GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know this is not quite the same platform, but it is competition to the Volt. If the home powerstation becomes available with it, the car could easily be sold outside CA. I have one major problem with it though, it's a Honda! Our country has a serious trade deficeit problem and I personally am doing my part to buy as little imported goods as possible. Sadly, I've found it difficult to find many products made here in the US any more. The automotive industry seems to be the easiest to find made in America goods, thankfully.

Anyone think the FCX will become a true production vehicle by 2010?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
It sure is ugly! Looks like a Prius with Honda badging.

Now as much as I like the idea of fuel cell vehicles, I think it's too early to actually sell them to the public. Where are the fueling stations to dispense the hydrogen? I think Honda will suffer from the "cart before the horse syndrom" if they start selling it now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Anyone think the FCX will become a true production vehicle by 2010?
Very unlikely. At best fuel cell cars will only be released as fleet cars, not consumer cars, for years, maybe decades until more is know with real world testing, fueling infrastructure catches up and production costs come down. If Honda builds the FCX in 2010, and there's no real indication they will, it will be only special fleet sales. No competition for the Volt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
252 Posts
Very unlikely. At best fuel cell cars will only be released as fleet cars, not consumer cars, for years, maybe decades until more is know with real world testing, fueling infrastructure catches up and production costs come down. If Honda builds the FCX in 2010, and there's no real indication they will, it will be only special fleet sales. No competition for the Volt.

Considering that the FCX is already built and scheduled to be rolled out in three cities in California as consumer vehicles, it should be considered competition. They are also taking care of the infrastructure issue themselves by leasing a Home Hydrogen Generator. So they are folllowing the plug-in concept but with hydrogen. Also considering that the lease will be about $600/mo for the car itself in CA and if they can keep the lease for the Home Hydrogen Generator between 200-400/mo, at 40k on a 36-60 mo loan at 8% interest with little or no money down the cost of a volt will be between 800-1200/mo, and it can go 270 mi before being refueled, it could be stiff competition.

This is all according to honda's website so it should be taken with a grain of salt, of course.

http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/owning/

Also used the following website as the loan calculator for the volt:

http://www.cars.com/go/advice/financing/calc/loanCalc.jsp?mode=full
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
so what about the negative EROEI of hydrogen powered engines in general? takes more energy to get the hydrogen in the fuel cell than you get from burning it... are you going to address that? or just espouse your (seemingly biased) opinion on hydrogen powered vehicles?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Considering that the FCX is already built and scheduled to be rolled out in three cities in California as consumer vehicles, it should be considered competition. They are also taking care of the infrastructure issue themselves by leasing a Home Hydrogen Generator. So they are folllowing the plug-in concept but with hydrogen. Also considering that the lease will be about $600/mo for the car itself in CA and if they can keep the lease for the Home Hydrogen Generator between 200-400/mo, at 40k on a 36-60 mo loan at 8% interest with little or no money down the cost of a volt will be between 800-1200/mo, and it can go 270 mi before being refueled, it could be stiff competition.QUOTE]

That's what I was thinking. The home hydrogen generator would allow it to become viable nationwide. Lets just hope the Volt's final design far exceeds other hybrids. I'm afraid it's lost much of its aggressive look though. I'd rather have a few less miles of range and an awesome looking car, especially if price is in the 40's. The long hood was my favorite part, now it's gone. :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
252 Posts
so what about the negative EROEI of hydrogen powered engines in general? takes more energy to get the hydrogen in the fuel cell than you get from burning it... are you going to address that? or just espouse your (seemingly biased) opinion on hydrogen powered vehicles?
I think this was addressed at Jason M. Hendler, but I'm going to through my 2.5 pennies in anyways.

I don't think the negative EROEI matters and I think that the arguments that focus solely on how much energy it takes to produce versus how much you actually use are never going to be effective arguments. The reason being that for the most part, the average consumer doesn't care about the overall net displacement of energy. What they care about is whether it is cost effective or not. IE whether they can drive for as cheap as they are now or cheaper or possibly a little bit higher.

