US Fuel Cell Council asks for $1.2 billion to help fuel cells gain a foothold
Federal funds for the auto industry are being handed out left and right these days, and the US Fuel Cell Council thinks that the Feds should find $1.2 billion for a Fuel Cell Stimulus Plan. The USFCC says that the money will create an estimated 24,000 jobs as well as "put hundreds of fuel cell vehicles and up to 100 megawatts of fuel cell power into customers' hands, reap efficiency, environmental and security benefits and create green jobs and high-tech manufacturing capacity for the American economy." Specifically, the Council thinks the government should:
- Deploy fuel cells ($100 million)
- Build American manufacturing capacity ($100 million)
- Expand learning demonstrations ($375 million)
- Improve Federal fuel cell investment tax incentives (no price tag given)
- Stimulate fuel cell deployment by supporting a fueling infrastructure ($65 million)
- Accelerate research in partnership with industry ($350 million)
- Invest in fuel cell transit ($180 million)
- Include fuel cells in Obama's energy initiative (no price tag given)
You can read the full USFCC proposal here (page 2) and in the two-page gallery below. Green Car Congress reminds us that last July, a National Research Council study estimated that it would take about $200 billion between now and 2023 to make fuel cell vehicles competitive with gas-powered ones, and the government would have to pay about $55 of that.
Gallery: USFCC Proposal
[Source: USFCC via Green Car Congress]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Carney 8:51AM (1/02/2009)
Completely pointless boondoggle.
Hydrogen fuel cells will NEVER be practically or economically viable, and offer no environmental benefit anyway.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hydrogen-hoax
Fuel cells using other fuels such as methanol are pointless because the fuel can better used in an internal combustion engine.
Stop the waste, cut off the gravy train.
If we're truly interested in an affordable, practical way to move beyond gasoline, we could just pass a law requiring that all new cars sold (not just made) in America have flex fuel capability as a standard feature, like seatbelts. In 3 years we'd have 50 million cars on the road that burn gasoline like normal but can also use cleaner burning, safer, much cheaper alcohol fuel whenever they can find it.
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 9:14AM (1/02/2009)
Ouch, that's a lot of money for just a few hundred fuel cell vehicles. I think the council has made an excellent case for NOT supporting fuel cells. If they need that much government assistance for so little, then they aren't a worthwhile technology.
Hundreds of battery electric vehicles have already been sold without any government help at all, so that's clearly a much better solution.
Reply
jpm 2:34PM (1/02/2009)
Exactly.
This sounds Hydrogen fuel sell researches are in need of job security.
Chris M 4:45PM (1/02/2009)
A few hundred? Only 100 million is for fuel cell cars, that's just a hundred or so, basically doubling the current fleet size. Same with the 180 million for "fuel cell mass transit busses"
But notice that the biggest expenditure, 375 million, is for "learning demonstrations", that is, propaganda to keep the hydrogen hype going. After all, if the general public ever realized how bad H2 is as an auto fuel, and how it is always "just a few years away" but never comes, and how absurdly expensive it is, and that there are cheaper cleaner options available, then their H2 gravy train would come to a halt.
gorr 10:45AM (1/02/2009)
Their fuelcells are already outdated. See the best one that been invented one year ago approx, no need to build hydrogen dispensing machines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb9urNUFzAM
I won't buy any gasoline nor hydrogen products if it's not up to date , best efficient, latest technology. It's never been neccessary to fuel hydrogen cars or truck at a refueling station, like the clarity do or the equinox from chevrolet, this is a scam from honda and gm and the rest of the auto manufacturers. They are paid slaves from big oil and goverments cartel and they are still lying to us that we need to put hydrogen gas at a refueling station which is unnecessary. Just put water inside the car and that's it.
Reply
jeff 11:26AM (1/02/2009)
Gorr, if you seriously believe in what you see in that youtube video, you're missing out on some key aspects of thermodynamics and chemistry. To extract hydrogen from water, you need to input energy. Likewise, when you turn hydrogen back into water by combining it with oxygen, you get energy out of that process. Have a read on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water-fuelled_car
Reply
Chris M 5:14PM (1/04/2009)
Sorry, but it's a wasted effort. Gorr has been completely bamboozled by scam artists telling him sweet little lies, so now he won't listen to reason and ignores science. His dream is to convert his Dodge Neon to run forever on nothing but water, and won't let little things like the Laws of Physics stand in the way of his dreams.
