Volt chief engineer still thinks hydrogen is the long term answer
Volt chief powertrain engineer Nick Zielinski on the right
In recent years, Nick Zielinski has led the powertrain engineering teams on a number of GM advanced technology programs including the Chevy Equinox fuel cell vehicle and the Sequel concept. For the past two years, his focus has shifted to making the Chevrolet Volt a reality. The common thread through all of these recent efforts is electric drive. The difference is the source of the electricity. The Volt, of course, uses a lithium ion battery with an internal combustion range extender. Just because this configuration is coming to the road sooner doesn't mean that Zielinski has given up on his previous efforts.
Following the announcement of GM's battery manufacturing plans at the Detroit Auto Show on Monday, Zielinski spoke with MarketWatch about the program. Throughout all the financial turmoil of the last several months, development of the Volt has proceeded full speed ahead. Sources at suppliers to the program have also confirmed to ABG that Volt-related work is the only thing still moving for GM.
In spite of the current enthusiasm for extended range EVs from GM, Chrysler and Daimler, no one expects this architecture to remain dominant for the long term, including Zielinski. Just like Daimler officials did at the reveal of the Concept BlueZero, Zielinski believes that hydrogen will be the long term answer to energy storage and production in electric drive vehicles.
[Source: MarketWatch]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Matthew 7:51PM (1/14/2009)
Right now you can run any vehicle on hydrogen with an on-board hydrogen generator... Check it out.
http://peacelovefreedom.org/Products.html
Reply
Chris M 3:11AM (1/15/2009)
No one can run a car solely from the output of those "onboard hydrogen" devices sold on that site - they can't produce enough H2 to be the only fuel supply. They are meant to displace a small portion of the regular fuel/air mixture, thereby reducing fuel consumption. Unfortunately, since that H2 is bulky and has less energy than the fuel it displaces, power and performance is reduced. It would be cheaper to go light on the accelerator.
BTW, it was rather amusing to see a few bucks worth of plumbing parts sold for $299 or more. Quite a markup there.
BoneHeadOtto 8:30AM (1/15/2009)
peacelovefreedom are the engineers more famlies trust.... yeah good luck with that
gorr 8:14PM (1/14/2009)
Well i will just wait more time and keep my old car longer. At least gasoline is cheaper these days. I can't wait for electric drive because of better traction and better torque with easier traction control because electric motors can give more precise traction control then the actual complicated ice+transmission traction control. With electric drive in touph winter in canada the heater can start to give heat instantly contrary to ice that need 5-10 minutes to start giving heat. Last night i went to the airport and my glass were frozen for 20 minutes and the heater was not powerful enouph for the rear window. I want to keep the habit of refueling in 5 minutes and travelling far away from home sometime.
Reply
BoneHeadOtto 8:30AM (1/15/2009)
with those conditions, your electric car would not be able to travel from home far. BTW this magic heater tech you speak of has nothing to do with having an electric motor. It has to do with using electricity soley to power the heater. At which point you have just enough electricity to go to the grocery store and back. Good luck with your pure electric vehicle in canada.
What all electrics need is a sterling engine powering that accessories like that th!nk car has. good simple solution
GoodCheer 9:28AM (1/15/2009)
Ohmygosh, I'm siding with gorr on something!!
Actually Altairnano, EnerDel, NEC, A123 etc. claim that their new lithium chemistries are much more temperature tolerant, with design operating temps down to the -20 -50 (C) range (depending on which group you ask). That being said, the range of our eBox with graphite-anode Li-ion drops from ~150 miles @ 25 (C) to about ~90 miles @ -5 (C), not to mention that the charge rate is reduced.
For heat I would opt for a small propane/CNG/kerosine cabin heater. You could get very near 100% efficiency, have it heat up almost instantly (no engine block to heat), and have the whole thing be about the size of a loaf of bread.
Mike!!ekiM 8:25PM (1/14/2009)
- Batteries will continue to improve.
- Gas/Diesel hybrid infrastructure is already in place.
- Hydrogen in inefficient.
- Electric Transportation offers the quickest way to avoid Global Warming( Global Climate Weird-ing ), and an Oil Resource war.
- Not interested in carrying around a hydro bomb.
Reply
giyad 8:30PM (1/14/2009)
You know what bugs me when people say that hydrogen is explosive?
you drive a gasoline powered car don't you?
Mike!!ekiM 8:31PM (1/14/2009)
Yes, and hydrogen is More explosive.
Carney 12:37PM (1/15/2009)
Exactly. Gasoline vapor needs to be in a specific range of concentration or mixture with air in order to be inflammable, and also requires a relatively high degree of energy input to set it off. If it's too thick it won't work (you can douse a lit match in a tub of gasoline, although I wouldn't recommend it since it might ignite the vapor above), if it's too thin it won't either.
Hydrogen's range of inflammability is much greater, from very thin to very heavy, and the energy input needed to set it off is much greater. The littlest bit of static electricity or an electronic device being on can be enough.
And since it leaks so well (even straight through solid steel), every car becomes a potential Beirut style car bomb.
Carney 2:48PM (1/15/2009)
"the energy input needed to set it off is much greater"
I meant much LESSER. Stupid Blogsmith non editable comment system.
Richard in FLA 10:02PM (1/14/2009)
Hydrogen would mean more components and therefore more maintenance, and therefore more money. Just what the auto companies are looking for. EV's are a nightmare for profits for the automakers. That's why they are attaching an ICE engine to their EV's.
Reply
Ralph 12:53AM (1/15/2009)
Actually, I think you may be seeing a conspiracy where there isn't one.
Manufacturers are using an ICE engine to provide range and flexibility that the public is accustomed to. With a very small number of electric recharging stations available and fairly long recharge times to receive a full charge its no wonder that the serial hybrid concept is being worked on by mainstream manufacturers like GM.
