Vancouver 2009: "The main threat to hydrogen cars" are EVs and plug-in hybrids
by Sebastian Blanco on Jun 1st 2009 at 8:02PM 
Morgan LifeCar - Click above for a high-res gallery
By far the most interesting title for a presentation here at the Hydrogen + Fuel Cells 2009 conference in Vancouver, British Columbia was the following: "Threats to the introduction of fuel cell vehicles and how to deal with them." I mean, how could we not cover that?
The session was delivered by Paul Andre Nieuwenhuis, assistant director at the Centre for Automotive Industry Research at Cardiff University in Wales. He is also affiliated with BRASS, the Center for Business Relationships Accountability, Sustainability & Society. It is through his BRASS research that he and his partners have been looking at what are the potential pathways for hydrogen cars to come to showroom floors.
Nieuwenhuis and team first identified two core technologies of the car: the internal combustion engine and the all-steel body. Stick with us now. Nieuwenhuis said that the car came about because of the combination of a chassis (the horseless carriage) with an engine. But the real start of the auto age didn't happen until mass production came about. Interestingly, if your mind just called up Henry Ford, nice try.
Ford automated the production of certain key components, Nieuwenhuis said, but he did not make bodies. If you go to an auto plant today, though, what's mostly happening is that the robots and people are making all-steel car bodies. This is why the all-steel body is one of the core technologies of the car. What does this have to do with hydrogen and a threat to FCHVs? Follow us after the jump to find out.
Henry Ford did not build his own bodies. But, if you take Ford's moving production line (1912-1913), add in the mass production of bodies from Budd with Dodge (in 1915), and GM's addition of vehicle finance, trade-ins and changing styles in the following years, you finally have what Nieuwenhuis called the "modern mass-production car paradigm."
But there is a more subtle thing we can (and Nieuwenhuis did) pay attention to: how, throughout the history of the car, electrical systems kept replacing more and more mechanical systems. From the electric self-starter a century ago (which had an impact on the number of female drivers) to the transmission oil pump on the new HS250h, the trend has always been toward more electronics. In a sense, we've always been moving toward the electric car.Fuel cell vehicles are also steadily moving forward. Nieuwenhuis says that, despite what other say, fuel cell vehicles are pretty much where they should be if we look back at what sorts of things we were promised by 2010-ish (I'm willing to bet it won't take long for one of our readers to find proof that he's wrong on this point). The problem is that, moving forward, the nice things that the hydrogen fuel cell vehicles offer - being able to drive and refuel your car pretty much the same way you've always driven your car - but without the petroleum, are no longer exclusive to HFCVs. He said:
If you talk to ordinary members of the public, not people like us, they expect the future car to be electric and to be plug in. That's how they visualize the car of the future. [A plug-in hybrid] they can plug in, and yet they don't need to rough it in any way. They can still put in their gasoline. [...] Increasingly, the battery electric vehicle, with improved battery technology, is also beginning to encroach on all of those advantages that a fuel cell car can deliver. These are significant threats.
OK, now, back to the all-steel body stuff. With the car becoming more and more an electric device and people realizing there are various ways that the electricity can be delivered (plug-in hybrids, EVs and hydrogen fuel cells), why shouldn't the industry keep on doing what it knows how to do. The "problem," as Nieuwenhuis put it, is the "sunk investments" that the auto industry has in ICE and the all-steel body manufacturing facilities. From an accounting point of view, building PHEVs means that those sunken investments are still useable whereas the other options represent a big risk.
So, how to make sure that fuel cell vehicles can be contenders. Nieuwenhuis proposed a two-step process:
- Launch them into strategic niches. Demonstrate feasibility and avoid comprehensive infrastructure needs. See: California.
- Make sure that fuel cell vehicles are sexy. "I don't think sticking a fuel cell into a Ford Focus or another existing vehicle is really going to show how radically new this technology is," he said. What should a hydrogen car look like? Well, Nieuwenhuis thinks a GM Hy-wire (see pictures here) or the Morgan Life Car (above, and in the gallery below) are the way to go.
Gallery: Geneva 2008: Morgan LifeCar
Our travel and lodging for this event were paid for by the Canadian Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Dave 8:35PM (6/01/2009)
Competition is good...it compels companies to evolve their products.
