Finding the local angle: DOE's hydrogen funding cut will hurt South Carolina
Earlier this month, President Obama and DOE Secretary Chu announced big cuts to DOE hydrogen-powered car programs. The funding cut was hailed by many and panned by some in the larger argument about what the national priorities should be, but it will also have consequenses in local communities, especially those who had been making a go of it with hydrogen infrastructure. See: Columbia, South Carolina. City and state officials there can't be blamed for their hydrogen support; in fact, as late as mid-April, the DOE was sending signals it would continue to fund hydrogen projects (to the tune of $42 million) along with other technologies.
Columbia has been pushing for increased hydrogen for at least three years, issuing a "Fuel Cell Challenge" in 2006. Now, with the funding cut, local paper The State details how the DOE's budget cut will impact the local businesses, school (University of South Carolina) and students that have been working for years on fuel cells. Last month, the city opened two hydrogen fueling stations and unveiled a "hydrogen freeway" idea for the state. The good news is that USC has also been working on stationary fuel cells, and the DOE is still backing those.
Shannon Baxter-Clemmons, executive director of the South Carolina Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Alliance, told The State that the cuts are coming, wouldn't you know it, at just the wrong time: "This is a strange turn of events. We are very close to the tipping point (making fuel-cell applications, including cars, commercially viable). To stop that now is a waste of taxpayer dollars."
[Source: The State]
Photo by jimbowen0306. Licensed under Creative Commons license 2.0.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Richard in FLA 1:42PM (5/20/2009)
Tipping point? Hasn't it been the tipping point for some 30 years now? How come battery progress has grown by leaps and bounds in just the last three years? Sounds like a good move on the Obama "no nonsense" campaign. Hydrogen has been a waste of money for quite a long time. I'm not saying it won't have a potential in the future, but it's certainly not getting us to energy independence anytime in the near future.
Reply
Tohe 1:43PM (5/20/2009)
They can only blame themselves for electing republican Gov. Mark Sanford, his leadership (or lack thereof) have led the them into a hole. I think they have bigger problems in the state of South Carolina than that of hydrogen funding cuts. Sanford doesn't care about the people of his State, that became very obvious the minute he placed politics above their welfare, he refused federal stimulus money while people stayed unemployed and desperate.
Reply
Lad 2:19PM (5/20/2009)
The "Federal Hydrogen Give Away" has been operating for the last eight years to the detriment of bring practical electric drive cars to the market place. Building and funding an H2 highway before the products have been proven and the numbers run, seems to me to have been a stalling tactic to slow down development of the fossil fuel companies worst nightmare...The battery electric vehicle.
The DOE has enough information to know that H2 automobiles are not ready for the highway so it should restrict funding to continued research. It's too bad that college students have been caught up in the political trapping of the current South Carolina Governor; a man who has chosen the wrong path for the state's people during this economic downturn. There is no doubt his decisions will set the state back decades.
Tohe 1:54PM (5/20/2009)
BTW that symbolic 41M figure is irrelevant when we consider that Bush had already spent half a billion dollars in fuel cell research, plus the 100M annually he had committed to a grand total of 1.2 billion dollars. President Obama killed a wasteful hydrogen program, and rightly so.
Reply
Tim 1:58PM (5/20/2009)
Every baby cries when you pull the bottle away. Those sucking on the taxpayer tit are no exemption.
Reply
Shock Me 2:44PM (5/20/2009)
Yeah none of those BEV manufacturers are asking for government handouts...
Oh wait yes they are!
Bet all those public charging stations will spring out of the ground like flowers. All of it financed with unicorn smiles.
BEVs are certainly a wonderful zero-emission at the tail-pipe solution, but they are definately not the non-toxic, hypoallergenic, free range, organic, wet dream you make them out to be.
BEVs will require government assistance in distribution, basic research, and new vehicle development financing, and services to new factories before they make a difference homeless polar bear and caribou.
In the mean time we can watch all those sand-hillbillies squirm.
