Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Focus is on hydrogen (BANKRUPTING THE SAUDIS ALERT)
The Daily Telegraph ^ | October 10, 2002 | Jesse Crosse

Posted on 10/10/2002 2:11:29 AM PDT by MadIvan

If you are wondering how we will all get around once the oil wells run dry, you might take comfort from Ford's latest hydrogen fuel-cell electric Focus. It goes into limited service with commercial fleets in 2004.

It currently exists as a one-off prototype valued at about £2.65 million but while its price might make an insurance broker blush, its performance won't have the same effect. It has the kind of urge usually associated with a 2.5-litre Mondeo and its refinement is surprisingly convincing.

Appearing at this year's Challenge Bibendum, an event described by organiser Michelin as "a rolling roadshow for environmentally friendly vehicles", the Focus joined more than 50 other contestants ranging from a vegetable oil-fuelled VW Golf to a standard petrol-powered Alfa Romeo Brera. Inaugurated in 1998, the event ran from Los Angeles to Las Vegas last year, via the cloying dust and dry heat of the Nevada Desert (Motoring, Nov 10 2001). This year's soggier route - from Heidelberg to Paris - gave us a glimpse of what we can expect to be driving in future.

For many, the end-game is the fuel-cell engine that consumes hydrogen and air to generate electricity, with heat and water as by-products. Using pure hydrogen, fuel cells produce no planet-warming carbon dioxide (CO2 ) and, assuming the hydrogen is also manufactured on a CO2 -free basis, guarantee a guilt-free trip.

But with the hydrogen economy a way off yet, short-term plans to reduce exhaust emissions in conventional cars include alternatives such as natural gas and bio-fuel made using rapeseed oil or even alcohol. The European Commission is advocating the use of these eco-blended fuels as a matter of urgency and this year's Challenge Bibendum reflected that. With so many different kinds available, however, life could become complicated. So far the most taxing decision car buyers face is whether to stick with the standard radio or splash out on a six-CD autochanger. Will we cope with choosing between ethyl-tertiary-butyl-ether or vegetable oil methyl esters? Probably not.

Hybrid entries, such as the Toyota Prius, Honda Insight and new Honda Civic IMA (due in the UK next year), will play a role in cutting fuel consumption and CO2 but fuel-cell lobbyists insist the global car population is expanding so fast that CO2 levels will be back where they started in just a few years. For them, the fuel cell is the only answer and work is progressing quickly. In fact, the improvement in Ford's Focus FCV (fuel-cell vehicle) Bibendum entry beggars belief when you compare it with last year's version.

Accompanied by fuel-cell programme marketing manager (and former F15 pilot) Phil Chizek, test engineer Brian Gillespey and planning analyst Mark Sulek, the Focus endured a two-hour fuel consumption test around the Hockenheim grand prix circuit, near Heidelberg, and outpaced a production Toyota Prius in the process. Later, it completed a three-day trip from Hockenheim to Paris in the hands of sceptical hacks. "This is no hand-built mule cobbled together in a research lab," said Chizek. "It's the first prototype from the production programme and the first to be made using production processes and production tooling."

It also has a unique body made from aluminium, stainless steel and carbon-fibre, which saves 300kg compared with a standard Focus and partially offsets the extra weight of the new 902 fuel-cell engine from Canadian company Ballard.

From the driving seat, the Focus FCV starts silently and is a revelation compared with its predecessor. The irksome rasp of a hidden compressor forcing air into the fuel-cell engine has been all but replaced by subdued sighs and whispers of discreet aerospace technology when the throttle is squeezed. The electric motor characteristically underwrites its modest 88bhp with substantial torque of 170lb ft, roughly equivalent to that of a 2.5-litre V6 and easily enough to cope with the cut and thrust of Strasbourg's rush-hour traffic. Later, in gathering gloom and humming along at 60mph on the open road, the most intrusive sounds were the wind and tyres rolling over tarmac. But with a potential top speed of 115mph and the ability to accelerate to 62mph in 13.5 seconds, the performance of the Focus is already on a par with a conventional family car.

We stopped for fuel after 50 miles, in the informal surroundings of a French transport cafe car park. Pure compressed hydrogen was piped from a tanker into the Ford's boot-cramming, cylindrical fuel tank at a pressure of 5,000 pounds per square inch. Minutes later, we were on our way, carrying enough fuel to take the Focus 200 miles. Stringently tested 10,000psi tanks are in the offing and will double that range, so it almost seems as if the future has arrived sooner than expected.

Despite the huge strides being made, manufacturers agree that significant numbers of fuel-cell vehicles won't appear in private driveways until at least 2010. Given the rate of progress demonstrated by Ford in the past 12 months, however, that possibility becomes more believable by the minute.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: autoshop; energylist; focus; ford; hydrogen; saudis; science; stuffthesaudis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 last
To: MadIvan
We should be working on fuel cells as a matter of defence priority

We are. Hydrogen has many advantages. Building the support infrastructure will take time, and since we would replace a huge, expensive oil-based infrastructure it will be expensive. It's going to take years, decades to convert over whether it is a national defense priority or not. Not a quick solution, but inevitable.

61 posted on 10/10/2002 9:26:58 AM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nonstatist
Arent we talking about 10000 psi tanks of H2 ?? Hydrogen gas has a huge explosive range.

Dude, he works for a fuel cell company. Fuel cells typical store hydrogen in a solid matrix. No high pressure, no large volumes of hydrogen and oxygen being mixed.

