We are sorry that we made an error in the editing of this paragraph. The model of this vehicle is not the "Highlander" , it's ...
... the Hindenburg.
Posted on 09/16/2002 9:32:51 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
In the parking lot of a building squeezed between Interstate 80 and the Sacramento River, Kota Manabe did something at once elemental and revolutionary: He topped off the tank of a sport utility vehicle.
The only suggestions that anything was out of the ordinary were the flame-retardant suit the Toyota engineer wore and the fuel he pumped into the Highlander: pure hydrogen.
"Basically, it's just like refueling at a normal station,' fellow engineer Kyo Hattori said.
Almost.
While hydrogen is the most-abundant element in the universe, as an automotive fuel it's about as commonplace as moon travel. There are only two hydrogen filling stations in the entire state.
The futuristic SUV being tested at the California Fuel Cell Partnership is part of an international push to create cars and trucks that run more cleanly and efficiently than any in history. Fuel cells that power the vehicles combine hydrogen and oxygen to produce electricity. They emit only water vapor and heat.
But the hydrogen-powered Highlander also exemplifies a critical problem faced by alternative vehicles: They may be friendly to the environment but they're a mystery to consumers.
That conundrum stems from several factors, including consumer uncertainty about performance and resistance to change by automakers. As a result, the spread of alternative fuel vehicles has been slow.
"The Big Three have often used future vehicles as an excuse not to produce current innovations - it's the Wimpy approach, the 'I will gladly pay you Tuesday, but don't make us do anything today to increase fuel efficiency and in 10 to 20 years we will produce a much more efficient car,'' said Daniel Becker, director of the Sierra Club's global warming and energy program.
For decades, California has been at the forefront of the clean-vehicle movement aimed at fighting smog and global warming while cutting dependence on oil. The innovations have been driven by California's Air Resources Board, which sets air-quality standards independent of the federal government.
The board says its regulations have spawned innovations in fuel cells, hybrid cars and fuel efficiency to an extent automakers never thought possible.
Now, enterprises like the California Fuel Cell Partnership aim to help meet the state's zero-emission mandate, which requires an increasing percentage of new cars and trucks to emit no pollution.
The mandate was to have taken effect next year, but auto manufacturers won a preliminary injunction in June that delays implementation for two years.
Alternative fuel vehicles are a big part of the mandate, but thus far the movement has failed to gain much speed. As of 2001, there were about 456,000 alternative-fuel powered vehicles licensed in the United States, including those that run on batteries, natural gas and ethanol, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
Another 40,000 are hybrids, in which a gasoline engine is paired with an electric motor to boost fuel efficiency and reduce emissions. These numbers are dwarfed by the 210-million gasoline and diesel cars and trucks on the nation's roads.
Automakers argue that consumers won't buy cars simply because they are environmentally friendly.
"There can be no sacrifices. This vehicle has to be a better car,' said Anthony Eggert, an engineer with Ford's Think Technologies, which is developing a hydrogen fuel-cell car.
Nor will anyone buy newfangled technology unless it's appealing, said Leonard Stobar, a professor at Art Center College of Design, the Pasadena school that turns out roughly half the world's car designers.
"You've got to make them attractive. You can make any vehicle that is good to the environment, but if I don't want to be seen in it, you won't sell it,' said Stobar, who is helping develop a three-wheel vehicle capable of driving coast to coast on a single tank of gas.
Automakers say hydrogen fuel cell vehicles come closest to fitting the bill because their power sources can be packaged in a way that allows more radical body designs. They can also pack a punch, as Eggert demonstrated on a recent test drive by gunning a Ford prototype.
They're also the cleanest thing going, since they spew only warm water vapor clean enough to inhale. Honda and Toyota plan to introduce the first hydrogen-powered vehicles in very limited numbers by year's end but claim they need another decade to perfect them. Safety is a big reason as hydrogen is highly volatile.
For the time being, that leaves battery-powered vehicles as the only pure zero-emission offerings. But their cost, limited range and recharging delays have hampered their popularity.
A number of models have come and gone. The latest are Ford's Think electric vehicles, which the automaker intends to stop selling in the United States because of lack of demand.