Reply
Ignatius 2:59PM (5/20/2009)
Hydrogen requires even MORE infrastructure than any BEV ever will. You can't refuel a hydrogen vehicle at home without specialized requirement. You CAN recharge an electric vehicle at home with a 110V or 220V socket, which every home has at least one of.
Hydrogen is going to cost a hell of a lot more per mile than electricity ever will.
Shock Me 4:01PM (5/20/2009)
#7 Ignatius
Hydrogen is going to cost a hell of a lot more per mile than electricity ever will.
_____
While that is almost certainly the case, my point was that any of these solutions will require government investment (handouts).
In the case of the BEV, the societal pay off from these handouts will likely be achieved at much less expense to the taxpayer.
The current power to weight issues of BEVs will yield themselves to yet to be determined technical solution. It is very likely this will require both public and private investment in basic materials research and other battery improvements.
While cheaper than a hydrogen solution, the cost for public recharging is not trivial. Add to this the eventual public and private investment in large capital intensive centralized power plants and distributed generation by both the well-to-do consumer and the power companies themselves. Accompany this with an upgrade to a smart grid and we are suddenly talking big money from Uncle Sugar, Big Energy, and it's delightful evil cousin Big Oil.
I'm not engaged to either one but when she steps out of the Bridal Shop it will be Uncle Sam trudging out the door behind her with bandanna and a gun looking to mug the first fool (er taxpayer) who doesn't run fast enough.
paulwesterberg 4:59PM (5/20/2009)
The current transportation system already uses government money:
- tax breaks and drilling incentives to oil companies
- R&D tax breaks to car companies
- federal interstate funding and state highway funds
- subsidies for ethanol
- military funding used to secure oil resources
Government spending on transportation infrastructure always costs taxpayer money, but it helps grow the economy and makes delivery of goods and services more efficient.
Spending money on EV tech rather than hydrogen or oil will give a small boost to cleaner more efficient technology, but it is nothing compared to the billions(or trillions?) of dollars that have been invested in our current hydrocarbon based transportation system.
Shock Me 5:46PM (5/20/2009)
QED
Although I'm not certain that the federal spending levels will be any less for BEV, we can be certain resources currently devoted to securing oils supplies (oil tankers, platforms, pipelines, refineries, ground, air , and naval security forces) will be released from propping up and/or opposing oil dictators to prop up and oppose dictators in countries with strategic minerals.
I pity the country that possesses the material we need to support what our next energy system ends up being based on. We gone to war for fruit as well as oil what makes anyone think we won't have some poor jarhead sitting on mountaintop in Bolivia when the vultures inside and out descend on that gentle democracy like a troop of gold-crazed conquistadors.
meme 4:48PM (5/20/2009)
Aww... the poor buggy whip manufacturers... :(
Reply
Chris M 6:53PM (5/20/2009)
South Carolina don't get no respect from the Hydrogen Hype, in spite of their vocal boosterism. Almost all of the H2 fuel cell test vehicles and H2 stations ended up in Los Angeles, a long ways away from Charlotte. Not sure why, but I suspect that the abundance of LA celebrities and the notable lack of South Carolina celebrities may have had something to do with it.
Of course, with a more rational administration trying to get more bang for the bucks, it was inevitable that the H2 hype would be cut.
Reply
Shock Me 7:10PM (5/20/2009)
It more likely they were tested in California because of the zero emissions benefits in one of the few states in the nation that has stricter emissions rules than the rest of the country.
If they can't sell it to the Granola Crunchers and Publicity Whores, then Joe Six-Pack and Johnny Reb will never see it.
But if it were more competitive you know we'd be seeing silent stealth confederate flag emblazoned pick-ups with rifle racks and coon-hounds in the bed. Solar powered rail guns and trimarans powered by corn squeezins.
letstakeawalk 11:50PM (5/25/2009)
First of all, Charlotte is in North Carolina.
Second, the BMW presence in South Carolina -and that company's involvement in hydrogen-powered autos - is a key reason to understanding why the state committed to hydrogen research and development.
gorr 7:18AM (5/21/2009)
No fundings is neccessary to put on sale for cash a hydrogen car .
Reply