Full water ahead: GM reminds us that hydrogen is a "key" long-term solution
Not that we really expect to hear anything different from GM, but even with the company's most vocal hydrogen proponent Larry Burns set to retire, The General is sticking to the line that it is committed to bringing H2 vehicles to market. Beth Lowery, GM vice president of environment, energy and safety policy, posted to the GM Fastlane a few follow-ups to her recent webchat and directly addressed the hydrogen question:
Lowery also re-emphasized GM's near-term commitment to hybrid and flexfuel vehicles. Read her post here. Recently, Lowery also said that GM expects future generations of the Voltec technology will allow GM to turn a profit from plug-in hybrids.We still believe that in the long-term hydrogen can be a key solution to the issues we face around energy supplies and the environmental impacts of personal transportation. Our work on fuel cell technology includes our "Project Driveway" test program. It has yielded great feedback on the performance and capabilities of the Chevy Equinox Fuel Cell vehicle in real-world driving situations. However, hydrogen infrastructure is still an important hurdle we face that requires collaborative efforts by government, academic and industry partners.
[Source: GM Fastlane]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
ShaunneyCakes 8:04AM (8/06/2009)
Uh oh... here comes all the pro-EV, anti-hydrogen posts...
Reply
polo 10:20PM (8/06/2009)
Yep. Its pretty stupid to assume people are going to buy an EV and then a few years later switch to a vehicle that consumes 3xs as much energy.
The "lets not limit our options" argument is idiotic and bogus. How long have we had gas cars with no other option? A 100 years? And is anybody expecting the laws of physics to suddenly change and prevent *only* EVs from charging or running?? What is could possibly happen that justifies spending billions pushing hydrogen as a "fall back"?? There is nothing...that benefits the consumer. But its a great fallback option if you're an oil company and you want to continue to profit once the oil stops flowing...
Tim 8:42AM (8/06/2009)
You can give this old Leopard all the "free food" you want, but he will NEVER truly change his spots.
Reply
jpm100 8:53AM (8/06/2009)
I hope you are talking about Congress. Because its Congress that breathed life back into the Hydrogen issue. So now GM has to walk a tightrope between the Obama administration and Congress.
Tim 9:32AM (8/06/2009)
JPM100, you're correct.
There can be NO "good change" until Congress and the President honor their oath to Defend the Constitution by recognizing the limits that our supreme law place on their power over We, the People.
Currently, the only "change" we are seeing is MORE debt, MORE war, MORE overreach, MORE tyranny and MORE stupid failed progressive-socialist Keynesian economics which has bankrupted nation after nation.
We need to remove the Leopards both at GM and in the current Congressional ONE party system.
ShaunneyCakes 10:03AM (8/06/2009)
@Tim
Tim, your posts are so hilariously misplaced and misinformed, I can help but read them and laugh. You made my day with your anti-government rant on an auto post about Hydrogen...LOL.
Tim 10:13AM (8/06/2009)
ShaunneyCakes,
These days, everything seems to fall back to the progressive-socialists in gov't. The funding for the H2 JUNK SCIENCE is coming from the same place the Corn Ethanol debacle came from... OUR TAX MONEY, REDISTRIBUTED.
The progressives make the SAME mistake over and over all the while calling it "change" like ALL "change" is good and "change" for the sake of "change" will fix everything.
We have a huge wound in our nation (caused by central planning) and the progressive's answer is to pick at it (with more central planning) until it heals. You statist Keynesians are totally ignorant of the big picture, simple economics, basic logic and history.
If you want to cure a problem, look at it like a doctor would.
First and foremost DO NO HARM!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primum_non_nocere
ShaunneyCakes 10:33AM (8/06/2009)
@Tim,
Whether you argument is true or not, it does not belong here Tim. That is why I am laughing at you. You are just another troll who protests from his keyboard. If you really cared about it, you could write your congressman. Though I am sure he/she gets dozens of letters from rambling idiots like you, so be a little unbiased and a little less close-minded (not likely) and maybe, just maybe, he/she will listen. Remember, you and I vote these people into where they are.
Anti-Tim 1:50PM (8/06/2009)
Tim again rears his retarded, misplaced, ill-informed, trollish, behavior again. Tim go post your ludicrous ridiculous ideas over at Fox "News" maybe they will enjoy your stupidity, you should fit right in.
Tim 2:57PM (8/06/2009)
Anti-Tim LOVES free speech… as long as it’s his own.
(typical pathetic Progressive-fascist who believes what’s yours is mine and if you disagree, want freedom or don’t need a “big brother”, you’re a “troll”)
To the retard Progressives… this is fair, this is good.
Anti-Tim 3:07PM (8/06/2009)
*****Warning**** Troll Alert! Tiny Tim the Troll comments should be (and can be) easily ignored. Tim is a mildly retarded, ill-informed Libertarian (though that is an insult to Liberarians) who suffers from serious delusions. Timmy thinks that the volume of his posts (over 22,000) since 2006 will make up for his lack of anything useful and relavent to say. You may simply insert any of the following as substitutions for Tiny Tim's comments:
- Me think free market good
- Me think Progressive NeoCons/Democrat/Socialist/Progressive/Liberal bad
- Me think government bad
- Me no like unicorns farting money
- Me just learn how to spell pathetic
- Me think Anti-Tim is Polo
To Progressives from Tim.....I stupid, this is true.
