BMW to test world's 1st mass-produced liquid hydrogen cars in Japan

F.Y.I. It takes a extreme amount of energy to produce and store hydrogen
and I think its over rated if you add the production cost to the final product. I would like to see more input on electric cars that would go 200K without charging. Would take only four hours to charge and have a top speed of 120K.

 

that came out with an electric car a few years ago. It was an experient that worked. But Ford would only lease the cars. They only made a 100 of them. One leaser tried to buy their car from Ford and was told that as soon as the lease was up, they were taking their car back. And did.

This car actually worked. You would plug it in over night and then drive all day, just about.

They can build it if they want. <:-)

 

I believe these cars use a regular engine, so no great leap forward here. Just a marketing scoop.

 

considering hydrogen is highly explosive in certain states and the use of it as fuel has been the holy grail of engineers for a long long time. if they can truly run a car on hydrogen its a huge leap forward. considering the exhaust is water also could have a huge environmental impact also.

hope it works.

 

We can't drill for hydrogen in its liquid form. Its always attached to other elements and compounds. We have to reform it from other sources like oil or the electrolisis of water then compress it into liquid form to make it usable as a portable fuel. Both methods are slow and energy intensive. The closest we can get right now is to reform natural gas.

Everyone has been mezmerized by the "clean burning" of hydrogen fueled engins but they are not telling the whole truth about where the hydrogen actually comes from and how much byproduct is created before the fuel ever get to the engine.

The grid powered vehicle that you plug in at night in your drive way is the best road to take. The infrastructure is already there. With hydrogen it would take decades to get the fuel to where it is needed. Think about pipelines, storage, pumping and conversion plants. The electric grid is already in place. Its there and everyone has easy access to it. Think of you car as a cell phone. Come home at night and plug it in to the charger. And grid power is at a wholesale price from 2200 - 0800. A benefit to the consumer as well ast the utility.

If any of you here have ever ridden in a Japanese taxi then it probable that taxi was fueled with propane (LPG). Most all are. Look in the trunk of that taxi and you will see a large pressurized tank nestled right up against the rear passenger seat. LPG has more explosive force than hydrogen and is much heavier than air. Hydrogen only burns straight up. The Hindenberg did not explode.

I am tired of hearing all this hype that hydrogen is the answer to all our problems.

 

all you need is a piece of aluminum and some water.

and if you invested the billions of dollars that go into oil exploration into more efficient ways to make fuel level hydrogen it is very feasible.

while not an answer to all our problems, it is an alternative worth pursuing.

LPG is a step in the right direction by the way.

And you talk of the electric power grid as the answer. I am sure you are aware of the "by-products" here? nuclear reactors and all?

 

 

The very process that you refer to requires large amounts of aluminum that comes from bauxite. The US is already in short supply and is required to import.

The waste alumina produced from the process you mention would require reprocessing in nuclear power plants (of which the US is also in short supply of) since massive amounts of heat are required for the process of recycling.

However this is an interesting concept and does solve the touchy subject of hydrogen storage and distribution. In this case it would be produced as needed in the vehicle. Let's see where it goes.

As for grid powered vehicles it solves two problems. 1. Deriving gasoline from crude oil. 2. Removing highly inefficient and poluting individual powerplants from the highways.

Yes, an electric utility does need oil or coal (in most cases)to produce electricity but it can burn this fuel many times more efficiency than the gasoline powered engines in our existing cars. This is where "economy of scale" comes into play.

 

thanks for the info. I was under the impression that the hydrogen recovery proscess using aluminum could be done with scrap metal and not bauxite.

anyways I think we agree that alternative energy sources are pretty vital going forward.

 

You are not wrong. Bauxite is where aluminum comes from. The US no longer mines this ore so we are dependent on imports. Fortunately some of our friends like Australia are sitting on the largest deposits.

Old aluminum beer cans could be used in a sense. They would first need to be converted into pellets.

This method has merit but I just have the hang up on the recycling part since it is an energy intensive process.

I agree. Alternatives are paramount. Finding scientific ways and means will be the easy part. Changing habits and mind sets will be the hard part. This will come to a boil soon. China and India will soon be the biggest consumers of energy and they will change the global situation in a big way.

 

First, of all if you were to compare hydrogen to the gasoline you use in your car today, hydrogen can be argued to be safer. The main reason being, hydrogens a gas dissapates very quickly, were as gasoline, a liquid stays and burns everything in site.

Secondly, all major OEMs are working hydrogen powered vehicles. Whether they be fuel cells or converted ICEs.

Thirdly, electric is great but please check the performance and lifetime of your cell phone battery. Now imagine that in car that you want to last for 5-10 years and then be able to sell on the used market. Also, where do think electricity at your home comes from?

Fourth, hydrogen is a by-product of reforming crude oil. Today there is enough hydrogen production which is simply burned off to fuel 1 million vehicles/a year. If you include all hydrogen production, there is enough hydrogen to fuel 5 million vehicles/a year (more than the total number of hybrids sold over the last 10 years).

Future propuslion systems are certainly needed for society but all of them have issues. Nothing is clearly the leader whether it be hydrogen/electric/biofuels etc. etc. Interesting times....

 

They use specially designed polymer tanks that split lengthwise during an accident. The absolute lack of any type of sparking materials in the tank region, and special vents and releses in the area the tank is stored prevents the big "boom!" you would think would happen during an accident. The airbags in the car present more danger to the passengers than the hydrogen tanks.

 

Your wish has been granted, but it is not detroit that is building those cars it's a new company located in silicon valley that is mass producing electric sports cars, that apperently outperform a Ferrari (0 to 100Km/h in 4 seconds)

This is the video of the presntation. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was also there
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vt1AdfgcNiQ

Pepe

 

Mazda has the Rotary engine running on hydrogen.
And this is what Thomas Korn of BMW said only half a year ago:"the situation out there is not such that we can sell the car, because the potential customer hardly will find a place to fill up the car." So I wonder what the 'mass produced' implies. Could be or will be mass produced?

 

we're looking for alternatives when the first and most obvious one would be to change our habits. Alternative fuels to ensure that people can still be wasteful, drive around in dinosaurs and polish their ego.
In the US alone, how much fuel could be saved every year if there was 1. decent and reliable public transportation , 2. traffic management 3. absence of drive through lanes? These three items alone ( dozens more) would have an immense impact. But for as long as people can't get their @$$es out of their cars to get a family dinner in a bucket, there's little hope that "common sense" would be one hell of an "alternative fuel"