AltCar 2009: California Fuel Cell Partnership giving out free t-shirts w/winning slogan
Readers had a lot of fun with the California Fuel Cell Partnership's t-shirt slogan earlier this year. The winning slogan wasn't one of the snarky options – it's "Ahead of the Pact with a Fuel Cell Stack" – and now the CaFCP is ready to start getting the word out about hydrogen via the ever-popular front-of-torso surface area. To that end, the first 500 people who either drive or ride in a fuel cell vehicle at the Santa Monica Alt Car Expo this weekend will each get a free shirt. If you can't make it to the event, the Hydrogen Education Foundation will be offering the shirt (along with other designs and slogans) on their website starting later this month.
Vehicles included in the AltCar ride and drive include: the Daimler F-Cell, the Chevy Equinox FCV, the Honda FCX Clarity, the Nissan X-Trail FCV and the Toyota Highlander FCHV-adv. If you want to drive one of these, you have to be over 18 and bring a valid driver's license.
[Source: CaCFP]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jon 5:54PM (10/01/2009)
I think the term "fuel cell stack" is too technical to catch on among the general public. If there wasn't a picture of a car I don't think people would even know it was referring to cars.
I think the phrase would have been better, albeit less technically accurate, if it had specifically referred to hydrogen-powered vehicles, as the general public would at least immediately understand what was being promoted.
Reply
Ray 8:13PM (10/01/2009)
What is the life expectancy of the fuel cell? How much will fuel cost? What happens in an accident? How big of battery pack does it use? What will it require for maintenance?
How recyclable is it? How many miles to the gallon? What advantages does it have over BEV's in cost of maintenance and fuel?
Reply
Chris M 3:11AM (10/02/2009)
Oh, Ray, you're not supposed to ask those embarrassing questions!
(But please do, they're essential for battling the Hydrogen Hype)
Patrick 10:40AM (10/02/2009)
Ok Ray, I'll bite:
What is the life expectancy of the fuel cell? It's an area that needs improvement and today is between 60,000 (fuel cell stack) and 180,000 (fuel cell membrane).
How much will fuel cost? Using today's technology, $3.00-$5.00/gal equivalent. This includes hydrogen from natural gas AND from renewables like electricity from wind. The US Dept of Energy and the National Hydrogen Association expects the cost to lower to $2 to $3 per kilogram. http://www.h2andyou.org/tenThings.asp
What happens in an accident? Nothing much different from your current car. Hydrogen cars on the roads today are crash tested just like the car you drive right now. If the fuel tank is hit, they're so strong, normally nothing would happen. The tanks are tested so they will never explode--instead, vent the fuel inside (hydrogen) up and away. This is much more safe than your gasoline tank which would leak all over the ground where it could catch on fire. http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=482
How big of a battery pack does it use? The sizes vary, but almost all hydrogen fuel cell vehicles today use batteries to capture energy from braking and deceleration. A perfect example of how these two technologies can work cooperatively on the same vehicle. The Honda Clarity uses a 288-volt Li-ion battery, for example.
What will it require for maintenance? For hydrogen fuel cell cars: routine maintenance on the tires, brakes and air conditioning system. And refill the windshield washer. That’s it! For hydrogen engine cars, the same kind of maintenance as your gasoline car.
How recyclable is it? Just as recyclable as your car today. Plus, many of the new hydrogen cars use materials like plant-based materials for upholstery that offers CO2 reductions as an alternative to traditional interior materials, along with outstanding durability and resistance to wear, stretching, and damage from sunlight.
How many miles to the gallon? Well, hydrogen's measured in kilograms, but today's hydrogen vehicles experience mileage up to 68 mpg equivalent--in real driving conditions including rush-hour, city and highway driving
http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/toyota/toyota-advanced-fuel-cell-hybrid-97782.aspx
What advantages does it have over BEV's in cost of maintenance and fuel? Maintenance is actually likely to be very similar between hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and battery electric vehicles since they're both electric. It's kind of hard to tell though since there's much more experience with hydrogen vehicles on the road than with battery vehicles. In terms of fuel, today, hydrogen vehicles can fill up in 3-5 minutes. A fraction of the time for any battery vehicle.
meme 2:32PM (10/02/2009)
"What is the life expectancy of the fuel cell? It's an area that needs improvement and today is between 60,000 (fuel cell stack) and 180,000 (fuel cell membrane)."
