fact that Honda is investing the way that they are indicates that they believe that it isn't. Maybe they have proprietary knowledge about processes that will reduce costs, or increase efficiency; Maybe they have studies that conclude that batteries will never be able to reach the energy densities needed, be cheap enough, or that there are not enough raw materials to make them in sufficient quantities. I don't know.
Either way, Honda is not a stupid company and they are taking a calculated risk that Hydrogen will result in a more practical solution than EV (notice I said practical, not efficient)
I don't agree with Honda's decision to pursue Hydrogen, but this is the free market and companies should be allowed to purse development work on technologies they think will succeed.
Reply
jiltedcitizen 3:32PM (11/14/2006)
EV will never be main stream unless it can be recharged in minutes and travel for hundreds of miles. That's why hydrogen is an option. It's just another storage device like a battery.
Reply
pkuhl 4:23PM (11/15/2006)
EV can do 250 miles now. You can recharge it overnight in your own home. Yes, recharge rate will be a convenience problem for some time, but not enough of a problem to trump the very long list of benefits.
Maybe Honda can figure out some way to fix all the inefficiences with hydrogen production, transport (ok, make it at your house), compression, and conversion to electricity. But they have to for it to make sense vs. the upcoming EV cars. The FCX is a really sexy design so it would be nice if they could revolutionize hydrogen for it.
Too expensive now, but they are planning the mid-level cars already.
www.teslamotors.com
www.wrightspeed.com
http://www.venturi.fr/index.php?rubrique12
Reply
Vince 6:01PM (11/14/2006)
Seems to me that the main problem with Hydrogen isn't the relative environmental merits. It's that Hydrogen would require installing an entire nationwide infrastructure. The electricity infrastructure already exists. If I wanted to open a for-profit "fueling station" for electrical cars, all I'd need is a couple lawyers to do the paperwork and an electrician to install the meter.
Reply
Tony Belding 7:57PM (11/14/2006)
I'd love to see a coherent, well-researched and well-reasoned argument in favor of hydrogen. If Honda's engineers have arrived at that line of reasoning, all I can say is that their message isn't getting out. I haven't seen it yet.
I also would prefer electricity if other things are more-or-less equal. Not having to visit a filling station would be nice. And hydrogen needs that huge infrastructure build-up, which is something GM's top people have publicly pointed out as a stumbling block. It's not being said only by EV zealots.
To jiltedcitizen: In my opinion EVs can be mainstream if they can be recharged in minutes *or* travel hundreds of miles on a charge. I don't see both being required together (though it would be nice of course).
Reply
mediapusher 6:58AM (11/15/2006)
Howard Lee Harkness you remind me of why General Motors is in such a cesspool in the U.S.A. The fat cats at the top have their paychecks; they are old, fat, arrogant, stubborn and set in their ways. Remember, these are executives that don't drive anywhere. They get chaueffered :| What the hell do they know about what people would want to be driving? These aforementioned facts dissuade them from wanting to promote innovation and take the risks that they should.
You see hydrogen fuel cell technology as a negative. Honda sees it as a positive. I'm sure there were those that thought their electric/petrol hybrid technology was that of pipe dreams as well. Honda sure proved the negative mongers wrong on that one, didn't they? A smart company like Honda wouldn't be putting such tremendous energy into hydrogen fuel cell technology if they didn't think it would eventually be fruitful or important to society
Reply
russell geister 7:45AM (11/15/2006)
100s of miles? how far do you really drive every day im a courier my average milage is about 200 miles a day and thats when its busy are you really going to drive cross country every week. get real, when evs become more common there cababilties will improve but until the big auto makers grow up and relise that its time too kill the gasoline engine this process will be slow.one thing i would not do is buy any gm or ford shares because the way there going both companies are tec dinosours...
Reply
jiltedcitizen 9:08AM (11/15/2006)
For 2 years I was putting on 150 miles a day going to work. I do not drive that far now, but everyone I know lives an hour away, so on weekends I put on much more. I do not want to own 2 cars. The American consumer is used to 5 minute fillups and hundreds of miles per tank. EV's won't be mainstream until they can compete with that. That's what I think at least.
Reply
Howard's End 9:21AM (11/15/2006)
mediapusher, just repeat the mantra.
There is no scenario for using Howard Lee Harkness to power a comment that can't be made more economical, more efficient, safer, simpler, and greener by just leaving out the Howard Lee Harkness part.