I'm really surprised that some scammer hasn't contacted him to "sell" him a worthless water car engine. Maybe the scammers don't read autoblog green?
Dude 3:05PM (1/02/2009)
What a waste of money. We have hybrids and electric cars available using current battery technology. $2B for battery R&D would do a lot more good.
Reply
gorr 3:37PM (1/02/2009)
@ feff
You are a paranoiac believing that films in youtube are falses, LOL. I prefer my situation then yours that's is leaded by unknowns aliens forces
Reply
Chris M 4:52PM (1/02/2009)
Gorr, some of the youtube videos must be false, as some of them directly contradict others.
Did you realize that to be successful, a con man must be able to fool people into thinking he is really honest and good? Stan Meyers was able to fool lots of people into thinking he was a good honest righteous man, when in fact he was pulling a scam, taking their money, giving lots of empty promises but never delivering the goods.
nick 5:18PM (1/02/2009)
I don't know why so many people are against fuel cells but pro-battery. A fuel cell is the ultimate form of a battery. When you invest in fuel-cells you invest in battery technology. In the same way that we don't have to be overly concerned with how our electricity is produced, you should not be concerned with how hydrogen is produced now. Changes will have to be made in both cases in order to have a clean future. The advantages of using a fuel cell are range, weight, and recharge time, secondary batteries have a long ways to go before they can match a fuel cell. OTOH fuel cells need to lower costs dramatically in order to be cost competitive with internal combustion vehicles. Li-Ion Batteries may be what we use in the near future, but we should still be investing in what we'll use in the not-so-far-off future.
Reply
Chris M 6:24PM (1/02/2009)
I'm not against all fuel cells, just against the ones that require a difficult to store and expensive fuel, are a lot less efficient than batteries, and cost a fortune to make. In other words, those running on H2 fuel.
Zinc-air fuel cells, on the other hand, show a lot of promise, with a safe, easy to handle and store fuel (zinc pellets), and a reasonable production cost. Unlike H2 fuel cells, It doesn't require platinum or other rare metals for catalysts.
The sole advantage of H2 fuel cells over LiIon batteries, quick refilling vs. slow recharge, disappears with the advent of "swappable" batteries or "powered roadways" for power on-the-go.
gorr 12:17PM (1/04/2009)
With the hackers and state employees you have to read between the 'lines' because you will never understand anything at all. In this case 'swappable' mean replacing a post or an email or a chat-name from somebody with their false name, a pure hacking trick commonly done by hacking-folks. Then 'powered roadways'
mean they get their enforced deals for them for the future especially energy selling because they will always jack-up the price and say that their is no more energy.
Reply
Chris M 5:06PM (1/04/2009)
Gorr. your paranoia is getting way out of hand!
When I say "Swappable Batteries", I'm referring to batteries that can be easily removed from a vehicle when discharged and easily replaced with a fully charged batteries. I don't do hacking, all of my posts are my own, and it would be silly to waste my time posting using anyone elses name.
"Powered Roadway" refers to a system to provide electrical power to moving road vehicles, either by a conductive contact or by magnetic induction. While powered roadways are not yet available to the general public, some public transit systems are already using electric "trolley busses" powered by overhead lines. There is no "enforced deal", nobody would ever be required to use such a system. Electricity is far cheaper than gasoline to power vehicles, so most folks (except for a few paranoids) would want to use it.
gorr 1:53PM (1/05/2009)
You are a state paid trader that tax private business and citizens.
Your solutions like swappable batteries and powered highways can only exist in a state-trading policy where all batteries and all car designs will have to be standardized and all manufacturing trading will be taken care by state related business only. To be a high ranking state businessman you have to lick a?s all day long and not all the regular businessmans live like that. After a while state regulated employees feel useless and all a&s taste the same and then they swap identities and invent destructing trade like swappable batteries and powered highways.
Reply