In short, 60,000 miles. The average driver drives 12,000 miles a year.
"How much will fuel cost? Using today's technology, $3.00-$5.00/gal equivalent."
*From natural gas*. That absolutely does not include the cost of electrolysis hydrogen from grid energy, let alone more expensive grid energy like wind. That's currently about $8-15/kg. It can go down from there, but not to anywhere near what you're talking about
"What happens in an accident? Nothing much different from your current car."
Mmhmm. Yeah. Keep spouting that industry propaganda. Do I need to post more links to how devastating CNG car and bus explosions have been? They use the exact same kinds of tanks, but at lower pressure and with a less volatile fuel. Thankfully, we'll never have enough hydrogen cars on the road that this will be a problem.
"Hydrogen cars on the roads today are crash tested just like the car you drive right now."
First off, so are CNG cars. They still explode. Crash tests are about occupant safety in a particular subset of less extreme accidents which are survivable; they're not about more extreme accidents which aren't survivable, or car fires (260,000 per year in the US), or defective/leaking components, or anything of that nature.
Secondly, no they're not. For example:
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Honda_FCX-Clarity/
"Neither the federal government nor the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has ever crash tested the Honda FCX Clarity."
"instead, vent the fuel inside (hydrogen) up and away."
1. Hydrogen has a very low ignition energy -- 1/10th the ignition energy of gasoline. It ignites in the majority of leaks.
2. Hydrogen pools in fuel-air mixtures in tunnels, overhangs, garages, parking garages, and all sorts of other situations. Leaving you with a fuel-air bomb waiting for that 1/10th ignition energy.
3. Hydrogen burns in almost any fuel-air mixture (unlike gasoline), and readily undergoes deflagration to detonation transitions (unlike gasoline).
"What will it require for maintenance? For hydrogen fuel cell cars: routine maintenance on the tires, brakes and air conditioning system. And refill the windshield washer. That’s it!"
Well, that and replacing the half million dollar fuel cell stack every few years. ;)
"For hydrogen engine cars, the same kind of maintenance as your gasoline car."
No; hydrogen is much more corrosive than gasoline, and the engines have to be larger and operate at higher pressures due to the lower density of hydrogen.
"How many miles to the gallon? Well, hydrogen's measured in kilograms, but today's hydrogen vehicles experience mileage up to 68 mpg equivalent"
Which is a worthless number, as it ignores the energy needed to make, compress, and transport the hydrogen. Your average FCV has an average tank-to-wheel efficiency of around 30% (depending on your drivecycle). Gasoline vehicles average more like 20%. However, hydrogen's energy source to tank efficiency is ~25-65% (depending on source), while oil's is about 80%.
"Maintenance is actually likely to be very similar between hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and battery electric vehicles since they're both electric."
Except, of course, for that half million dollar fuel cell stack.
"It's kind of hard to tell though since there's much more experience with hydrogen vehicles on the road than with battery vehicles."
Funny -- most H2 advocates here try to claim that BEVs are so much cheaper than hydrogen because we've done more with them. But you're right -- there's been *way* more funding for H2 vehicles than for BEVs. And they're still nowhere close to commercialization in terms of price, longevity, efficiency, or infrastructure, while BEVs are being produced now, and nearly every automaker is going to be making at least one for commercial sale over the next few years. The plants are already going up.
"In terms of fuel, today, hydrogen vehicles can fill up in 3-5 minutes. A fraction of the time for any battery vehicle."
1. Only from the very high pressure (and, IMHO, way too dangerous for being anywhere near populated areas) stations, where the fuel is kept stored at many hundreds of atmospheres. From the lower pressure stations, it's closer to half an hour.
