Posted on 11/20/2004 10:02:46 AM PST by SierraWasp
'Hydrogen highway' bad route, group says
Alternative fuel championed by governor flawed, but proponents say give it more time
By Harrison SheppardSACRAMENTO BUREAU
Saturday, November 20, 2004 -
SACRAMENTO -- A report by a libertarian think tank seeks to debunk Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's plans for a "hydrogen highway" by claiming hydrogen-fueled vehicles will make little difference in reducing harmful emissions.
The report released this week by the Reason Foundation argues that even while hydrogen itself may be clean-burning, the processes used to manufacture and distribute hydrogen are dirty enough to nearly negate the benefits -- and the cost of conversion isn't worth the difference.
The study instead advocates more conservation, lowering freeway speed limits and making gasoline-powered cars smaller.
"Until we figure out ways to create hydrogen that are less energy-intensive or the performance of hydrogen improves, it's not a good air-quality measure," said Adrian Moore, the study's project director.
State environmental officials concede the study's argument has some merit -- if one only considers the current state of technology. But hydrogen is still an emerging science with rapid advances, and it is expected to be cheaper and more efficient in the future, said Michele St. Martin, spokeswoman for the California Department of Environmental Protection.
Ultimately, she said, the goal is to produce hydrogen through clean, renewable sources such as solar, wind and biomass, rather than natural gas.
"Every day these vehicles coming out are lighter and more fuel-efficient," St. Martin said. "At the end of the day, experts are saying hydrogen-powered vehicles will be at least twice as fuel-efficient as gasoline vehicles."
Earlier this year, Schwarzenegger proposed a "California Hydrogen Highway Network" that would result in a network of up to 200 hydrogen fueling stations on the state's freeways by 2010. The project is expected to cost $75 million to $200 million, with much of the costs picked up by the private sector.
The state has already opened three hydrogen fueling stations -- in Los Angeles, Davis and San Francisco -- and expects to have 18 more open soon, she said. City governments in those regions are using hydrogen cars in pilot programs.
Hydrogen car supporters say they are the clean-burning wave of the future, producing only water, not dirty carbon dioxide, in their exhaust.
The Reason study said it is not the emissions of individual hydrogen vehicles that is troubling, but the way in which hydrogen is produced and distributed. Hydrogen plants would most likely run on natural gas, which results in high emissions of carbon dioxide, the study argues.
The study also notes that converting some vehicles to hydrogen may actually make them greater polluters because hydrogen vehicles are heavier and therefore take more energy to generate the same horsepower.
According to the study, a Hummer H2 that is converted to hydrogen use will be about 1,000 pounds heavier. In order to get the same performance as a gasoline powered Hummer, a greater amount of carbon dioxide will be produced.
Schwarzenegger, who was criticized during the recall campaign for driving a Hummer, promised to convert one of his vehicles to hydrogen.
Last month, he appeared at a press conference at Los Angeles International Airport driving a hydrogen Hummer to open a fueling station there, although it turned out the vehicle was a prototype loaner from General Motors that is not available to the public.
V. John White, an adviser to the Sierra Club on clean-air issues, said he is skeptical of findings by the Reason Foundation because of the group's ideological bias. Hydrogen, he said, is only one part of a multipronged strategy to reduce emissions in California, and the hydrogen field continues to improve.
"The Reason Foundation doesn't accept we're living in a carbon-constrained world, and petroleum is rapidly reaching its peak and will soon begin a long decline," White said. "The alternatives to our addiction to petroleum are important to develop."
Here is their report. I browsed through it. Interesting.
http://www.rppi.org/ps322.pdf
I read that there are trillions of tiny wormholes amongst us. If someone can find a way the exploit the energy, a small amount is enough to boil the ocean's water. Someone should develop quantum energy. It would end pollution problems and would be very potent.
Where is this Reason report? Is it online? I didn't see it on their site. Link, anyone? Thanks.
Thanks. Ignore my last post!
