Volkswagen CEO does not believe in Fuel Cells

Fuel Cell Today ^ | Feb 26, 2003 | Stefan Geiger

[zx2dragon]

No mention of emissions or what is used to make this "synfuel". It will be interesting to see if this goes anywhere or disappears like the ceramic engines.

[taxcontrol]

I'm rather skeptical of any "one size fits all" technologies. People must remember that buying a car is very much a personal and emotional issue.

Yes, 140 mpg is one of the factors to consider and many would say that other factors are at least equally important. Things like comfort, safety, cargo space, performance, etc.

[way-right-of-center]

Tell the head of Volkswagen to kiss my Fharvegnuven. I'm not buying German products anyway. Maybe he can sell them in frence, that is, if the french won't surrender when they see them coming.

Seriously, The only Volkwagen I owned (2001 Jetta GLS Turbo) was the biggest POS I have ever seen. It was in the shop so much (8 times in 3 months-no joke-all conveniently after the car's crappy 24k warranty had expired ), Volkswagen USA finally called me and apologized. They never offered me any money, though. I am sure if they pursure new fuel technologies with the same fervor, the car will suck equally.

[Pylot]

I am working for a very large energy management company.

They have a dedicated R&D department looking at fuel cell technology.

These people say that a practical fuel cell, one for mass consumption is at least 5 years away and possibly further.

In working for this company I have had an opportunity to work directly with a couple of the countrys top energy engineers. They are very sceptical about fuel cells and see nothing on the horizon that is practical or even close to prime time deployment. If you mention fuel cell for a car or truck they will laugh at you and ask you a half dozen (fuel cell deployment) questions for which there is no answer.

[LibertarianInExile]

I have a question: How do you make hydrogen for fuel cells? Is it something that you can just whip up, or does it take more or less energy than gasoline does to produce?

I keep hearing this fuel cell crap like it's the coming thing, but I don't know why it's better than the hybrid stuff, which would NOT require replacement of gas stations nationally and would not require a complete retraining of every mechanic in the country.

I'm quite suspicious of the fuel cell crowd. I don't know that hybrids are better, and I ain't jumpin' on the synfuel bandwagon neither, but I kneejerk against fuel cells just like I did gasohol. Seems suspiciously like somebody's in that line of work and wants a subsidy.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

http://www.starrotor.com/indexflash.htm

this new braxton cycle seems to be workable.
I believe when prototype is finished,
it will be the engine of most cars!

[Question_Assumptions]

Any serious replacement for gasoline will need to be close to a "one side fits all" solution because any replacement will need a vast infrastructure to support it, akin to the vast infrastructure of gas stations that now dots the landscape. Small scale solutions will simply not have the efficiencies of scale to make the development of such an infrastructure worth it. That's the back-pressure that any alternative to gasoline is going to have to overcome. In that regard, any sythetic drop-in replacement for gasoline that could use the existing gas station infrastructure to dispense it would have a big advantage. Something like hydrogen will require a completely different distribution infrastrucutre from the creation through storing and dispensing it.

[zx2dragon]

There are several methods for making fuel cells. Including the manufacture needed for hydrogen, fuel cells will run almost the same price as gasoline production and the cost will be expected to fall after massive market deployment. This is according to testomony given to Congress. I haven't read anything since last year on this issue.
I think that it will all depend on what is used for the fuel type. Some of the vehicles have used hydrogen (at various pressures), liquid hydrogen, methanol, and metal hydride.
Here is a chart in PDF format of some of the things going on in the fuel cell vehicle arena.

[LibertarianInExile]

This is a car engine. I understand that fuel cells are more efficient at using hydrogen than gas engines are at using gas, and I believe they're less environmentally problematic in cars than gas engines--they emit water. But the site you sent me doesn't address the expense of producing the hydrogen for the car to run on, or the expense of refitting hydrogen distribution plants. And I have yet to hear someone tell me how we're to produce the hydrogen in an environmentally friendly fashion in the first place. Doesn't that stuff require steam to produce (like electricity)? Wouldn't that necessitate gas or methane boilers, too?

[Solson]

Agreed. Fuel Cells...for any practical use are at least 15 years away. Fuel cells will go the way of solar panels...nowhere. Now, hydrogen fuel based equipment I think has very strong merit.

[zx2dragon]

Japan has already rolled out two types of fuel cell vehicles. One a car and one a SUV. The car leases at $6500/month, the SUV at $10,000/month. Definately not prime time, but that's to be expected since they are basically handmaking each vehicle at this point. Roll it out to mass production and the cost decreases significantly.

There's already a fuel station in Nevada that will be able to service FCV. Car makers are building more this year and next in California. GM and Honda will be offering home FC generators (for use with the cars) in 2005. Home systems are expected to be deployed in homes that already have natural gas.

More stations can be found here. PDF format.

There has been a dramatic drop in fuel cell costs, while the density has increased. There will be a need for a standard since there are several different ones on the market at the moment. SOFC, Alkaline, PEM, Zinc/Air, etc. Which stack will win out?