The downsides to fuel cells right now is longevity, reusability and operation efficiency, not combustability.

62 posted on 10/10/2002 9:27:36 AM PDT by WileyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Bump for later! Thanks.
63 posted on 10/10/2002 9:29:43 AM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
I think the explosive power of an 8 oz. cup of gasoline has been compared to either 3 or 5 sticks of dynamite. Of course you have to create a combustible mixture with air then ignite it. Shell's website has some info I think.
64 posted on 10/10/2002 9:47:41 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek; WileyC
Pure compressed hydrogen was piped from a tanker into the Ford's boot-cramming, cylindrical fuel tank at a pressure of 5,000 pounds per square inch. Minutes later, we were on our way, carrying enough fuel to take the Focus 200 miles. Stringently tested 10,000psi tanks are in the offing and will double that range, so it almost seems as if the future has arrived sooner than expected.

This, from the article.. 10,000 psi tanks and an invisible flame (if ignited) ?!.

As mentioned earlier, H2 might not be too safe in an underground garage or tunnel, etc (nowhere for the gas to rise to).. I don't know , but these sound like reasonable safety issues that would have to be addressed,... right?

65 posted on 10/10/2002 10:06:40 AM PDT by Nonstatist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

TAKE BACK THE SENATE!
Click The Logo to Donate
Click The Logo
DONATE TODAY!!!.
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
Become A Monthly Donor
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

66 posted on 10/10/2002 10:07:56 AM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
One thing we should also remember - one thing that helped the long post-World War II boom was cheap fuel. With the advent of a hydrogen based economy, cheap energy will be back in style. And this time the Arabs won't have a monopoly on it.

Where are you proposing to get this "Cheap" H2? It does not grow on trees!

67 posted on 10/10/2002 10:09:43 AM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
The most primitive and efficient way to use coal is for heating. You can approach 85%-100% efficiency there. Uranium can never be used in such a basic way....cannot be used in a simple furnace or cook stove. Nuclear yields energy for man only via electricity generation.

Actually, U can be used very efficiently in heating via warm water. Did a project on this in college.

68 posted on 10/10/2002 10:12:57 AM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
Yes, and the huge flames you see on the Hindenburg footage are mainly from the Diesel fuel on board.
69 posted on 10/10/2002 10:13:49 AM PDT by Tony in Hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Use nuclear energy and coal - sources which do not require the Saudis.

Then it is NOT cheap energy as you previously posted.

70 posted on 10/10/2002 10:14:55 AM PDT by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"Only problem is there are coal burning plants (making electricity) in the UK and no gasification plants making hydrogen for automobile fuel cells."

Yes, but no new technology needs to be developed for the gasification. A chemical company I worked for had a contract with the DOE (during the days of the Carter-induced "oil shortage"), gasifying coal, using combined-cycle gas turbine-steam turbine generators to generate electricity, and capturing the low-grade steam to use for process heat. Overall cycle efficiency of energy capture was on the order of 80% (note that is NOT electrical efficiency, but combined cycle efficiency including the use of the process heat). They could start building these plants tomorrow.

71 posted on 10/10/2002 10:21:06 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: RandallFlagg
That is called a multi-fuel engine, which has been a standard military diesel engine since at least the 60's, perhaps even the 50's.
72 posted on 10/10/2002 10:28:55 AM PDT by XBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
How much equipment does it take to generate a few milliwatts of electric via cold fusion?

------------------------------

The principle requirement is engineering creativity and brainpower. That's where we are lacking.

73 posted on 10/10/2002 10:45:15 AM PDT by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Thanks. How about this one: 

Does it make more sense to extract the coal in our great western deposits and burn it in situ? To generate hydrogen there and somehow transport it to where it's needed?

Or to mine the coal and ship by rail (by barge?) to distant power and hydrogen generation plants?


74 posted on 10/10/2002 11:27:45 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"Does it make more sense to extract the coal in our great western deposits and burn it in situ? To generate hydrogen there and somehow transport it to where it's needed?"

"Or to mine the coal and ship by rail (by barge?) to distant power and hydrogen generation plants?"

REAL hard questions. Gasifying in-situ takes a lot of water, which most western sites are pretty short of. I suspect it would come down to whether the decision was made to actually go for the total "hydrogen economy". I think then one could justify building pipelines to the coal sources, pipe water in and hydrogen out. But it would take a really good, complete economic analysis to chose between the two cases.

75 posted on 10/10/2002 1:39:50 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
One thing this post totally ignores is that Hydrogen fuel cells put huge amounts of hydroxil acid into the atmosphere - which is a far more serious "global warming" pollutant than CO2.
76 posted on 10/10/2002 1:53:02 PM PDT by Frumious Bandersnatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cinFLA
Where are you proposing to get this "Cheap" H2? It does not grow on trees!

Maybe not, but there is a researcher who has convinced a microscopic organism (algae, I think?) to produce H2. If his research pans out, then all you need is nutrients (probably from the effluvia of any city) and sunlight.

77 posted on 10/10/2002 2:25:55 PM PDT by WileyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: js1138
And why wouldn't they profit. Who else has the capital, the engineers, the distribution network?

I don't have a problem with big oil getting in on the action. I'm just speculating that they may try to throw a wrench into the works to prevent others from getting in first.

78 posted on 10/11/2002 1:20:03 AM PDT by powderhorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson