Ford, Daimler, Nissan team on common fuel cell system

[Dr Mordrid]

http://m.detnews.com/autos/article?a=2013301280367&f=1213

Ford, Nissan, Daimler team up for common fuel cell system development

The race is on to produce fuel-cell-powered automobiles.

Ford Motor Co., Nissan Motor Co. and Daimler AG on Monday announced an agreement develop a common automobile fuel cell system, which is expected to lead the launch of the world's first mass-market fuel-cell vehicles by 2017.

The automakers said Monday they will collaborate on a global program across three continents in an effort to signal to suppliers, policymakers and the industry the seriousness of developing an emission-free technology.

Ford, Nissan and Daimler expect to develop a common fuel cell stack and fuel cell system and anticipate lower development costs as a result of the collaboration.

The announcement comes days after BMW Group and Toyota Motor Corp. agreed to develop components for fuel-cell vehicles.

The two companies last week confirmed plans to develop a fuel-cell vehicle system, including a fuel cell stack and system, a hydrogen tank, motor and battery by 2020.

In fuel-cell vehicles, the fuel cell stack converts hydrogen gas with oxygen into electricity to power an electric motor. Fuel-cell vehicles emit only heat and water, but production costs, storage systems, public acceptance and durability remain major hurdles for automakers.

And much like other forms of alternative energy, a lack of hydrogen refueling stations could prolong the time needed to bring fuel-cell vehicles to the mass market.

[Brian Ellis]

This will come to nothing. The race has been on for the last 15 years and it has got nowhere. The hydrogen/fuel cell car is too inefficient, too costly and too polluting.

An efficient pure hybrid car can get a well-to-wheels energy efficiency of 35% quite easily. An FC car will obtain 25%, if you're lucky.

Costly, because the FCs contain precious metals.

Polluting because hydrogen is produced industrially by converting methane (fracking?) to hydrogen with superheated steam (which requires much energy to produce) over a catalyst.
CH4 + 2H2O > 3H2 + CO2
This gives exactly the same amount of CO2 as if you burnt the methane.
Electrolysis is no better and is more expensive.
Remember hydrogen is not a fuel, it is only a means of storing energy.

Along with the last sentence, it can never be viable.

[dZeus]

This will come to nothing. The race has been on for the last 15 years and it has got nowhere. The hydrogen/fuel cell car is too inefficient, too costly and too polluting.

An efficient pure hybrid car can get a well-to-wheels energy efficiency of 35% quite easily. An FC car will obtain 25%, if you're lucky.

Costly, because the FCs contain precious metals.

Polluting because hydrogen is produced industrially by converting methane (fracking?) to hydrogen with superheated steam (which requires much energy to produce) over a catalyst.
CH4 + 2H2O > 3H2 + CO2
This gives exactly the same amount of CO2 as if you burnt the methane.
Electrolysis is no better and is more expensive.
Remember hydrogen is not a fuel, it is only a means of storing energy.

Along with the last sentence, it can never be viable.

I'd like to see the figures for the different energy sources used to produce the hydrogen. i.e. hydrogen from natural gas vs. direct combustion of natural gas in the car (CNG, LPG or LNG) including the embedded energy costs for entire production, distribution and usage chain.

If it's as inefficient as it seems.. why are they even developing it? poorly managed government subsidies? A backup scenario (when the hydrogen is produced through electrolysis powered by nuclear power) in case neither natural gas nor petrol/diesel are available?

[TransformX]

I've read somewhere recently that the French are going for hybrid vehicles running on compressed air.

[Dr Mordrid]

They've been working on compressed air & compressed air hybrid cars for years, but I can't see how the trades work out given the need to run compressors to "recharge" the air reservoir.

As to H2 production, an advance was recently announced about in-vehicle direct conversion using the oxidization of metals by water. Seems copious amounts of H2 can be made using nano-particles, which react quickly and in volume. Smaller the particle, the faster the max conversion rate.

Downside: need to re-fill two items instead of one.

[Marshmallowman]

CH4 + 2H2O > 3H2 + CO2
This gives exactly the same amount of CO2 as if you burnt the methane.
Electrolysis is no better and is more expensive.
Remember hydrogen is not a fuel, it is only a means of storing energy.

Along with the last sentence, it can never be viable.

Well it does eliminate production of NOx and other combustion byproducts, however more likely its just moving it up the production chain...

I think it may be viable if they can get biological produced hydrogen or some other more efficient production method, having said that they have been trying to do that for 100 years or more