Fuel cell vehicles finish 707-mile demonstration run in Japan
Toyota, Nissan and Honda all participated in a fuel cell demonstration run in Japan last week. The three automakers brought their most advanced hydrogen fuel cell vehicles out for the two-day trip from Tokyo to Fukuoka with an overnight stop in Osaka. The driving teams piloted a Honda FCX Clarity, a Nissan X-Trail FCV and a Toyota Highlander FCHV-adv. Back in 2007, a Toyota FCHV traveled from Osaka to Tokyo on one tank of H2.Over the course of the trip the three vehicles covered 706.5 miles and consumed 28.8 kg of hydrogen. That works out to an average of 73.6 miles / kg. One kg of hydrogen has roughly the energy equivalent of one gallon of gasoline, so the mileage works out to about 73-74 mpg.
The drive was organized by the Japan Hydrogen and Fuel cell project. While all three of the automakers are developing plug-in battery electric vehicles, all three also continue to work on fuel cells. Both Toyota and Honda maintain that they feel hydrogen remains the best long term solution for full function vehicles.
[Source: Japan Hydrogen and Fuel Cell project]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Reality Hurts 10:10AM (11/16/2009)
Uh oh... you said the forbidden words: "Fuel Cell." I can already hear all the pro-EV eco-snobs getting ready to bash this post...
Reply
DasBoese 11:44AM (11/16/2009)
Passive-aggressive much?
I think I distinctly remember you pointing out that fuel cell vehicles are EVs too, whenever you've exhausted your hydrogen hype talking points and switch to "why can't we all be friends, we're all against ICEs and fossil fuels aren't we"-mode.
Alan 11:13AM (11/16/2009)
Eco snobs? Where do people get these phrases from?!
Reply
DasBoese 12:08PM (11/16/2009)
It's what he calls everyone who disagrees with him.
How dare people criticize unsubstantiated beliefs with science and logic, that's rude!
Nozferat 12:16PM (11/16/2009)
Oh the hypocrisy...pot kettle black.
Richard 11:36AM (11/16/2009)
I understand the cost of a kg of hydrogen is around $10. So even if you could find it conveniently, 1 kg would take you 74 miles? A car that get 24mpg would cost less. OK, at current prices of $2.60, that car would cost $7.80 to drive the same 74 miles.
I'm missing the point here.
Reply
ziv 11:46AM (11/16/2009)
Richard, you are missing the point indeed. Hydrogen is something the government can easily tax, and can use some of the petroleum infrastructure already in place. Although how they are going to move enough Hydrogen to fill up a filling station is beyond me, let alone how they will try to finesse the EROEI. A BEV or an E85 ER-EV will use no, or very little, petroleum and you will be able to generate the electricity at home using a photovoltaic array or a wind generator. No taxes, no room for Exxon/Citgo/Mobile Oil. Why go with a $40,000 ER-EV that will see huge price drops when the economies of scale kick in when you can promote a $300,000 fuel cell? Hydrogen, the fuel of the future, now and forever.
At least Chu is figuring this out.
DasBoese 12:18PM (11/16/2009)
I don't see how hydrogen can benefit from the petroleum infrastructure at all, except maybe saving the purchase price for the land if installed at existing gas stations, which is pretty insignificant considering the multimillion dollar price tag of a hydrogen installation.
E85, biodiesel and other liquid renewable fuels, on the other hand, can use the petroleum infrastructure with minimal adaptation, if any.
ziv 1:05PM (11/16/2009)
DB, no one can make hydrogen inexpensively, but the cheapest method out there is using natural gas, not electrolysis. So the big energy guys will probably have a large role in the production of hydrogen, or so the articles that I have read implied. Regardless, the EROEI is horrible. Better to use the natural gas to propel a truck or use the electricity to propel a BEV/ER-EE when they arrive in reasonable numbers and at acceptable prices..
Ernie 4:31PM (11/16/2009)
Actually, you're not missing the point. The disadvantages of replacing gasoline with hydrogen are:
1) The astonishingly expensive fuel stack.
2) The astonishingly expensive fuel stations, and the total lack thereof.
3) The not-quite-so-astonishingly expensive fuel, but still pretty expensive.
4) The fact that when you convert propane to hydrogen (the cheapest way to make it, but see step 2), you get the exact same emissions as if you were to just burn it without bothering with steps 1, 2, 3, and 4.
If Honda is going to go through the trouble of converting its entire product line to something, it should just cut out the middle man and convert to Propane, really. But at the same time, the fuel cell cars get really good mileage. It would be interesting to compare this little experiment with cars converted to Propane, and the cost of the fuel for the trip.
Boyprodigy1 5:51PM (11/16/2009)
Here is a point that they don't point out here: I guarantee you that these guys were "power mileing" or whatever you call it. This article says that they made an overnight stop, but were there any other stops along the way? I wonder how fast they were going. If you assume that they drove 8 hours per day, then they would be averaging about 50 mph....
3PeaceSweet 12:01PM (11/16/2009)
Of course a fuell cell doesn't use electricity or batteries
Reply
Boyprodigy1 5:46PM (11/16/2009)
sarcasm?
Carney 12:33PM (11/16/2009)
Former NASA rocket scientist, nuclear engineer, and "Energy Victory" author Dr. Robert Zubrin on "The Hydrogen Hoax":
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hydrogen-hoax
Reply
gorr 12:57PM (11/16/2009)
Only the ' traders ' oppose hydrogen gas That can be made free at home without pollution and that apply to cars, trucks, motorcycles, lawn mower, electrical generation, trains, tractor-trailer trucks, airplanes, ships.
Reply
letstakeawalk 1:02PM (11/16/2009)
Despite all the negative comments, fuel cell development continues on ...
It's like the automakers think that they can continue to refine a technology, making improvements along the way, to develop a product that will provide an alternative to range-limited BEVs.
I'm glad the Japanese are continuing HFC testing.
Reply
Serge 1:17PM (11/16/2009)
HFCVs compete with ER-EVs like the Volt, not BEVs.
letstakeawalk 1:43PM (11/16/2009)
Well, then. Making energy efficiency comparisons between HFCs and BEVs is really just a red herring.
The BEVS excel in their niche of short-range hops, and fuel cells are intended for longer-range propulsion solutions.
Serge 2:33PM (11/16/2009)
"The BEVS excel in their niche of short-range hops, and fuel cells are intended for longer-range propulsion solutions"
Now that is an example of a red herring. You are comparing BEVs confirmed for production, like Nissan Leaf, to HFCVs that *were* supposed to go into production in 2003-2004 and are being put off once again.
letstakeawalk 3:10PM (11/16/2009)
I'm making reference to the Toyota HFCV (one of the vehicles used in this demo) which has shown that it is capable of traveling from Tokyo to Osaka on one fill-up of hydrogen - a distance of over 350 miles. Can Toyota put it into production by 2015? They seem pretty confident.
I