Will the Honda hydrogen car eventually become the norm?
It seems logical - what's the downside?
Answers
2183 points
ChaosNantuko answered one year ago …
The downside is that hydrogen cars don't really acomplish anything...
All the energy from the hydrogen fuel cell comes from the hydrogen... the hydrogen is created using the electrolysis of water. So basically, we are just converting electric energy to chemical energy (a process that isn't 100% efficient) and then running our car on the chemical energy that came from electricity. Hydrogen Fuel cells CARRY energy, they aren't an energy SOURCE. What we need today is sources, not carriers.
As i see it, hydrogen cars don't accomplish anything,
678 points
BoxCar answered one year ago …
EFFICIENCY is the watchword for 21st Century. An IC engine's efficiency depends on compression ratio which is limited by the fuel consumed. Light molecules like H2
tend to explode rather than burn smoothly. Detonation or "pinging" leads to damage of combustion chamber. High octane gas is regular gas with large heavy weight
molecules (like tetraethyl lead) added to increase the fuels ignition temperature. H2 is the lightest molecule to burn so I'd suspect major detonation problems to occur.
A better idea is to develop Diesel/Electric Hybrids, like locomotives for efficiency
951 points
Grudun answered one year ago …
The biggest downside is refueling stations. It is a chicken and the egg problem. People won't build hydrogen stations until there is enough cars and there won't be enough cars until there are enough fueling stations.
The generation of hydrogen is a problem that can/will be solved in a variety of ways(processing of organic waste, as part of the manufacture of Nitrogen fertilizer, using alternative local power sources like wind or solar, and the main method of electrolosis) but it is all about getting the infrastructure setup.
237 points
josephconlin answered one year ago …
An additional concern with hydrogen is the fact that it is gaseous rather than liquid, and must therefore be compressed in order to carry enough for a reasonable travel distance before refueling. This becomes dangerous in refueling, accidents, etc.
Read more from josephconlin411 points
jester112358 answered one year ago …
Other than the fact that hydrogen costs more to produce than it saves in energy (like biofuels), is difficult to store, has lower energy content/weight than gas, and is very dangerous, its a great technology! Oh, and there's no infrastructure to transport and refuel. So, no this is not an answer to our energy problems. Further, fuel cells based upon polymer membranes (i.e. all low temperature fuel cells) are very expensive because of the membrane and Pt catalysts needed. So, its more a "feel good" technology like solar photovoltaics.
Read more from jester112358
197 points
whiteshadow204 answered one year ago …
I work for a company that makes hydrogen refueling stations. (as well as for other alternative fuel sources) And I can assure you the infrastructure is well under way and has been for several years. It is my understanding that The Governator's plan for the hydrogen highway from California to B.C. for the 2010 Winter Olympics is still on schedule.
There is some slightly outdated info on hydrogen cars at http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/
joseph and jester both have some unwarranted concerns regarding the technology from my perspective.
379 points
dustbusterz answered one year ago …
boxcar I would say your theory is a little off on the detonation problems with using hydrogen.
You see, I read about a company who has converted ( ALL) of their vehicles to hydrogen(not Hydrogen cells) but true Hydrogen burning cars. They have been running these cars for many years now( at least 8 or more) and they say ,without hesitation that these engines run with less not more detonation problems than gas engines. Not only this, but they get good(perhaps not excellent) mileage and the cars seem to last longer with fewer repairs needed.
379 points
dustbusterz answered one year ago …
jester112358, I have to argue with you on your assertion that (solar photovoltaics)is a feel good technology. First off, they might not as yet,, be as cost efficient as electric or coal. But as the technology progresses, they produce more power with less cost all the time. Add, to this, the fact that its not yet main stream and you have higher prices for the time being, but they are quickly becoming more and more main stream, and as this happens(like any technology) it will become much cheaper.
California has just done something I fell will become more and more popular across the nation. They adopted a policy which allows electric companies to rent roof space from businesses and private home owners for the exclusive use of attaching solar panels to these homes . The energy produced from these solar panels will power electric plants in the cities that do this helping to reduce the use of coals, and other polluting sources of energy. As this becomes more widely accepted practice, less and less oil, gas, and coal will be needed. And ,the cost to produce these solar panels will drop to less than the cost of other sources of energy.
Will this be the only source we will need to supply our electric demands? not really, but it will go a long way along with wind a a few other resources.
I applaud their resourcefulness in coming up with ideas like this and its shows ,this is not your feel good technology as you would put it.