FCVs and BEVs both have serious cost of ownership issues to overcome, with BEVs currently in the lead.
Personally - I'm looking forward to seeing how much hydrogen or battery power is needed to keep your windshield defrosted and your interior warm and toasty during winter here in Rhode Island (and RI is relatively mild compared to ND or AK).
Reply
ShaunneyCakes 8:47PM (6/01/2009)
Does anyone else think that this is something Austin Powers might drive!
Reply
Snowdog 9:04PM (6/01/2009)
I was more thinking Batmobile in the 1930's.
Doug 9:06PM (6/01/2009)
How about Ace and Gary?
TX CHL Instructor 9:53PM (6/01/2009)
The main threats to hydrogen cars are physics, economics, and common sense.
Reply
Chris M 12:37AM (6/02/2009)
Yes, but they can't admit that. They've got to pretend it is just a marketing issue!
Eric Bertrand 7:53AM (6/02/2009)
+1
x 1000
Hydrogen cars are non-starters. Companies that insist on developping this tech need to press the *pause* button right now and focus on something - anything! - else.
(Looking at you BMW and Honda!)
Serge 5:26PM (6/03/2009)
One of the best comments I've read on ABG in a while. If only compressing hydrogen was as easy as compressing all the issues with hydrogen into one concise statement.
TX CHL Instructor 10:20PM (6/03/2009)
Maybe it is just a marketing issue. Or maybe the target demographic is just too narrow, e.g., people who have more money than sense, and people who can free spend other people's money. Maybe the Liberals can fix that by arranging for all of us to spend other people's money. Suppose that might work?
jake 10:17PM (6/01/2009)
The problem with his arguement is that BEVs are even more flexible than hydrogen cars to be used in new configurations, this has to do with the flexibility in battery pack shape, whereas for hydrogen you need cylindrical tanks. And volumetrically at least the battery pack doesn't really lose out to hydrogen.
On 2010 targets, they haven't hit the pricing and durability targets initially set out by the DOE. The targeted number of vehicles haven't been hit either (California targeted 2000 hydrogen cars by 2010, not to mention even more agressive the 100k target proposed by Congress: now there's still less than 400 on the road in the US, there are more Teslas on the road than hydrogen cars).
The most worrying are the fueling station targets. They are way off the amount needed for even a small consumer introduction (similar to initial hybrid/plug-in introduction numbers) and the industry isn't eager to make more without huge amounts of government subsidies.
Reply
CaramelZappa 10:53PM (6/01/2009)
Hydrogen cars are still miles behind. Some automakers love it because they can keep the current status of families having to go to a gas station to fill up their car, but realistically hydrogen cars aren't feasable at this point. The only examples of hydrogen cars are far too expensive for the general public to be able to actually purchase, which is why they are only leasing hondas clarity. Electric cars are not only already in production but we have working examples of both around the town cars that look like toys, with 40 mile ranges to performance cars like the tesla roadster. There's a bunch of vehicles inbetween and anyone with 10k and a spare car can convert their own car to electric without too much fuss. On top of that hydrogen is dangerous. LiPo cells have never been explosive.
Then there's the idea that hydrogen cars can just be filled up at any gas station, but most gas stations don't have hydrogen filling so you have to find one that does. Almost every home has electricity already.
Even if they made the technology possible hydrogen can only store 1/3 the power that current battery technology can.
The ONLY real con for electric cars right now is charging time, which seems to me a much simpler problem to fix than facing all the obstacles that hydrogen fuel cells face.
I could go on and on. I just don't think that hydrogen is the way to go right now. It just doesn't work.
Reply
Chris M 12:44AM (6/02/2009)
Even the charging time is getting to be less of a problem, with rapid charging systems that dramatically reduce charging times. Even better, a system that can swap batteries in less than 2 minutes has been demonstrated, though the car must be designed to work with it.
On the horizon is "powered highways" that provide electric power "on the go". That nifty little trick that is quite impossible with H2 fuel.
Jon 8:24AM (6/02/2009)
The second con for plug-in EVs is that they are useless (at the present time) for people who live in an apartment and don't have a garage. You'd have to use it like a normal ICE, which defeats the purpose somewhat, or else park it miles away from where you live and walk home.
