Ballard says fuel cells not worth it, confirms rumors it's selling automotive unit
Ballard Power Systems, one of the larger fuel cell companies, confirmed rumors they are in talks to sell their automotive fuel cell assets to Daimler AG and Ford Motor Company. Ballard says the negotiations are not complete or assured but Daimler already owns 18.7 percent of Ballard and Ford owns another 11.2 percent; the stock jumped 18 percent Monday.
Why are they selling? Ballard says the reason is "lengthy projected timeline to commercialization and high cost of development." A statement like that coming from a major fuel cell company just may mean the end of politicians standing in front of fuel cell cars talking about a hydrogen future.
Related:
[Source: Ballard Power Systems via Reuters]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Chris M 3:10AM (4/24/2008)
D: Nobody here has said "fuel cells don't work", critics just point out that fuel cells are extravagantly expensive and much less efficient than LiIon batteries.
It is rather ironic that you should fault LiIon for "serious failings regarding longevity", as PEM fuel cells have been notoriously short-lived. The early prototypes barely lasted 15,000 miles before the membrane eroded away and leaked, causing complete failure. A decade of intense research have improved the membrane and it is now lasts around 75,000 miles before failure. Compare that with the standard LiIon batteries in the Tesla Roadster, projected to last over 100,000 miles - and still have 80% usable capacity! A Tesla driver willing to accept a reduced range could easily get double the life of the H2 fuel cell, right now. Moreover, other LiIon battery types have much higher charge cycle lifespans than standard LiIon, some should still have over 90% charge capacity after 200,000 miles or 10 years of use.
Why are all the fuel cell prototypes hybridized with batteries or ultracapacitors? Because the batteries make it much easier to use regenerative braking, batteries can propel the car during the several minutes it takes for fuel cells to start working, and it allows use of a much smaller less expensive less powerful fuel cells, with the batteries adding the extra power needed for acceleration, and the batteries cost much less than the fuel cells. In short, adding batteries is a way to improve performance and reduce costs.
Considering the current extravagant cost of H2 fuel cells and H2 storage and H2 fuel, I'd say the main reason why none of the automakers plan to sell any fuel cell cars anytime soon is that they realize there is no market for half-million dollar cars with average performance. It would take at least 3 major miraculous breakthroughs to bring H2 fuel cells to mass market pricing. On the other hand, LiIon battery cars are already affordable to the affluent, and we've already seen several breakthroughs that will bring plug-ins to the masses. The future is electric.
Reply
Tim 10:49AM (11/06/2007)
Apparently, Rip Van Winkle just came too from his H2 induced dreamlike fantasy. I bet he’ll lay off that bottle for a while.
Reply
JP 10:59AM (11/06/2007)
Good riddance - hopefully the automakers don't put their vast resources behind hydrogen vehicles once they own the technology. Hydrogen is fuel storage, not a fuel source, and we've already got many more efficient, proven energy storage methods.
Reply
rob 12:09PM (11/06/2007)
Welcome to the Automotive world Ballard. It takes next to forever for something "new" to make it into the automotive marketplace. How long did it take before Microsoft finally got a system into a US car (Ford - Sync)? Close to 8 years and that was for something that does not directly affect safety or powertrain. How about in the Hybrids game? The first Japanese hybrids hits the US market in 1999 and Ford doesn't put anything out until 2004. GM is just now putting out a two-mode solution. Automotive is not exactly a speedy market.
Most of the issue of commercialization is that purchasing at the OE probably couldn't find someone to "market test" against. "Market test" is the phrase used in the supply industry to describe the process of an OEM giving your design and pricing to a competitor and seeing if they can do it cheaper.
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 1:33PM (11/06/2007)
Their electric car has a tailpipe? They're just blowing smoke!
Reply
Lascelles Linton 1:35PM (11/06/2007)
BlackbirdHighway,
"Their electric car has a tailpipe?"
Fuel cell electric car. Probably emits water.
Reply
M W 3:24PM (11/06/2007)
I take issue with the poster's response:
"Ballard says the reason is "lengthy projected timeline to commercialization and high cost of development." A statement like that coming from a major fuel cell company just may mean the end of politicians standing in front of fuel cell cars talking about a hydrogen future."
Just because Ballard is selling of their automotive unit to another (larger) company does not necessarily mean that fuel cells are unviable. (That would only be the case if they were unable to find a buyer for the unit.)
More likely is that Ballard has limited capital resources and cannot expend a significant portion of it on a particular market that is slow to show commercial viability.
Selling off their automotive unit just shows that Ballard can no longer justify further development based upon its current business model, but this does not mean that a major auto manufacturer (who has a vested interest in the long term viability of the industry and transportation) won't be able to justify continued investment.
For better or for worse, this is move means relatively little or nothing for the future of cars and fuel cells.