If this were not true, electric would have won out when ford made it's first ev but instead they went for gasoline. The arguments you apply today for hydrogen could have been made when car manufacturers went solely to gasoline. It's the overall cost in dollars that matters and not the overall cost in energy.

Currently, there are few alternatives that meet the overall cost equation. Biodiesel has potential to do so, but it all depends on the feedstock. If it weren't for political considerations, I believe that we could ramp up, as a nation, a biodiesel economy using hemp as a feedstock that could make the arguments for electric vs hydrogen evaporate until such a time as solar becomes accessible to the average consumer and batteries become small and powerful enough that I can go 300 mi's on a single charge.

Cost of refueling/range is the essential equation that must be solved for all alternative fuels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,085 Posts
I think this was addressed at Jason M. Hendler, but I'm going to through my 2.5 pennies in anyways.

I don't think the negative EROEI matters and I think that the arguments that focus solely on how much energy it takes to produce versus how much you actually use are never going to be effective arguments. The reason being that for the most part, the average consumer doesn't care about the overall net displacement of energy. What they care about is whether it is cost effective or not. IE whether they can drive for as cheap as they are now or cheaper or possibly a little bit higher.

If this were not true, electric would have won out when ford made it's first ev but instead they went for gasoline. The arguments you apply today for hydrogen could have been made when car manufacturers went solely to gasoline. It's the overall cost in dollars that matters and not the overall cost in energy.

Currently, there are few alternatives that meet the overall cost equation. Biodiesel has potential to do so, but it all depends on the feedstock. If it weren't for political considerations, I believe that we could ramp up, as a nation, a biodiesel economy using hemp as a feedstock that could make the arguments for electric vs hydrogen evaporate until such a time as solar becomes accessible to the average consumer and batteries become small and powerful enough that I can go 300 mi's on a single charge.

Cost of refueling/range is the essential equation that must be solved for all alternative fuels.
Thankyou so much for stating this better than I have in the past. Fuel cell vehicles will have better performance and cheaper / faster refueling than EV's. Considering that fuel cell vehicles will probably have a plug-in 40 mile Li Ion battery / supercap pack, I don't know why people are griping, they are getting the best of both worlds. At least hydrogen won't go stale if you don't use it for a year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
i suppose the EROEI arguments aren't really market sensitive, but they are resource sensitive... negative EROEI definitely matters in the long view. you cannot devise a new transportation system which uses a net-energy loser as the primary fuel source and expect it to be sustainable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,916 Posts
BigRedFed

I agree that it really doesn't matter have much energy or fuel is used to generate the hydrogen as long those sources are plentiful and cost effective enough. Iceland and some other isolated areas with excess inexpensive energy stores are good markets for hydrogen but not most.

Maybe someday hydrogen powered cars will be a meaningful competitor to cars like the Volt, but it won't be the FCX in 2010. Did you look at the Home Hydrogen Generator details on Honda's site? I could not find much other than it uses natural gas to generate the Hydrogen. I'm sure you could also use solar, but I serious doubt that either or combinations of both are cost competitive when installation and running costs are calculated.

Besides, even if the hydrogen can be magically produced at home in a cost effective manner where do you propose the FCX fuel up once the 270 miles is reached in 2010? It will be a range limited vehicle until refueling stations are plentiful.

Improve that batteries with EREV's until we are only using a fraction of the gas we use now. At that point, if gas is still an issue then renewables could easily supply this greatly reduced demand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Not enough is know about this "Home cogeneration plant". It alludes at being solar powered by the illustration, but is it really? If it is, do you have to pay for the solar installation and if it's not, how much power does it pull from the grid or burn in natural gas? You just don't get something for nothing. When you fill up at the Honda factory pumps, how much does that cost? Honda offers a technologicaly advanced vehicle only as a lease and no one says a peep. Gee, do you think they'll ever want them back? If GM were to do this, they would be crucified. :rolleyes:
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
3,689 Posts
The poster above is right. It basically comes down to the cheapest way to go a mile. Look at the ICE. Less than 1 percent of the inputted oil energy is used to move the person. Not a very efficient way to get around but there was no other automotive technology out there that could do better!