I agree on the five years before mass consumption and it will probably be around 8. It is estimated that it will take another 20 years after that point before there is a complete rollover of fleet vehicles. Gasoline vendors are already looking at a way to retrofit existing stations for the new "hydrogen age".

[LibertarianInExile]

I understand, again, that the price for the engine will be the same, and the costs of all hydrogen-related stuff would fall if we got economies of scale working for hydrogen and hydrogen-powered engines. What I don't understand is, other than the environmental plus, why we'd want to do this, or subsidize it. This would be true of electric cars, too, and subways, and buses, but I don't want to have to use any of those things, either, and I don't want the government doing anything to build or help their systems take root, either. That's not what I pay taxes for.

I haven't heard anyone tell me why we don't want to go more and more hybridized, which would mean less screwing around with the current distribution system. Hydrogen would mean natural-gas-like distribution, maybe even centralized distribution, of fuel.

It would require each gas station to dispense differently, too. Ever filled a propane tank? It's a lot different than driving to the gas pump.

I can't say I don't like the idea of a better environment--I'm just not sure why hydrogen is better than hybrids or why the Dept O'Energy wants us to do it so much. And if it costs us more energy to produce than gas, maybe it's not so environmentally friendly.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Read the complete web site

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[zx2dragon]

Why get rid of old King George? Who wants to rock the boat? Why in the world would we want to change our postal distribution to support overnight delivery for the masses?

Do you seriously think that the corporations will be cut out while the gov runs it all? The corps have put more into this than our gov. Their current distribution centers will still be used, just revamped.

Hydrogen refilling will be almost exactly as it is for gasoline now. Pay and then pump away.

[zx2dragon]

Why they are better than the hybrids and what we have today.

They are much more efficient, a very low fuel consumption, very quiet in operation, no more oil changes, steam is the byproduct (methanol based vehicles have some waste, but much smaller than today's gas waste), less mechanical stress to the car, and fewer dollars heading overseas to people who want to blow us up. Notice, I did not say all, there will still be a big demand for oil.

[MainFrame65]

"Maybe he can sell them in frence, that is, if the french won't surrender when they see them coming. "

Nah. Ya can't reach your wallet with both hands in the air.

[MainFrame65]

Any internal combustion engine is subject to a theoretical uppre limit of efficiency due to the way it operates. Diesel is at the top, somewhere around 30%, and gasoline engines for cars are in the low 20's. Fuel cells can easily exceed 80%, and electric motors 50% or better, so the combination can deliver twice the power to the wheels from the same amount of fuel - if they can use the same fuel.

In some cases they can. Internal combustion engines can run on hydrogen, methane, propane, gasoline, methanol, ethanol, or diesel and air, with specific mixtures and timings matched to the fuel in use. And while some fuel cells require hydrogen, other kinds (solid oxide) of fuel cells can operate on any of the other fuels, as long as they are sulfur-free.

Fuel cells are currently expensive to build, but since they have no moving parts, at some point the manufacturing process will be fully automated and far less expensive. Look what has happened to the price of memory and processor chips, or disk storage. Fuel cells do contain an expensive catalyst, but the amount needed per unit will decline, and the catalytic converter, which uses the same catalyst, will no longer be needed.

The electric motors these cars use are simpler to build than the complicated combustion engines in today's cars. And they can run efficiently over a much larger RPM range, (and even backward) which can eliminate a separate transmission.

Today's cars are the quintessential mass produced device. They virtually define the concept of economy of scale. Someday the fuel cell car might take over that title - and if and when it does, it will win on cost.

[Pylot]

Well that is impressive information, you seem to be more dialed into the topic than I am.

One of the big obstacles my engineer friend presents is the hydrogen. It is not realistic to use it in any massive form because it is so explosive.

While driving down a freeway he points to a semi and says imagine the two side fuel tanks are both full of hydrogen. There is no way to make it safe from an accident point of view.

So he tells me one of the biggest challenges is to manufacture the hydrogen "on the fly". That is in usable quantities at the site of the cell, but not in quantities that would be dangerous in the event of an accident. It is a huge challenge that consumes so much energy that the practicallity of a mobile fuel cell diminishes quickly.

This at least according to my engineer friend.

[zx2dragon]

I have been interested in renewable energy for a little while now. It is only recently that there has been impressive breakthroughs; mainly fuel cell, solar and wind.

Hydrogen is less volatile than gasoline. It requires a 4% mixture in the air before it will ignite. Gasoline requires only 1%.

Hydrogen spills will be no big deal as it will quickly dissipate as water. Also keep in mind that hydrogen is non toxic.

Now for delivery. There are some refueling stations that are looking into (or are using) solar power in order to create hydrogen. Other alternatives to hydrogen would be natural gas (like Honda's Civic GX coming out next year, all natural gas plus a hook up to refuel at home), propane, or biomass (methane). Hydrogen gives us the purer form, only extra left over is water. Even though the other gases would have detectable emmissions, they will be much lower than what we have coming out now.