One way to lower emissions is to boost fuel economy. But the Bush administration has been loath to boost efficiency requirements, instead throwing its support behind hydrogen research.
Fewer than 6 percent of new U.S. cars and trucks get better than 30 miles per gallon, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In 2001, the weighted average of all new passenger cars and trucks was 20.4 mpg - a 21-year low.
Auto manufacturers say consumers don't want fuel-efficient vehicles.
"The fuel economy of our cars will be decided by consumers. They will choose the vehicles that suit them best,' said Charles Territo, spokesman for the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers.
Surveys say 60 percent of car and truck buyers are interested in fuel economy but are unwilling to compromise on design and performance, said Thad Malesh, auto analyst with Agoura Hills-based J.D. Power and Associates.
"What they are saying is, 'I still want my truck, I just want better mileage,'' Malesh said.
Despite all the challenges, cars and trucks have quietly become cleaner and more efficient.
New versions of the Honda Accord, Nissan Sentra and Toyota Prius hybrid are included in California's fleet of "super low-emissions vehicles' since they are 90 percent cleaner than the average new car. About 50,000 such vehicles have been sold or leased in California.
Some observers find that encouraging.
"There is going to be an explosion of choice for consumers,' predicted John Boesel, president of transportation technology consortium Calstart. "My neighbor will come over and say, 'John, I got a new car' and the natural question will be 'What fuel?''
If the big 3 would finally break free of their OPEC ties and produce alternative vehicles, they would the same cost or less.
Precisely.
The notion that hydrogen is an "efficient" fuel is pure malarkey.
Unlike most other fuels, it takes more energy to produce hydrogen than one can ever hope to harness by burning it.
They never seem to mention you have to use energy to break down water.
This means using a coal,natural gas or nuke to make hydrogen.
Nukes are by far the cleanest,safest choice. Had we not sabatoged nuclear technology in the 1970's we wouldn't be worried about the Middle East right now.
BINGO! I looked into a "hybrid" when I was looking for a new car. Unfortunately, after doing a little math (my parents were kind enough to send me to private school, so I can do actual additional and subtraction), I found that I would have to drive the car 10+ years to save enough money on gas to justify the increased expense. And that was figuring the average price of gas would be $1.50 a gallon, which it is not in the Midwest (we have this thing called lower taxes here...it's wonderful).
But, the stupid Californians will keep acting stupid. It is their nature and purpose.
The irony is that the only cheap source of hydrogen is the catalytic reformation of hydrocarbons (read: fossil fuels). Still, it is much cleaner than the traditional combustion of hydrocarbons.
Yea, but the cars will be 'clean'......ha ha ha ha ha
We are sorry that we made an error in the editing of this paragraph. The model of this vehicle is not the "Highlander" , it's ...
... the Hindenburg.
I thought that water vapor was a greenhouse gas.
GLOBAL WARMING ALERT! (/sarcasm .. off)
AKA, Mike.
"The first H-bomb ever 'Mike' was exploded at 7.15 am local time on November 1st 1952. The mushroom cloud was 8 miles across and 27 miles high. The canopy was 100 miles wide. Radioactive mud fell out of the sky followed by heavy rain. 80 million tons of earth was vaporised. Mike was the first ever megaton yeild explosion.
They burn coal, oil, or gas to make steam, with much of the heat going up the chimney. They use the steam to spin turbines which turn generators which generate much wasted heat in the process. The spent steam rises from a cooling tower in a giant plume, heating the surrounding atmosphere and/or water in a nearby reservoir. The power from the generators is stepped up in voltage using lossy, heat-generating transformers. They send the power across the countryside through lossy, heat-generating power lines. They step the voltage back down to useable levels at the other end using lossy, heat-generating transformers. They use the power to seperate water into H2 and O2 and wasted heat.
Maybe they should just burn the oil or gas directly in the car. Of course, we know that is a bigger threat to this country than any terrorism.
There's positively oodles of it out there. Most of it, though, is combined with oxygen... To separate them, you need a source of stored energy, which is most easily obtained in the form of coal, petroleum, natural gas, and uranium.
What price considerations does government specify when it sets regulations?
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.