2) Titanate batteries can recharge that fast, and battery swapping is that fast. Titanate cell EVs are cheaper than PEMFC vehicles, and the chargers are cheaper than high pressure hydrogen stations. Most people, however, prefer the even cheaper phosphates and manganates, which are limited to 10-20 minute charges. And to save even more money still, they sometimes cut back on cooling hardware, so not all of them use their cells full potential. So all in all, they get reasonable capability, but at a tenth the cost.
So, a rundown:
Phoenix SUT, Lightning GT, etc: Under 10 minutes
F3DM: 50% in 10 minutes
E6: 50% in 10 minutes
Stella: 85% in 15 minutes
Leaf: 80% in 30 minutes
MiEV: 80% in 30 minutes
Etc.
Andy 11:39PM (10/01/2009)
Explain to me again why we need to use renewable energy to create electricity to create hydrogen to put into a fuel cell to create electricity to put into a battery to make the wheels go around.
What was that you said?... Oh. Because of vehicle range.
Anything else.... Ans. No.....!!!
But aren't there perfectly good BEV's rapidly approaching comercialisation with 80-120 miles range suitable for at least 80% of our daily needs? Will battery swap stations and fast charge batteries be commercialised within 2 years?
Shucks... Maybe we won't be needing so much of that fuel cell hydrogen stuff.
Reply
Patrick 10:48AM (10/02/2009)
Most hydrogen vehicle proponents are not against battery vehicles. We're against choosing one over the other before the market has a chance to decide. Right now, we need to develop both.
Battery vehicles, as Andy says, will have a positive role for smaller vehicles and short-range driving. Hydrogen vehicles are better for larger, long-range vehicles which customers will also want. The technologies are complementary and work well together.
AND, they will both encourage the use of more renewables which is good for everyone!
Serge 11:34AM (10/02/2009)
Andy, such a convoluted energy supply chain via hydrogen as you described ensures that an army of leeches, parasites and bureaucrats continues its existence. If most households install solar panels on their roof, with which they "fillup" their own EVs, what will this motley crew going to do for a living?
The LEAF and charging infrastructure will start showing up in some states in year's time. http://www.theevproject.com/
Patrick, you are too late with your "we need to develop both" message. You should have spoken up 8 years ago when all major automakers scuttled EV programs and dumped all resources into hydrogen fuel cells. After wasting 8 years and millions of taxpayer subsidies hydrogen fuel cells are no closer to commercial implementation than they were then. Hydrogen fuel-cells require many more years and many more billions of taxpayers funds for development. Even then, results are not guaranteed. If promises of hydrogen fuel cell commercialization sound like deja vue, it is because it is:
From SAE's "Fuel Cells Start to Look Real" article published in March of 2001 http://www.aerospaceengineeringmagazine.sae.org/automag/features/fuelcells/index.htm
"Toyota has set 2003 as its target for market introduction of fuel-cell vehicles."
"Ford's Focus FCV will serve as the base for its first production fuel-cell vehicle, scheduled to go on sale by 2004"
"Larry Burns, GM Vice President for Research and Development, said that GM and ExxonMobil have developed a better way to extract hydrogen from gasoline. 'Our joint progress on gasoline processor technology means that clean, efficient fuel-cell-electric vehicles could be in consumers' garages by the end of the decade,' he said"
"While Honda's management does not expect fuel-cell vehicles to come into the mainstream for 10 to 20 years, the Japanese automaker remains committed to commercializing its first unit in 2003."
"In 2002, DaimlerChrysler will deliver the first city buses with fuel cells, followed in 2004 by the first passenger cars,"
"Kaneko expects Nissan to introduce a 'market research vehicle' in the 2003-05 time frame, pending development of a fueling infrastructure."
We don't need EVs with bloated inefficient hydrogen fuel cell range-extender. We need more EVs and ER-EVs on the road as soon as possible with matching rollout of public charging infrastructure for extending the range. Thank you DOE!
Dave 8:44AM (10/02/2009)
"What is the life expectancy of the fuel cell? How much will fuel cost? What happens in an accident? How big of battery pack does it use? What will it require for maintenance?
How recyclable is it? How many miles to the gallon? What advantages does it have over BEV's in cost of maintenance and fuel?"
