From that article:

The gist of the book is that hydrogen is not economically feasible to use for transportation, nor will its use reduce global warming, because of the cost and greenhouse gases generated during production, the low energy content per volume and weight of the container, the cost of the fuel cells, and the cost of the infrastructure. The author argues that a major effort to introduce hydrogen cars before 2030 would actually undermine efforts to reduce emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.

I would have to agree. Hydrogen is a fantasy, and a way to delay doing what needs to be done now to conserve our resources and minimize CO2 emissions. When every car on the road gets 40+ mpg, and every pickup gets 25+ mpg, then we can talk about hydrogen. I equate hydrogen with flying cars, a fanciful notion, but one not likely to ever see the light of day.

Harry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Apr 13 2007, 03:28 PM) [snapback]422887[/snapback]</div>

Even as you agree, folks on the adjacent thread, "hydrogen cars are on their way" (HA ! !) seem to blindly go forward, spouting, "yay". That kind of fake hype is the epitome of the auto industry. GM for example is MORE than glad to grab MILLIONS of research dollars for hydrogen, simply so their research folks are able to suck the research tit until everyone has said, "ENOUGH". The REAL criminals are the back scratchers . . . our dear oil-owned legislators, who get re-elected again and again, by oil-loby dollars, so that hydrogen research can continue. After all, it takes oil/natural gas to make hydrogen, indirectly, as well as continued oil products that go into the car's crank case - rear end -etc. I'm amazed that the research dollars continue to flow, when the auto industry hasn't been able to deliver, nor are they any closer, than they were over a DECADE ago.

Ok you knock it but what do you think would do better in an everyday driving for every person not just those with a garage to charge an ev. Also can you charge an ev in 5 minutes? Hydrogen can be made from water with electricity and if we go to nuclear power plants we would not use oil for power. I am for what ever does the job of ending pollution and getting us off of oil. Every time I check the problem with ev is limited range and long recharge times. One decade ago fuel cell cars were just theory and now they are driving around. no not on the streets yet but give it time. Even if I have to drive the 10 miles or whatever to put hydrogen in my car I would do and laugh at all the people spewing pollution from their tail pipe.

If you think it doesn’t take oil to get oil then I don’t know what to say.
As far as I know non of the big auto companies is doing research into the ev as a mass market vehicles but I might be wrong on that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IAO @ Apr 14 2007, 08:56 PM) [snapback]423418[/snapback]</div>

http://www.buildings.com/Articles/detail.asp?ArticleID=1766
Basicly, the hydrogen physics guru Joseph Romm, tells us, "forget about it" . . . needing "5 miracles" before hydrogen cars can happen, and my favorite is getting the car's cost under a MILLION dollars. Heck knock 75% off, and you STILL got a quarter million dollar car. 4 miricles to go! Romm says NO, and the auto industry that gets awarded free millions for research, say yes. Gee, who should I believe? . . . but hey, I'm not knocking it, I'm just considering who I should believe ... who has the vested interest in free research dollars?

BTW, Yes, you CAN charge an EV in 5 minutes. We do it at disney every day, on the storybook boats. It's called, "change out the batteries" & it only takes TWO minutes! You think addng battery stations in existisng gas stations is more expensive than a multi trillion dollar hydrogen infrastructure? This presumes you have to drive over 100 miles/day ... other wise, like your shaver, you plug it in at nite, when the grid has surplus. You think adding a bunch of plugs/charging posts is more pricy than building a multi trillion doller hydrogen infrastructure?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hill @ Apr 15 2007, 02:53 AM) [snapback]423530[/snapback]</div>

Yeah that’s it. I want to drive my ev to a gas station and leave it over night. I would rather have the charging stations on the streets like others have suggested. Batteries are expensive so to have packs just sitting around to me is a waste. To convert a prius to a phev with descent range I have seen quotes of 6-10k. That is a lot and a friend told me just converting to lithium ion batteries would cost like 2k+. I don’t know what it would cost to make it hot swappable (so to speak).


My point is if the manufactures back hydrogen the public will to. I am sure people said the same thing when people started talking about replacing horse troughs with gas stations. If we end up with hydrogen vehicles we need to make the infrastructure for them. if ev’s become mass produced we need to build charging stations not the opposite of what we have.


The majority is going to decide what is going to be used. If politicians and the media are behind it then most people will be too.