Sorry... (but beam me up, Ptarmigan!) (and at warp speed, mind you!!) (where's that danged stargate?) (Is it the year 3100 yet?) (help! git me outa this backwards 21st century!!!) (I musta missed the bridge! Did you say it was in Hope, Arkansas?) (wur's that danged pissant that burnt that dang bridge?)
Hay! I'ma still waitin fer that Guberner of CA ta rip open his shirt an show us the "S" on his chest!!! (snort!)
I'm REALLY waitin for thought transportation... just think about Orion's Belt and SHAZZAM!!! You're THERE before you can quit thinkin about it!!! (far out, huh?) (Oh well...)
The basic concept for fuel cells was discovered in 1839.But 164 years later, the alluring prospect of replacing the internal combustion engine with devices that generate electricity from an environmentally benign chemical reaction still lies far in the future.
In the meantime, though, Firoz Rasul found a way to make lots of money from fuel-cell technology. The former head of fuel-cell pioneer Ballard Power Systems Inc. of Burnaby, B.C., who stepped down as CEO last month but remains as chairman, sold or transferred some $30 million worth of Ballard shares to family trusts and charities over the past three years.
During his 15-year tenure as CEO, Rasul was also handsomely compensated in salary and bonuses, managing at least once to appear atop the list of Canada's best-paid CEOs. In 2001, he collected $9.9 million in pay. Rasul's haul in 2002 was $5.9 million. Included in that sum, Ballard said last week, was a tripling in Rasul's bonus because of his success in meeting goals he had set for himself, such as the development of a five-year business plan.
Ballard is the sort of company where the CEO not only gets extra marks for planning ahead, but is compensated in line with Big Five bank chairmen in a year in which his company's stock plummeted 48 per cent and the annual loss deepened to $148 million, bringing to $403 million Ballard's total losses over the past four years.
(snip)
Toronto Star, Apr. 27, 2002
Enriching themselvesCanadian Corporate News, Oct 2, 2001
CEOs often pocket outrageous sums regardless of how company performs(snip)
Firoz Rasul heads Ballard Power Systems Inc. of Burnaby, B.C., a developer of fuel cells that has never turned an annual profit. The publicly traded firm has racked up total losses of $196.6 million (Canadian) in the past three years, culminating in a loss of $96.2 million last year alone. Just the same, Rasul last year earned a bonus of $191,314 on top of his salary of $551,248, even as the company was laying off 200 employees in a productivity drive.
Ballard Acquires XCELLSIS Fuel Cell Engines and Ecostar Electric Drive Systems
from DaimlerChrysler and Ford, DaimlerChrysler and Ford increase commitment and investment in Ballard(snip)
* Ballard's leading position in fuel cell intellectual property will be extended from 550 patents issued or pending to over 1,200 patents issued or pending, covering almost 500 distinct inventions.
Canada.com, March 7, 2004
Hydrogen fuel-cell goals moving closer, industry insiders believe(snip) Coincidentally, Firoz Rasul, chairman of Ballard Power Systems Ltd., the Vancouver fuel-cell pioneer, this year took over the rotating chairmanship of the California Fuel Cell Partnership, the small but influential business-government coalition that helps set the development agenda globally.
Rasul says he expects to meet with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger next month about beginning the $200-million project, a key piece of infrastructure needed to make fuel cell-powered vehicles practical.
BLD.TO BALLARD POWER SYSTEMS INC Toronto BLDP Ballard Power Systems Inc NasdaqNM
Hey Waspman! This is ignorant, too!! We don't need them Jimmy Carter speed limits back... If we conserve, they'll just slap us with a "per mile" tax... And switchin to Yugo's will just get our loved ones KILLED!!!
Who do they think they're kiddin??? Looks like themselves, to me!!!
In the longer term, something other than gasoline will have to provide transportation energy. Natural gas can substitute for gasoline better than exotic fuels like hydrogen, but natural gas supplies won't last a lot longer than oil supplies, either.
