In a speech made last Saturday, President George W. Bush named hydrogen as the fuel of the future. “I believe that today’s children will one day take their driver’s test in a hydrogen-powered, pollution-free car. It’s a big goal, but it’s an attainable goal,” the President added. So, is Mr. Bush just having a fancy dream or are his goals really achievable?
Using hydrogen to fuel vehicles and other machines is not a new concept, or at least the idea is not something that has not been discussed in the past. But as fuel prices continue to rise and as the nation search for alternative fuel sources, interest in the subject matter has again been revived. And just as with the other alternatives being considered as solutions to the nation’s ever increasing fuel demands, the idea was met with agreements and oppositions.
According to the major proponents of hydrogen technology, using hydrogen as fuel offers a lot of advantages. For one, hydrogen is widely available in the environment and making use of it as fuel can eliminate our dependence on oil producing countries. Hydrogen is also fairly simple to generate and the technology required for such production is already existent. Hydrogen is safe for the environment too because it eliminates the need for fossil fuel and adds no greenhouse gases to the air.
But despite all of these benefits, many critics would still find hydrogen technology as an impractical solution to our nation’s current problems. Among other things, critics are concerned about the commercial viability of hydrogen and the technology. “The technology works, but it’s far too expensive,” says MacMurray Whale, an analyst at Sprott Securities. “And even if they manage to make a cost-effective fuel cell, the biggest problem is finding a way to make hydrogen available and cheap. It’s all about product and not about technology,” Whale added.
So is President Bush dreaming deep when he called hydrogen the fuel of the future? Let’s just make our major automakers and other hydrogen fuel-cell technology proponents decide. So far, General Motors have promised to reveal a fuel-cell vehicle by the end of the decade. Major hydrogen fuel-cell manufacturer Ballard Power Systems Inc. also promised to demonstrate a commercially viable hydrogen fuel cell by 2010. Among other hydrogen technology proponents, the future of hydrogen fuel cell technology may depend on these companies.
May 1st, 2006 at 11:01 am
hydrogen fuel??? dont you think its to dangerous? i know how flammable hydrogen is… a simple ignition could really lead you and your car into deep fire with hydrogen.. hydrogen is really sensitive than the usual fuels were using right now. so i think they better study and conduct more tests or experiments with this.. they will just endanger motorists…so what do you think ha???
May 3rd, 2006 at 2:08 am
I was directed to your site while researching about alternative fuel sources. Well, I believe that automakers should continue on their research on hydrogen fuel cell technology despite all the odds. After all, what they’re doing is something that would benefit the world (yeah, I hope it would also benefit my country) in the long run.
As to Joanna’s comment, I think our automakers have found a solution to that long ago. Perfecting the technology and making the technology a commercially viable option, I think, is the only problem left to be solved.
May 7th, 2006 at 6:12 pm
[...] But what’s a guy to do? Gripe to his buddies around the water cooler? Drop some coin on a hybrid (but it wouldn’t be a VW and we can’t even truly consider that)? Sit around and wait for the government to deliver on hydrogen? Maybe it’s best to just ditch gasoline entirely…for vegetable oil. [...]
May 25th, 2006 at 2:48 pm
Check out this introduction article on fuel cell:
http://www.articleworld.org/fuel_cell
Content:
1.Constituents of a fuel cell
2.How it works
3.Applications
4.History and development of fuel cells
June 22nd, 2006 at 9:20 am
At the National Alternative Fuels Training Consortium these issue are the type of thing we try to educate the public on. In fact, this very topic (described below) is the subject of a course we currently have under developement:
A Guide for First Responders: Safety and Emergency Response Procedures for Advanced Technology Vehicles.
A growing number of vehicles on the road today using alternative fuels such as hybrid electric, natural gas, ethanol, and biodiesel. Personnel who respond to accidents, fire, and other incidents must have specialized knowledge about how to extricate victims, fight fires, remove damaged vehicles with minimal danger to themselves and bystanders. This two-day hands-on course will teach the basic technology and components of each type of fuel and vehicle, how to identify and approach a vehicle that has been involved in an accident or fire, and how to safely dispose of vehicles and components that have been damaged.
Pleae visit our Web site to learn more (http://www.naftc.wvu.edu) or attend our National AFV Day Odyssey (http://www.nationalafvdayodyssey.org/) in a city near you!
July 9th, 2006 at 5:16 pm
Here is how it works:
The oil and auto industry consider the battery industry to be a failed technology that can never be made or delivered in the form factor, price point, range or efficiency that they care about. (It doesn’t matter, for this argument, what YOU think.) So they got together and used “layered anti-evangelism” to manipulate the battery industry.
“Layered anti-evangelism” is an intelligence agency third world manipulation device that works like this:
1. Select the target: In this case it is hydrogen fuel cells, which have been demonstrated to beat batteries on every business front.
2. Select your internal agents. In this case lobbyists and “writers” that are paid by the oil and auto industry.
3. Have the agents contact and talk to the “sheep”. In this case the sheep are the writers for battery industry trades and heads of battery lobby or support organizations.
4. Have the agents convince the sheep via skewed data provision. In this case selected reports were written and then shown to the sheep to convince the sheep that hydrogen fuels cells would steal their funding, put them out of business and that the only source of hydrogen was from the “evil oil companies”.
So you have battery evangelists who are anti-hydrogen sheep:
Ulf Bossel of the European Fuel Cell Forum
Alec Brooks- EV World
Sam Thurber
Yet for every manipulated argument they come up with, they are shot down by hundreds of sites with facts, ie: http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid985.php
WHY? Because you can make hydrogen at home and the ability to do it fast, cheap and clean is coming 40 times faster than they thought.
This happened, using the same process, to:
1.) Electric light rail in America (US Vs. National City Lines, 334 US 573)
2.) The EV1 (Movie: Who killed the electric car)
Etc.
July 14th, 2006 at 8:22 am
- Fuel cell vehicles are extremely flammable. More then natural gas cars - which are not allowed in closed quarters due to this fact. Imagine all the cars in parking lot exploding due to one fuel cell cars’ leak.
-Fuel cell don’t work in cold NY winters.
-FCV can cause drowsiness, headache, reactions etc.. to occupants. Safety hazard.
-Containers for the fuel cell will need to be maintained and disposed of dilligently.
-Car accidents will be fatal every time.
-It takes 3 times as much energy to power a FCV as compared to a electric one from a renewable resource. If fueled from fossil fuels it will not get rid of our imported oil and carbon excesses.
- FCV cost over a million dollars for just the vehicle then there is the powerstation. Electric vehicles cost 40000$ and there powerstation - solar panels - cost 6000$.