GM has a fuel cell with an 80k mile lifespan. They plan to have at least a 120k mile lifespan before commercial sales.
Fuel cost predictions that I've seen vary widely. I've seen as low as $0.90 per kg to $8 per kg. Time will tell.
There are thousands of CNG vehicles on the road. I don't see any reason that H2 vehicles should be a greater concern. H2 storage R&D continues to search for solid state solutions, which obviously would be safest.
The Equinox FCVs used a 35kw battery IIRC. This can probably be reduced somewhat with more advanced fuel cells. But obviously battery R&D will benefit hybrids, BEVs, and FCVs.
Looking at GM's fifth generation fuel cell drivetrain, it appears that the fuel cell stack can be easily removed and replaced with a rebuilt / upgraded unit by simply unbolting the "head" from above. No doubt there could be other items to maintain, but the stack itself is likely to be the largest cost.
No idea on recyclability.
Toyota claims 68 miles per kg in a Sequoia SUV. The Equinox achieved something like 45 miles per kg, IIRC.
It has no advantages over properly engineered BEVs in cost of maintenance and fuel. (Some BEVs - such as the Tesla Roadster - sacrifice battery longevity to extend range and reduce weight. Long term maintenance cost of such a BEV is an issue.)
The OEMs claim that the R&D that has been invested in fuel cells will make them far less expensive to build than BEVs. And that they will be more capable than BEVs. (longer range, larger payload, faster refuel).
Of course, if someone comes out with a battery that is ten times more energy dense and ten times less expensive (as some researchers claim is on the horizon), fuel cells may have no reason to exist.
Reply
Dave 10:59AM (10/02/2009)
"Explain to me again why we need to use renewable energy to create electricity to create hydrogen to put into a fuel cell to create electricity to put into a battery to make the wheels go around."
Current pure BEVs are unacceptable because of:
Price. Payload. Range. Refuel speed.
The battery pack of the Tesla weighs 900 lbs, costs at least $25,000 and delivers ~125 miles of range (possibly less) in cold climates or when driven aggressively. Unless you recharge in "range" mode which full charges and deep discharges, lessening the lifespan of the battery pack.
It is fairly difficult to design a 900 lb battery pack for quick swapping. And you will need two of these $25,000, 900 lb batteries for a family car. And three of them for a pickup truck. (Thats assuming the buyers are satisfied with a 125 mile range between swaps)
The OEMs claim they can build fuel cell vehicles cheaper and lighter and with greater range and faster refuel times than a pure BEV. And, they claim that the higher price of fuel will be offset by the lower purchase price of the automobile. Time will tell.
Reply
KarlInSanDiego 12:16PM (10/02/2009)
Alternative energy vehicles CANNOT be allowed to use fossil fuels simply because the market demands it. That's how we surpassed peak oil in 100 years. You can't get it back, so responsible scientists, engineers, and policy makers need to stop thinking of their immediate needs and LEAP to a fully renewable strategy for cars/bikes/lawn mowers. For me that's BEV only with a mandate to use progressively mandate renewables as a source of their charging. If scientists want to continue to refine a technology that was around when when we landed on the moon, yet still can't scale economically, let them. But don't focus the auto industry that way when it won't work in the foreseeable future.
If the Clarity was a reality, Honda would just pull the pin and release it as a production car. Instead they're pulling the same stunt that's constantly pulled by automakers, creating a halo e-car that they can't sell because it's too expensive to build. If hydrogen cars sell with their own hydrogen sourcing powered by wind or solar, then they just need to make that technology somewhere under astronomical and I'm a hydrogen convert.
Reply
Dave 1:13PM (10/02/2009)
"a technology that was around when when we landed on the moon, yet still can't scale economically"......That is a perfect description of batteries.
A small vehicle with a small range works.
A large vehicle and/or a large range doesnt.
Reply
Ifreemyer 3:57PM (10/02/2009)
If you can't make it to the expo, the t-shirts featuring the winning slogan are for sale starting today.
Check them out at http://www.cafepress.com/h2andyou
Reply