Someone cue the politicians...
Reply
Chauncey 12:59PM (11/07/2007)
Wow, this is HUGE!
If Ballard Power cannot make auto fuel cells viable after over a decade of development, massive funding, and key auto industry partnerships, no one can.
I think most E-car enthusiasts who have taken a few minutes to look at the logistics of implementing hydrogen cars across North America have realized that it is so daunting as to be virtually impossible.
But to have one of the pioneers of the fuel cell publicly "give up" on cars isn't just the last nail in the coffin, ...it's the last nail, then setting the coffin on fire, then doing a happy dance on the ashes.
The challenge now is to funnel at least SOME of that fuel cell development money toward electric-only technology and not just biodiesel and ethanol for dinosaur engines.
Reply
Andy 12:03PM (11/08/2007)
The fool cell program was and is flawed from the beginning because of all the reasons mentioned. it was for the Auto's to do nothing and pull the wool over the eyes of the public including the politicians. The pure electric car has the same flaw in lacking technology. The Plug-In Hybrid is the only technology that can be adopted today to help us transition from fossil fuel to solar, wind and biofuels immediately. Please come to EVS23 and listen and see the PHEV papers and demonstrations. We only need to get the car companies to build these cars. The cost of driving a PHEV on electricity is equivalent to 70 cents/gallon gasoline. The current cost of gasoline is $3.20/gallon and quickly going up so there is a difference of 4.5 to one in fuel cost for your carand the diference is widening fast. So why would anyone not want to buy a PHEV that will not impact the electric generation system for 50 years or more?? The key is that this is a vehicle that will not change our lifestyle and provide all the benefits of our current vehicles and allow us to transition to zero fossil fuel with not change in our current infrastructure!!
Reply
read_the_release 5:18AM (11/08/2007)
Wow, that is some terrible artistic licence that L. Linton took with this "article". Go to the Ballard website and read the latest press release to learn the details of the agreement. Looks to me like Ballard is going to focus on near term markets that can make money, while automotive work will continue to be done at the Ballard site by some former employees of Ballard, who would be eplyed by the new company owned mostly by the OEMs... ? Read it and see what you think.
Reply
Lascelles Linton 5:26AM (11/08/2007)
Read_the_release, I link to and quote the release. The link I got directly from Ballard's website. If anyone does what you say, you get the same link. I am not sure I understand your criticism. It's not really a press release. Just a few lines saying yes, the rumor is partly right. I don't see any mention of staff, OEM, etc. Could you link to and quote whatever press release you are talking about directly?
Reply
Lascelles Linton 6:59AM (11/08/2007)
Read_the_release, I think I understand now. You must mean the news of the deal. This article was written days before it broke and writes about the rumors and the tiny PR from Ballard confirming the rumor because the stock moved so much, it was a trusted source and mostly right. I am writing about the deal now and yes, Ballard backs off a little but not THAT much :D No presidential candidate mentions fuel cells. You can say this news is the unofficial nail in the coffin of the tech.
Reply
Chris M 2:41AM (11/09/2007)
Ballard is one of the older fuel cell makers, I remember Ballard promoting H2 as "the fuel of the future" back in the early '70s.
Ballard had developed motors for their fuel cell cars, and are now finding that the motors sell much better than the fuel cells. Then the arrival of improved LiIon batteries made their fuel cells totally uncompetitive, and Ballard saw the writing on the wall. Time to concentrate on what will work, what will sell, and drop the obsolete H2 technology.
Reply
D 1:00AM (4/24/2008)
First you all don't seem to understand what is going on here and are all just blabbing pure nonsense.
First, the fuel cell cars do work and have been demonstrated successfuly by many different organizations. Lithium Ion batteries have serious failings regarding their longevity, charging time, amoung other problems. Fuel Cell cars have issue with cost, mainly platinum and the ionomeric based membrane. For the most part fuel cell cars nailed the performance years ago (perhaps with the exception of degradation and sub-zero performance start up performance).
Most certainly, Honda/Toyota/GM/Ford/Diamler will bring fuel cells cars to the market. They will not do this until the technology is certain for obvious reasons such as warranty obligations. When they do come to the market many of the fuel cell solutions will be "hybridized" WITH lithium ion batteries (and if you don't know why they do this...I am not going to be the first to explain it)
Ballard decision appears to be one that focuses on staying in the fuel cell game, they had limited funding based on the original automotive holy grail market call. Overall, the question is will the non-automotive markets actually come to fruition or will they pan out just like the automotive investment -- to long a time frame for a company that needs to show profitability now.
Reply
jim hones 3:38AM (12/06/2007)
Ballard selling means it's WORTH SOMETHING. If it was worthless there would be no buyers.
The original author must have an axe to grind, because his DUMB argument makes no sense.
Reply