Myself I am undecided as to what I like because the arguments are great on both sides of the table. If hydrogen stations become common place I can drive like I do now without worry or I can buy an ev and have to worry about charging it and blah blah blah.
If charging stations become common place the hydrogen vehicle is stupid because were am I going to fill it at. It becomes like the ev the only place to get hydrogen is at home.

Fast charge batteries have been around for a while. You simply need the current available to do it. I'm talking about charging in 10 minutes, not 2-3 hours.

Interestingly enough, if you look at the latest FCV designs they are incorporating much larger battery packs. Basically, it sounds like the newer designs are PFCVs. It's pretty clear that BEVs are where we should be putting research dollars (esp the money we throw at auto makers). Continuing to do basic research on hydrogen and nano-structures to contain it is a good idea. However, for transportation BEV hold more potential.

Stationary fuel cells for power generation are a good thing. That's where the research for hydrogen should be going at this point.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IAO @ Apr 15 2007, 01:15 PM) [snapback]423641[/snapback]</div>

I don't think you get it. Do you have to leave your BBQ Propane bottle at a station over night? Or do you simply EXCHANGE one for another, in less then a couple minutes. That kind of technology is available. Besides, as Tripp pointed out ... it doesn't take oodles of hours. There IS technology for quick charge batteries. As for $2,000 - $3,000 batteries? Do the math ... you basically get about the same energy $$$ out of batteries as you would for Gas. Ours is subsidized by the feds. But is it really important to think, "hey ... if I can't get dollar for dollar similarity between Gas versus Batteries, then screw it? Then we WILL be stuck waiting for the phony fantasy hydrogen highway.

Everytime I think "someone should write a book about it", somebody already has. Hydrogen research is just a way to spend money on 'green research' with the already known outcome that it will fail so that status quo can continue.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hill @ Apr 17 2007, 12:37 PM) [snapback]424677[/snapback]</div>

I do get this. Battery packs are big, bulky, and heavy even the lithium ion packs for cars. If we were to have battery exchange the battery station (what would replace the gas station) would be the size of a small warehouse and in some cities would have to be as big as an aircraft hanger to hold all the batteries not to mention the fact that they each need a slot to charge from. Then we would have to have a people who can lift heavy weights because not everyone can easily lift 80+ pounds. This also means that the battery packs need to be accessible considering people keep stuff in the trunk of the car this makes it difficult. So this idea of battery swapping is as ludicrous as you proclaim hydrogen to be.

As darelldd has shown charging stations can be done easily. And the great part is that you always get to park your car in the shade. Like I said I would rather have charging posts on the streets and in parking lots. But you seam to think that we need to keep gas stations for some odd reason. If we switch to ev we do not need them but if we go with hydrogen then we do need gas stations.

I am not against the ev or the hydrogen car I want to get rid of oil burning cars. If the big corporations and government back hydrogen and hydrogen cars are mass-produced (mass production makes things cheaper. Example the Ford Model T)why keep touting the ev but until that time I agree the ev is better but if all you can buy is the hydrogen car and the only place to charge an ev is at home what are you going to get. Before you go off if the ev’s become mass produced and the only place to get hydrogen is at home why buy a hydrogen vehicle.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IAO @ Apr 17 2007, 01:19 PM) [snapback]424700[/snapback]</div>

Size of a warehouse? Errr . . . No . . . as my earlier thread mentioned ... using the Disney storybook boats as a model . . . Appx 2 dozen boats swap out battery trays in a few minutes, and then go back onto the charge stations. It's quick / easy / and 30+ year old technology. And it's the size of a large WAREHOUSE?? no . . . try "as large as a" . . . BATHROOM

And who said swap out stations need to be the ONLY way to go? Like you said, with charging stations AND swap out stations, you get the best of both worlds. With most people charging at home, change out tray stations wouldn't have to have but maybe enough trays for 100 or 200 swap outs. After all, don't forget how many gas stations there are . . . using them, you'd have plenty of room to take care of business.

Lifting 80 lbs? Hugh? No, jacks & and small overhead cherry picker type lifting can do the job of unloading / reloading battery trays. Sheeze! Even most trash haul trucks life via hydraulic / air powered lifts now days. Hardly a hurdle there. So ~ using both recharge techniques, it becomes a no brainer, rather than as "ludicrous as hydrogen".