Until a proper street charging network is established, those cars will not be viable to that group of people.
tankd0g 9:18AM (6/02/2009)
Lets see, we have an electrical grid that by all accounts can not handle even a 15% American ownership of EVs. A grid that we depend on for much more vital things than driving I might add, run by monopolies that make oil companies look like charitable organizations.
We have independent solar and wind power coming online generating excess power that can not be stored so much of it is wasted. If only these independent companys had had some medium to store that energy to later sell as 100% emissions free fuel without taxing the current electrical grid.
I'll have to give this some thought and get back to you.
CaramelZappa 10:46AM (6/02/2009)
People are slow to adapt. The grid can't support us suddenly all having electric cars, but 15% of people aren't about to just buy electric cars in one day, nor are we even able to produce enough cars for that to happen overnight. Change happens slowly, and as more and more people use electric cars and electricity use is increased the grid infrastructure will be upgraded as well. None of this is going to happen overnight. The great thing about electric cars is that these things can happen slowly, and the people who have caught on and bought electric cars will be able to use them as intended from day one. Hydrogen cars on the other hand need to have hydrogen charging stations locally in order to be useful, the new infrastructure needs to come before the cars do.
Richard in FLA 4:14PM (6/02/2009)
Great points, but don't forget, refueling a fuel cell is slow also. It take 45 minutes to refuel a tank large enough for 100 miles range! Not much of an advantage.
Bill 2:47PM (6/02/2009)
Chris M wrote "On the horizon is "powered highways" that provide electric power "on the go". That nifty little trick that is quite impossible with H2 fuel."
Well, assuming that bit of infrastructure ever got deployed, it's not really a problem for fuel cell H2 cars, since they're just EVs powered by a hydrogen fuel cell. They could just as easily pick up electricity from a powered highway. But combustion H2 powered cars (a la BMW) would be out of luck.
Ernie 2:59PM (6/02/2009)
"The second con for plug-in EVs is that they are useless (at the present time) for people who live in an apartment and don't have a garage."
Solution #1: Ask your city and/or landlord for one.
Solution #2: redesign your life around your car. You know, kind of like you already have with your car. Move to a apartment with a garage (and plugins), or an apartment with an on-street charger. Suddenly landlords everywhere are listening.
These are solutions that will take very little time to enable. I think the maximum amount of time it would take to move is about 2 months. It would probably take about the same or somewhat longer for Solution #1 to be enacted as well. These aren't insurmountable problems, they're trivial road bumps.
Chris M 11:02PM (6/02/2009)
Jon, having a tiny apartment in a big city and having to park a car on the street where it is vulnerable to theft and vandalism - under those circumstances, I'd seriously consider either moving or selling the car. But all that means for EVs is that they wouldn't be suitable for those folks. Out here, almost all apartments include off-street parking or enclosed parking garages that could be equipped for EV charging, especially if it meant extra income for the landlords. Also, when plug-ins become popular, parking lot owners would certainly consider adding charging facilities for the extra income it could provide.
Tankd0g, the current grid might only support 15% of the number vehicles, but the current H2 fueling infrastructure could only support 0.001% of the number of vehicles. In both cases, additional facilities would need to be added to make a complete transition, but since it would take years to reach even 15% of the vehicle base, there is plenty of time for the grid. Considering the lower efficiency of H2 vehicles, H2 fueling would take a bit longer.
As for storing energy from fluctuating renewables like wind and solar, consider that the combination of electrolysis, compression for storage and H2 fuel cells is only 24% efficient in storing electricity. Charger and batteries together are 85% efficient. Even if stationary batteries are used to store renewable electricity for charging an EV, the efficiency of that dual conversions is still 72%, still more than twice the efficiency of the H2 route. Costs would be lower, too.
Nick P. 12:10AM (6/02/2009)
"Who killed the electric car?" exposed hydrogen for what it really is: a diversion designed to keep us using oil as long as possible.
The funny thing is that if hydrogen cells were ever to become cost-effective, they would be used as "rechargeable" battery packs to power electric gizmos like cell phones, laptops and...electric cars.
Let's keep our collective eyes on the ball: bring the electric cars to market, then improve the battery packs to extend their range and reduce charging time.
- Nick -
Reply