attn peak oil fearmongers: fuel cell cars take a leap forward

[natedogg]

http://autos.aol.com/article/hybrid/hub/...autoDYNLsec0001

From the article:

[ QUOTE ]
The fuel cell power-plant is 400 lbs lighter than the unit in the 2005 model.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, in 2005, a naysayer may have said "Hey you are crazy to think fuel cell cars will ever be viable. The power plant weighs too much." Thank god the people working on this technology don't actually listen to pundits. They have too much profit on the line.

Further:
[ QUOTE ]
The combination of increased fuel capacity and more efficient powertrain yields a thirty percent improvement in range compared to the 2006 model.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. In one year (assuming like most cars the 2006 model is build in 2005), they achieved a 30% increase in range. In one year

Anyone who thinks our technology is at an apex and will not improve please feel free to tout the end of the world.

natedogg

[Zeno]

Good news (for some) and interesting article. Science and technology march forward into the fog of the future.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who thinks our technology is at an apex and will not improve.....

[/ QUOTE ]


I have always wondered when our national idiocy would reach an apex put perhaps Nancy Pelosi will answer that question. But that aside, science coupled with technology and the inventive spirit of people can achieve much.


[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who thinks our technology is at an apex and will not improve please feel free to tout the end of the world.


[/ QUOTE ]


Touting the end of the world and wanting it to happen are two very different things. All should know on which side of the ledger I stand on this remorseless issue.

Le Misanthrope

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
So, in 2005, a naysayer may have said "Hey you are crazy to think fuel cell cars will ever be viable. The power plant weighs too much." Thank god the people working on this technology don't actually listen to pundits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Natedogg, where did you get that "quote" from? BTW, this isn't really something to get excited about. What good is a fuel cell if you don't have cheap fuel?

"Without the slightest doubt, the technology for a hydrogen economy exists or can be developed in reasonable time. Also, hydrogen is an appropriate energy carrier for particular niche applications, or it may become an important medium for electricity storage with reversible fuel cells. But hydrogen can never establish itself as a dominant energy carrier. It has to be fabricated from high grade energy and it has to compete with high grade energy in the marketplace. Hydrogen cannot win this fight against its own energy source.

Physics is eternal and cannot be changed by man. Therefore, a "Hydrogen Economy" has no past, no present and no future. The road to sustainability leads to an "Electron Economy"."
http://www.efcf.com/reports/E15.pdf

Nice try with the "fear monger" title. You stick to mass media and reporters that lack training in the fields they are reporting on, and I'll stick to the peer-review scientific journals.

[Felix_Nietzsche]

.....Gasoline tanks the size of elephants just to have a range of 200 miles.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
But hydrogen can never establish itself as a dominant energy carrier. It has to be fabricated from high grade energy and it has to compete with high grade energy in the marketplace. Hydrogen cannot win this fight against its own energy source.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oil has to be fabricated from biomass (ultimately, from solar energy). Has it won it's fight against its own energy source?

If the energy needs of the future are going to be met by wind or solar or hydroelectric, there's going to have to be some way of storing that power. I can't depend on a direct-powered solar car (I have to drive at night). I can't depend on a windmill on top of my car.

How long do I have to wait for the banana peel economy?

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
If the energy needs of the future are going to be met by wind or solar or hydroelectric, there's going to have to be some way of storing that power.

[/ QUOTE ]

Batteries are far, far more efficient and will require several times fewer power plants to charge the same amount of cars. Try reading the paper I linked to. The laws of physics are highly unlikely to be rewritten in the next 30 years.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]

Oil has to be fabricated from biomass (ultimately, from solar energy). Has it won it's fight against its own energy source?

[/ QUOTE ]

not really, oil's energy source is not today's solar power but hundreds of thousands of years of solar power from the past, we don't have a choice between the two as one is gone. When extracting Hydrogen from fossil feuls you could just use the fossil fuels instead which is what wacki is talking about.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the energy needs of the future are going to be met by wind or solar or hydroelectric, there's going to have to be some way of storing that power.

[/ QUOTE ]

Batteries are far, far more efficient and will require several times fewer power plants to charge the same amount of cars. Try reading the paper I linked to. The laws of physics are highly unlikely to be rewritten in the next 30 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why aren't we using them now?

Petroleum is a battery of sorts. It's an energy storage medium. So is hydrogen.

I ask you again: Has petroleum "won its fight against its own energy source"?

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
Why aren't we using them now?

[/ QUOTE ]

Slightly off topic, but the movie Who Killed the Electric Car attempts to answer that very question. If you want a copy, PM me about it.

The ultimate answer, though, was that battery power was definately not the limiting agent in our lack of electric cars, but rather: consumers lack of purchasing; producers lack of producing; oil companies lobbying; hydrogen fuel cell technology; and the government were to blame.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
Slightly off topic, but the movie Who Killed the Electric Car attempts to answer that very question. If you want a copy, PM me about it.

The ultimate answer, though, was that battery power was definately not the limiting agent in our lack of electric cars,

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't those cars use lead acid batteries? NiCad, Nimh, and Li-Ion are far better technologies. Despite the availability of much better technology battery powered cars still blow massive chunks. The Tesla, while extremely fast and gets great range, has a $50,000 battery pack that needs to be replaced every 400 or so charges.

I think I'm going to go to blockbuster and rent that movie.


That being said the oil companies are responsible for killing the trains and public transport sector in this country. There is no doubt about that.

Without a doubt, solid state batteries, super caps, and carbon nanotube storage, and other battery techs are the future. Most of these techs have an indefinite lifespan and will make gasoline look slow and clumsy.