Posted on 10/20/2017 3:48:51 AM PDT by markomalley
The Fine Comfort Ride Concept, which will be making its debut at the 2017 Tokyo Motor Show is yet another attempt by Toyota to convince the masses that hydrogen is the fuel of the future.
The concept, which is being pitched as the premium sedan of the future, uses a combination of clever packaging (the motors are integrated into its wheels) and clever shapes (technically speaking the car is a rhombus rather than rectangular-shaped) in order to offer ample space for six adults without extending the wheelbase beyond 3.5m.
However, the most striking thing about the car, from a visual perspective at least, is that its exterior lines and curved glass sections feel very much like the next iteration of Toyota’s current design language, rather than those of a truly space-aged, never-to-be-realized concept.
Although every major mainstream car company has invested in and is studying the capabilities of fuel cells, Toyota has been selling hydrogen-powered cars for several years and demonstrating how this form of electrification not only most closely mirrors the traditional gasoline-powered car-owner experience (long driving range, fast re-fueling times), but could also be an innovative way of power delivery. People in remote regions could conceivably use their car’s fuel cell to power their homes.
And with this concept, the company is eager to show that a fuel cell car can be a truly premium automobile, thanks in part to the extra space made available by doing away with a big internal combustion engine up front and a transmission tunnel running through the center of the cabin.
Each of the car’s six individual seats reclines and rotates so that occupants can turn to talk to each other—this is made possible by the fact that the car is rhombus-shaped. It is widest at the middle and tapers away at both ends. Or they can be folded away to create a completely open space for use as the driver sees fit. The windows double as infotainment screens with graphics and content projected on to them so that occupants aren’t reliant on tablet interfaces or other fixed sets of controls.
Toyota claims that the car has a cruising range of 1000km and that a hydrogen refueling stop should take just three minutes.
There is little doubt that in theory, hydrogen is a direct non-polluting replacement for gasoline. The only gas emitted from a fuel cell car is water vapor. However, capturing hydrogen is still an elusive process and the simplest way of separating it from other compounds for use in such applications is to burn hydrocarbons, which are fossil fuels. Until this problem can be solved then, with the exception of Toyota and Honda, most car companies’ fuel cell cars will be of the conceptual variety.
That's the bottom line: it all comes back to an ultimate origin of the energy. In this case, the only practical way to get industrial amounts of hydrogen is through electrolysis. Something has got to create the energy for the electrolysis. And that process is going to be ultimately polluting, even if the energy is produced using so-called "renewable" methods.
Sadly, you're not going to get away from the second law of thermodynamics.
That’s not true at all, electrolysis isn’t usually used for industrial scale production of hydrogen
“Sadly, you’re not going to get away from the second law of thermodynamics.”
They could probably find a liberal judge to ignore the Law..
OK, so what process is used to produce hydrogen in industrial quantities? (Asking, not challenging)
Creating hydrogen is highly efficient and clean.
I have a hard time believing they can really make hydrogen a safe fuel for consumer use. Once the vehicle goes bouncing down the road for a hundred thousand mile and get a good eight or ten years on it, there is no way the seals are going to hold. It’s hard to prevent hydrogen from leaking under ideal circumstances. H2 is a pretty small molecule.
Hell, burning wood “creates” Carbon and Water - the water can be broken down into Hydrogen and Oxygen - the Hydrogen can be used as fuel and the Oxygen can be breathed by us - burn all the forests and we will have enough water/Hydrogen/Oxygen to meet all our needs......and enough Carbon to keep the graffiti artists happy too.....
“That’s not true at all, electrolysis isn’t usually used for industrial scale production of hydrogen”
Well, not to be argumentative, or as we say in Texas start a p!$$ing contest, as this topic is not in my wheelhouse for sure. But, I’ve been reading articles about hydrogen powered cars for several years and those who mention by products or expellants mention water.
All this will come to fruition in the US as soon as we begin construction of massive power plants coal, gas, and nuclear. Solar, wind, and bio are wholly unequal to the task, in fact, wholly unequal to producing more than a small percentage of the required electricity to produce the huge quantities of hydrogen just as they for today’s needs.
Simple...methane CH4.
Water vapor is a far more powerful “greenhouse gas” than carbon dioxide.
A water vapor tax will be necessary as the proceeds from carbon taxes dwindle.
While burning hydrogen produces water, that doesn’t restrict the source of the hydrogen to being produced from water. A number of processes can separate hydrogen from hydrocarbons.
That car looks like it’s morphing into a bulldog.
Thanks. I learned something today. Entropy still applies.
But water removes itself from the atmosphere or haven’t you heard of rain and snow.
As of 2016, 96% of global hydrogen production is from fossil fuels via steam reforming (48% from natural gas, 30% from oil, and 18% from coal); water electrolysis accounts for only 4%.
Electrolysis method uses approximately 50 kilowatt-hours of electricity per kilogram of hydrogen produced.
At $0.08/kWh (approx. $4/kg), producing hydrogen with electrolysis is is 3 to 10 times costlier than with steam reformation of natural gas.
I’m with you: how many Kilocalories does it take to produce the fuel and fill a hydrogen fuel tank for a vehicle, and how many kilocalories of kinetic energy can that vehicle produce?
What “pollutants” were produced in reducing other compounds to release atomic hydrogen.
And by the way, water vapor is *the* most prevalent and active greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. So by modern ‘warmist’ standards, these vehicles are terrible polluters.
At least gasoline cars emit plant food (CO2) along with water vapor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.