About being a net energy loser. This statement needs to be qualified. If you are talking about creating biodiesel by putting in 10 gallons of petroleum diesel to get out 8 gallons of biodiesel then that would not make much sense in the long-term, even if we are doing that today to get the market going. This can be explained very easily if you switch to using biodiesel in the whole process. You can't use 10 gallons of biodiesel growing all the crops and running the ethanol factories just to get 8 gallons back. Right?

However, if you are using solar power (today's solar panels have an energy pay back of less than one year) to run all the equipment to produce 10 gallons of liquid biofuel it doesn't really matter that the panel efficiency is 5 percent or not. The only thing that matters is if there is another system out there that gives you the same benefits for less cost. If you want carbon neutral burning and the convenience of a liquid fuel you don't have many choices (biofuel, hydrogen, ect.)

We will just have to wait to see what process fulfills the needs of the drivers for the smallest price. I’m betting on advanced quick-charge batteries. There may be major swings in what will be used (due to technology advances) but from a pure efficiency play I'm sticking with batteries. No messy liquids, no drawn out conversion steps (electricity - hydrogen - compression storage - transport - vehicle storage - fuel cell - electricity) Just simple steps (electricity - vehicle battery storage - electricity) Extremely efficient and simple.

Hydrogen? Are you going crazy? You can make an EV today (using A123 cells) that will have the same ability as today’s hydrogen fuel cell cars with many times less cost and complexity. Both can't be refueled because there are not enough hydrogen refueling stations or quick charging stations. Both will give sub 8 second to 60 mph times. Both will go about the same range. I'm talking today! If you think 5 years down the road what do you think will happen with battery technology? Why mess with hydrogen for passengers cars? Why would you want to call a repair person over to your house to fix the hydrogen hydrolyser or the hydrogen pump? Leak in the high pressure line? Are you guys masochists? Don't you think just having to swap out a solar panel or a bad battery sounds a bit easier? Just start counting the number of mechanical parts and you might see the light.

Selected parts list for complete home charging system and car:
1) Electric drive motor - EV - Hydrogen car
2) Battery - EV (big one) - Hydrogen car (Prius size or plug-in size - must have battery)
3) Motor control electronics - EV - Hydrogen car
4) Re-gen system - EV - Hydrogen car
5) Plug-in port - EV - Hydrogen car (if you want to use cheap grid power)
6) Solar panels - EV - Hydrogen car
7) Smart car charger - EV - Hydrogen car with plug-in battery option

HYDROGEN car only needed parts:

8) Home hydrolyser - requires purified water lines
9) Hydrogen storage tanks (5000 bar) - Hydrogen car
10) Fuel cell - Hydrogen car
11) Fuel cell environmental controls (keep the fuel cell in operating range)
12) High pressure pump (to pump hydrogen to 700 bar - 10,000 lbs)
13) High pressure hydrogen lines (from fill port - tank)
14) High pressure hydrogen lines (from tank - fuel cell)
15) Hydrogen pressure regulator (to give proper pressure to fuel cell)
16) Electronic control hydrogen flow control (power regulator)
17) Air control system (must pump air to fuel cell to combine with hydrogen)

Well, that's just about it. Whew. Simple huh? For the life of me I can't figure out why people think this is a good solution for the every day Joe. Of course they can just forget about all the home refilling equipment and fill up at the station. I guess that's what corporations and other profit minded organizations would love! Can anyone who thinks the hydrogen option is good for passenger cars please compare the two systems (EV vs. Hydrogen) on costs, functionality (with today's performance along with projected performance), infrastructure requirements, etc? I just don't even think the two are in the same ball park. Please help me to understand!
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top