Eventually, better chemical battery technology will have to appear for electric cars, or, perhaps, hydrogen fuel might be used to power cars. Or, it could be that people of the future will have to make do with less good vehicles than the ones we've got.
Did you say tax by mile?
State will test tax on mileage (Oregon)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1284813/posts
These vehicles are not all the same technology. They're not all on the same level of maturity either. GM, actually, was one of the best, with great power. Toyota, imho, had the edge with its retrofitted 4Runner. Hyundai retrofitted a Santa Fe. These aren't crap-boxes like GM's electric failure the EV-1. These are production SUVs but with a different powerplant.
With tens of millions of motor vehicles clogging the roads, California *MUST* think differently and I believe Arnold, who supports hydrogen as does President Bush, is doing the right thing. It's the *hot* technology among car companies' R&D and "big oil" companies as well. The West Sacramento hydrogen station is owned by BP, ChevronTexaco, Exxonmobil, Shell Hydrogen, Air Products and Praxair.
I thought we were FOR that kind of pro-business, pro-market, pro-innovation solution? The hydrogen can be sourced from fossil fuels like petroleum and natural gas but there are other possibilities including solar, wind or water power. There's also coal and biomass. This is a great potential: distribution of the source of hydrogen across a wide variety of source technologies. And we can do this *at home* and not have to be beholden to OPEC and other Mid-East interests for an eternity. This technology potentially underscores our sovereignty.
The Cities of Los Angeles & San Francisco actually have hydrogen powered vehicles (Hondas) in their fleet TODAY. Toyota & Honda have hydrogen R&D facilities located in Torrance and partnerships with UC Davis and UC Irvine.
There's no secret that there are really two sticking points: the battery technology (also an issue for electric and gas/electric hybrids) still can use work and manufacturing hydrogen for use as fuel can continue pollution problems. BUT there are many ways to extract the hydrogen. Check Shell Hydrogen's website here. Look at ChevronTexaco's here
Read about the California Fuel Cell Partnership. This is Arnold (and Bush), along with "Big Oil" and "Big Auto" thinking AHEAD for California, for Californians and for America in general along with Japan, German, Canada and other nations, rather than being stuck in the oil-warfare laden past. We should push AHEAD and support the "Hydrogen Economy" efforts by private business, academics and incentives from government.
Is that Tommy McClintock I spy under the desk?
Most of the auto manufacturers have developed their own technology, licensed from another auto-maker or obtained other partners.
Where are you gonna get the energy to make, store and distribute the hydrogen? Have you done and energy balance to compare hydrogen to fossil fuel? How does it compare?
" Michele St. Martin, spokeswoman for the California Department of Environmental Protection.
Ultimately, she said, the goal is to produce hydrogen through clean, renewable sources such as solar, wind and biomass, rather than natural gas. "
I wonder why she didn't mention nuclear?
Natural gas is SH!T for fuel economy whether in buses or half-ton trucks. It's also not really as "clean" as has been sold to the public consciousness.
Natural gas, however, *can* be a source for hydrogen. So could coal, wind power, water power, solar power, biofuels, and so forth. Because it's elemental, abundant it is a good common denominator "fuel" because the potential sources are so varied and the more sources possible, the larger the fuel capacity we will have to use long-term. No more being held hostage by OPEN.
I am aware of that. Ballard is however, holder of an extraordinary amount of patents and they are also the ones that have common leadership with the California Fuel Cell Partnership (to which you even included a link in your post). Firoz and his buddies have been living a rich life, thanks to generous government 'leaders' who 'invest' in the technology. The company shareholders have all lost.
ping
I take it you mean OPEC. Anyway, yeah, if we can generate electricity cheaply enough then we can make use of hydrogen from a lot of sources economically.
However, it's much cheaper to use natural gas as a fuel in ICE engines than to use it as a source for hydrogen, which is then used in vehicles. Natural gas is less energy dense than gasoline, that's true-- but so is hydrogen! And not by a small amount, either.
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.