Tim 3:13PM (8/06/2009)
Sieg Heil Progressive-Fascist Morons. All Heil the all powerful all knowing State!!!
To the retard Progressives… this is fair and this is good.
Anti-Tim must be off his meds.
XYZ 10:12PM (8/06/2009)
It's amazing, Tim, whenever your brain can't handle any comments you start with your Hittler rubbish. Get a life, troll!
Tim 8:38AM (8/07/2009)
XYZ et al; (look it up and learn something, anything.)
Here are is what you SHOULD be concerned about...
From 1776 to 1912 the value of the dollar backed by gold, without a central bank You Progressives SHOULD be worried about this fact:
From 1913, when the Federal Reserve was created to 2008, the value of the dollar decreased by 96%.
Obama and the Congressional Progressives has increased the deficit more in the last 6 months than GW Bush did during his entire 8-years as President. (GW's spending was also wrong and he was as much a traitor as that Obamanaton currently in office!)
REAL Public Debt Now EXCEEDS $74 TRILLION!
http://www.truthinaccounting.org/news/listing_article.asp?section=451§ion2=451&CatID=4&ArticleSource=372
We each month there are fewer nations willing to buy US Treasury T-Bills so we are having to print more fiat currency and debase its value MUCH faster than ever before just to pay for unbridled Congressional spending spree. Excess currency decreases its value and causes inflation - economics 101
What will the US $Dollar be worth in 2 years? Can you say $10.00 loaf of bread????
You may call me a Troll, but that only proves that you are a small minded, simpleton FOOL!
The road to hell is paved with good intentions (with unintended consequences).
LeanGreenMachine 9:12AM (8/06/2009)
To shamelessly plagiarise a quote from Steve Jobs and apply it to this argument: "H2 doesn't have to lose for EVs to win".
I am all for an EV future, but if there are more options out there that aren't dependant on oil, so much the better.
Sadly, I am too aware of the previous story about the gas companies having their hand in on the future distribution of H2, but I'm not going to dismiss any alternative that isn't EV-related.
Reply
Dave 4:04PM (8/06/2009)
+1
Its crazy to limit our options.
IMHO-
GM is doing the right thing by leaving the options open with the Volt.
If an affordable fuel cell comes along, it can easily replace the ICE generator. And still give a 40 mile BEV range, so drivers can use whichever energy source is cheaper.
And, if an affordable fuel cell never comes along, GM can still sell you a car that runs in EV mode 90+% of the time. And the rest of the time, future Volts could run on gasoline, diesel, natural gas, ethanol, etc.....
Nick P. 9:21AM (8/06/2009)
Yep, that's the old GM alright. Instead of focusing on one green car strategy (EVs), they spread thin trying everything under the sun. As a result, they will *never* be leaders in anything and always opt for compromises.
They miss the opportunity to take the lead in BEVs (Nissan & Tesla will do that), and in Hybrids (Toyota and Ford are way ahead). Even if the hydrogen thing hits the market, the Honda Clarity is for now the closest to real production. Eternal losers...
Hope Nissan & Tesla give them the market beating they deserve.
Reply
B 9:37AM (8/06/2009)
There two types of hydrogen powered vehicles - FCEV and ICE burning hydrogen. The latter are non starters, the former are just EVs using fuel cells instead of batteries (but they have one too for buffering and regen-braking). The simple thing is you can not beat battery for efficiency. We aren't going to be able to afford excessive costs to build hydrogen infrastructure. It's just pipe dream of oil companies wanting to save current business model (that's one forcing you to get to a pump). Batteries seems expensive (yet) but it's nothing when comparing all associated costs of hydrogen. Look how many commercial FCEV offering were made up to today - zero (and that with all those dumped dollars into it by government).
Reply
3PeaceSweet 10:08AM (8/06/2009)
Exactly, once you have the layout for an EV with medium battery capacity (~20miles) you have the choice of adding either.
1. Small ICE range extender
2. Fuel Cell range extender
3. More batteries
1 makes the most sense today, with 3 happening as battery production steps up a gear.
If a fuel cell can do the job of a range extender in time then good, but I'm fairly sure it will be running on methane not hydrogen.
skablaw 11:43AM (8/06/2009)
B, do you even have an electric bill, or do you light your home with 10,000 hamsters running on wheels connected to generators? What I love about all of you moronic EV supporters is this idea that electricity a) is free and b) requires no preceding method of generation before it is available at your outlet.
Where do you think electricity comes from? It comes for the most part from coal and oil burning power plants that spew thousands of tons of emissions into the air all across the country. Is a hydrogen infrastructure in place? No. Will it be expensive? Yes. Will Exxon Mobil or BP stay in business if we can find a way to use this resource as petroleum for fuel is phased out? Who cares??? Why do you care so much if a company makes money selling a useful and much-needed commodity?
Unless all of the whack-job anti-nuclear clowns stop being ridiculous and allow this country to dramatically ramp up our nuclear plant construction, there is absolutely no way our current grid will sustain wide-spread EV adoption. To say nothing of the fact that I'm hardly interested in running out of power every 100 miles and having to find a place to plug my car in only to spend hours and hours recharging. At least with hydrogen I'd be off and running in two minutes again.