In the future EVs can outdo serial hybrids when the battery range competes favorably with gasoline powered cars and quick-charge stations become much more numerous.
Looking at the hydrogen issue from a political/economic perspective I believe that hydrogen will compete with and likely overtake electric in the more distant future. Not because it is necessary 'better', but because the oil companies can easily corner the hydrogen supply industry by utilizing their thousands of preexisting gas stations. Manufacturers can continue to build complicated piston engines that require periodic maintenance (continuous stream of money for the dealers/auto shops) and also support the huge industry of replacement engine parts.
Paul Sallmen 3:42AM (1/15/2009)
Ralph, excellent comments about the "political/economic" standpoint. This is why hydrogen is bogus.
This is also why governments around the world need to get out of corporations' bed and start representing the people who elected them in the first place. I'll be mighty peeved if another break though battery technology gets buried (much like what Chevron did with that NiMH battery) delaying the full Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) yet again.
On a positive note, I think things will be a little different this time around, much as the Exxons of the world would like to maintain the status quo. Here are a couple of reasons why I think things might be a little different:
There are frankly too many people/companies working on batteries around the world. The oil companies couldn't possibly buy them all up. Not to mention, in a global market place, companies are competing very aggressively with each other to one-up their competition. This is very positive for the consumer. I imagine it won't be long before India and China start bringing their cars to North America.
Energy security is more and more an issue. The US government has definitely talked of this and seems to be serious about changing its wasteful ways. I think we'll definitely see many positive changes under the Obama administration. In addition, many small, but populated countries like Japan and those in western Europe have never had the resources to be wasteful. Europe and Japan are already light years ahead of North America in terms of fuel efficiency. I suspect BEVs will be more plentiful in those places right from the get go. Hydrogen won't solve energy security issues as most of the hydrogen will likely be isolated from petroleum products.
Here's hoping that 10 years from now, there will be a dizzying array of BEVs to choose from, and the internal combustion engine will be on its way out.
Chris M 3:18AM (1/15/2009)
Of course Nick Zielinski wants the hydrogen research to continue - he is looking for job security. Since H2 will never be a practical automotive fuel, that means he'll have a job as long as the hydrogen hype lasts, so he'll keep promoting it.
But how much demand will there be for battery engineers once batteries are perfected?
Reply
Sam Abuelsamid 8:37AM (1/15/2009)
Chris I would appreciate it if you would not demean Nick in this way. I know the gentleman personally and he is an outstanding engineer. He and many others truly believe in the long term potential of hydrogen as an energy carrier. This has nothing to do with job security or being a shill. Nick Zielinski would have no difficulty finding a job regardless of what type of powertrain was being developed.
Serge 10:21AM (1/15/2009)
Sam: the trouble as I see it, is that a lot of brilliant engineers, scientists, politicians and business people keep talking about the "future potential" of hydrogen technologies without ever acknowledging significant physical, technological and economical barriers that reduce the "potential" of hydrogen tech being commercially feasible in any reasonable time-frame to near 0.
We, as a society, need to stop dreaming about magic tech like hydrogen or EEStor rolling out of the lab "sometime in the future" to save the day. We need to get busy implementing solutions based on what's available and feasible today. We don't need a revolution in transportation, just a gradual and steadfast focus.
It is through this prism that I view Mr. Zielinski's comments. GM needs to get back to building practical, economical, and reliable automobiles.
noz 4:31PM (1/15/2009)
CHRIS M:
I'm not sure why you are complaining about job security.
So it's OK for oil companies and CEOs of these companies to push their agenda to create job security and wars and mayhem but not researchers who want to create a new technology that may potentially benefit us right??
So it's OK for battery industry executives to create job security but not the hydrogen guys right?
Everyone is complaining about hydrogen researchers being in it for the money...
Yeah I'm sure the biofuel and battery guys are in it because it's out of the goodness of their hearts.
Are you for real?
noz 4:44PM (1/15/2009)
SERGE:
That's not true. All of the scientists and engineers I work with acknowledge the problems and limitations. They are not the ones saying they don't think about it, it's the naysayers who constantly drivel on about it.
All these engineers and scientists are intensely aware of the problems. But it does not good sitting here complaining about brooding about it many of the people here do. We need a solution, not complaining, whining.
No one here has stated what exactly they think will replace fossil fuels as a viable, truly renewable, environmentally non-impacting fuel that can supply the world's current consumption for transportation needs. And they can't.
Biofuels? How much do we need? We can't even come close to producing the biofuel amounts to match our needs...not even close.
Corn? Ethanol? What a joke.
What's next? Clear cut all the Amazon and squeeze out oil from nuts?
THere's no point arguing with these idiots. It's these same morons who were shocked that we could travel over 10 miles any hour. It's these same morons who thought going to the moon was crazy.
Can't see beyond the length of their arms.
Chris M 8:53PM (1/15/2009)
Did I say Nick was "evil"? no. Did I say that seeking job security was wrong? no.
But it is the ideal motivation to keep the hydrogen hype going!
Noz, do I really have to keep repeating the answer because you keep ignoring it?
There is currently, right now, enough generating capacity to support over 10 million plug-in cars, if most of them are charged at night (and that is the most convenient time to do so). Increase electrical production a bit, add in biofuels from crops grown on land that is currently idle, and we're set.
But to go the H2 route would require more than doubling the current H2 production, and you can't grow H2 as a crop. Currently, 96% of H2 is made by steam reforming fossil fuels, as that is the cheapest source, but considering the energy losses involved, that would be a step backwards in getting us off fossil fuels. While nuclear power or renewable sources can be used to make electricity, then H2 via electrolysis, going the H2 route would require 3x more power, 3x more power plants, and cost much much more.