Using Howard Lee Harkness to power a comment is insanely stupid.
:P
Reply
DL 10:27AM (11/15/2006)
Investing in alternate strategies is always good, opens minds and creates possibilities that would not otherwise exist. The best thing to come out of all this so far is the focus on efficiency of everything, including costs. It lays the foundation for much better informed arguments. Two years ago, how many of us even had given any thoughts or cared about hydrogen, or lithium ion batteries, or how our electricity is generated. Everyone is entitled to opinions, the real kicker is the process that lead to that opinion. Its all good.
Reply
JP 12:34PM (11/15/2006)
"8. Seems to me that the main problem with Hydrogen isn't the relative environmental merits. It's that Hydrogen would require installing an entire nationwide infrastructure. The electricity infrastructure already exists. If I wanted to open a for-profit "fueling station" for electrical cars, all I'd need is a couple lawyers to do the paperwork and an electrician to install the meter."
Why do EV supporters ALWAYS use this invalid argument? You think the nation's electrical grid can even handle 1 million EV's plugged into it? How about 100 million? We can barely supply the electrical demands of today with the current infrastructure.
The biggest challenge for ANY alternative (non-fossil fuel) source of power for the automobile is the infrastructure.
Reply
marc Geller 1:55PM (11/15/2006)
If Honda really thinks Hydrogen and fuel cells is the future, they should build plug-in hybrids now. If H2 FCV makes sense, they'll eventually replace the engine. If batteries make more sense, they'll up the battery component (which they need with the fuel cell anyway) eventually winding up with a battery electric car. If ethanol happens they can replace use the engine for that. Or bio-diesel. But in each case the batteries remain. Beginning with PHEVs offers the most versatility going forward. If they just want to stall the transition from ICE to electric drive, they'll continue to work on H2 FCVs only and criticize us.
Reply
Howard Lee Harkness 2:11PM (11/15/2006)
"We can barely supply the electrical demands of today with the current infrastructure."
My hope is for a reasonably-priced biodiesel/electric car, possibly but not necessarily 'pluggible'. With a 9000+ cycle LiON battery technology now available, the main hurdle for making such a vehicle has been overcome. A small diesel running at a constant RPM and load can be made very efficient, and an electric motor can have excellent performance over a wide range of speeds, making an excellent complementary pair of technologies. And the infrastructure for transporting and selling biodiesel is already in place.
With the cost of setting up a commercial biodiesel reactor comparable to the cost of a new home, it is within reach of just about anybody who really wants to be in that business -- which is probably why the the big Politically Correct push is for oil-dependent, pollution-amplifying hydrogen. I would be unsurprised to see an effort to make small-scale production of biodiesel illegal in the US.
"You see hydrogen fuel cell technology as a negative." -- mediapusher
That's because hydrogen is not an energy source. It is an inefficient, uneconomical, hazardous, fossil-fuel dependent, and pollution-amplifying energy *storage* mechanism.
Biodiesel is an efficient, economical, safe, net carbon-sequestering energy source that doesn't require the invention of new technologies or the repeal of physical laws to use right now. The only thing I would prefer to biodiesel is SVO.
Reply
Sherry Boschert 12:44PM (11/16/2006)
Honda, more than any other car company, bought the hydrogen hype hook, line, and sinker, and poured hundreds of millions into it. The hydrogen boosters enjoyed millions in government support before people started to figure out that it makes no sense. Ellis's complaint about "EV zealots" is a desperate attempt to preserve at least equal funding for hydrogen as attention begins to shift to more realistic and practical alternatives for cleaner cars.
Hydrogen still gets far more government funding than do electric vehicles or plug-in hybrids, but that is starting to change. This isn't the last time we'll hear whining from the hydrogen camp. Until they're ready to debate the science and specifics, that's all it is -- whining. I'm ready to debate Stephen Ellis on the merits of hydrogen vs. electricity for cars any time.
Sherry Boschert, author:
Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that Will Recharge America
www.sherryboschert.com
Reply
Peter 4:12PM (11/15/2006)
This is ironic, because as an EV Zealot I am frustrated with automakers that are promoting hydrogen vehicles without evidence of a real environmental advantage over EVs.
Also, the last time I checked, we were free to criticize the actions of any company that we disagree with.
Reply