I have been looking into this for some time now. The drawbacks say it all. Hydrogen takes more energy to make than you get out. There is no reason to input energy at best 25% loss to make hydrogen. Not to mention if you figure in the net loss for generating the actual energy in the first place, not including wind, water, and solar. Something like 85% comes from oil and coal and the loss is something like 30% loss to convert hydrocarbon to Electricity. For an net loss between 50%-75%. This being said 50-75% loss at production side is much better than 75-80% at the automobile level. Electricity is the best option it gives diversity of source. The biggest draw back of that would be utility increase, supply and demand and capitalism indicates that the rise would only shift to the price of kw/h. What is needed is for the government to freeze and federalize petrol production, and continue to run it as oil industry does. Then, pay out all stock holders and levy a 40% tax on any of them who do not reinvest that into renewable, sustainable energy production. That would provide economic growth, jobs, and a new energy network that will be needed to supply power to all the batteries that will be driving automobile motors in the near future.

Hydrogen is a complete non-starter because the vast fireball that will accompany the first accident which causes rupture of the tank(s) will toast enough people to put all but the teminally hard of thinking or profoundly green off the whole concept. 10,000psi behind several hundred litres of H2 is going to disperse the mixture widely enough to involve quite a few other vehicles and possibly quite a few pedestrians as well. (Bit like a roadside bomb in Iraq come to think of it).

Then think of the terrorist potential of a refuelling station in a crowded city... Millions of litres of vastly compressed gas. Think ditto ditto of a delivery tanker.. and a katyusha rocket at near point blank range (200m or so) - Nasty! And horribly predictable.

If you want conclusive proof that hydrogen is a non-starter look at its main proponent - GM. Here is a company still churning out bigger and bigger vehicles with bigger and bigger bribes needed to sell them! This when ANY small hybrid has about a year's waiting list...(Ford's Escape does not qualify as small). I really do wonder whether GM will actually wake up in time to go voluntarily into chapter 11 rather than sleep-walk into forced liquidation... What's oddest is that this company has a union strong enough to impose conditions and work-practices on the management and they have never, ever threatened to strike over the company's crass product range... Now that's REALLY odd. What price job security when the company's churning out vehicles nobody wants and losing billions in the process??

Ken

I agree that a hybrid car with a large enough battery to make driving 100 or so miles possible without starting the engine, and using a small diesel engine burning biodiesel makes the most sense. Biodiesel, as a fuel, is very safe and even non-toxic. High pressure Hydrogen storage (at 10,000 PSIG) does not appeal to me. Neither does an almost empty gasoline tank. But a tank with any quantity of biodiesel is probably the safest of fuel options.

email to rgetsla (at) yahoo [dot] com

It appears nearly certain that electric motors will power future cars. Because delivering energy to the vehicle via hydrogen as an intermediate is at best 1/2 as efficient as delivering electrical energy to the vehicle directly, it is very possible that hydrogen as a fuel may not be widely deployed. 1,000 pouds of Li-ion batteries can give an electric car today a range approaching 300 miles. Recent advances have enabled battery lifetimes that approach 200,000 miles and recharge times that approach 10 minutes. The cost ($/KWh) of batteries will drop and the energy density (KWh/Kg) will increase. As the price of gasoline approaches $4.00/gallon, as the energy density of batteries approaches 200 watts/Kg, and as the price of batteries approaches $200/KWh, batteries will inreasingly power cars and light trucks with electrical energy delivered over the grid.

I'm looking for a diesel. The engery per gallon of gasoline, diesel, fuel oil are basically the same. However since power is proportional to compression ratio and gasoline engines are about 9.5 to 1 and diesels are about 18 to 1, I could get almost twice the power for the same fuel. I wish GM or Ford would have a small diesel in a Cavalier sized car like VW does.

The short descriptions of the Toyota and Honda hybrid power plants are swapped.

Any great invention that cuts into the profit of the oil industy will be gobbled up as it has in the past. The price at the pump does not reflect the increase in the price per barrel of oil. The present prices are based on greed.

Any great invention that cuts into the profit of the oil industy will be gobbled up as it has in the past. The price at the pump does not reflect the increase in the price per barrel of oil. The present prices are based on greed.

When it comes to our energy needs (wants) and usage we appear to divide into camps. These include those who crave inexpensive energy (include total costs), desire clean energy (all environmental conditions), need convenient energy (readily available), want independent energy (both nationally and personally), etc.

Few of us desire to be in only one camp, most of us would like a reasonable combination cheap, clean, convenient and independent energy, however it seems that most articles and arguments have become very polarized in there approach. We also get hung up whether we should take giant steps or baby steps to reach designated goals. We want our cake and want to eat it too, I don't know who coined that stupid expression because I don't know anyone who want to only watch or listen to their deserts.

The solution to reaching these goals boils down to resolving two basic issues: fuel efficiency and fuel sources, then approaching each issue with baby steps.

Efficiency: An example we are thoroughly hashing is transportation. As a short term goal, If we would only improve the efficiency of our gasoline cycle usage from 25% to 50% we would cut our costs to nearly in half, reduce our green house emissions to 1/2 and cut our dependency on foreign oil dramatically (probably more than 50%). This seems approachable by producing and using only slightly smaller cars on average, and hybrid technology (Whether electric motor/s driven by an internal combustion engine generator unit, or an electric/ICE combo drive) as a short term goal. This is a baby step. Further baby steps might be plug in hybrid (take advantage of the more energy efficient power generating facilities), biofuels or hydrogen (when it becomes energy efficient to produce and distribute). You can lump into this category more efficient mechanical and fluid styling improvements. and yes even using the dreaded mass transit.

To minimize (or eliminated) environmental factors we need to modify energy sources. Using electricity from power generation facilities is a baby step. Wind, geothermal, waves, nuclear (this has it's political draw backs), etc. (Even coal plants ( 65%) are cleaner and more efficient than an internal combustion engine source.). These are bigger steps that can be taken incrementally. Ultimately there is only one source that is practically free, available forever (well almost forever), and can be stored interminably (with devices still to be improved or developed), can be convenient and give independence. Use of the sun is a giant step and a long term goal that can be split into baby steps and short term goals. Additionally, solar energy effects not just transportation, but all energy systems.

The issue is, we have the technology and means to jump start the process and really make a difference; we don't need to wait to start trudging the path. We just need to put one foot front of the other. Which means we insist, that we, as well as our government procrastinate no more. We can bake our cake and eat it.

Gasoline IS liquid hydrogen, with carbon added to the tune of approximately one atom carbon per two atoms of hydrogen. The carbon, whatever its atmospheric drawbacks, makes the hydrogen way easier to handle by reducing its vapor pressure.

What about plug in hybrid vehicle that runs on biodiesel? it uses over night charge that will be sufficient for normal day to day driving requirement. When the battery is drain down, the diesel motor kicks in and run 75 miles per gallon.

I though Valance Tech is working on one.