US dumps support for fuel cell cars
May 11, 2009 by David Twomey
The plan by former United States President George W. Bush to spend US$1.2 billion to develop cars powered by hydrogen fuel cells has been dumped by President Barack Obama, saving taxpayers $100 million a year.
US Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the government preferred to target more immediate energy-saving solutions.
“The probability of deploying hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles in the next 10 to 20 years is low,” Energy Department spokesman Tom Welch told reporters.
Mr Welch cited the immense cost of developing an infrastructure of hydrogen pipelines and fuelling stations for the cars. He also said there were technical obstacles to producing hydrogen and storing it in vehicles.
President Obama’s 2010 budget proposal calls for US$68.2 million to be spent on fuel-cell technologies, down from US$169.0 million last year, and the savings comes from cancellation of funds for vehicle development, Mr Welch said.
Most major car companies are working on fuel cell technology for cars and Honda has begun selling its FCX Clarity fuel cell vehicle in Japan and the US.
The move will certainly slow the development of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles as there will now be no government funding in the US for research or to support the roll-out of infrastructure to assist the development of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
The Energy Department will continue to pay for research into stationary fuel cells that could be used for non-automotive purposes, he said.
In his 2003 State of the Union address, Mr Bush proposed spending US$1.2 billion to develop hydrogen-powered vehicles.
“With a new national commitment, our scientists and engineers will overcome obstacles to taking these cars from laboratory to showroom, so that the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free,” President Bush said.
The Bush administration spent more than US$500 million on research into producing and distributing hydrogen so it could be used in cars powered by fuel cells.
After Mr Bush’s speech, Philip Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust, said the plan was too small to make much of a difference.
“This was window-dressing pure and simple,” M
No tags for this post.
I think America just wants to do what they always do..
Some other country invents the new technology then they acquire or buy it out and claim as their own.
100 million, nice saving
That should fund america’s current war’s for a week or so.
And people say Obama is progressive. Seriously, wouldn’t be surprised if the real reason is because their local manufacturers have put all their eggs in the EV basket, and so supporting hydrogen fuel cell technology would only help overseas manufacturers, ie Honda and BMW.
Obama won’t be up for election in 10-20 years, so why bother spending money on this now. Especially when he needs to fund GM.
There’s another step back in going green.
I’m not sure why they want to continue to rely on oil. 100 million dollar a year is peanuts considering how much is being spent at the moment bailing out all these dodgy companies and fighting wars that shouldn’t even have happened.
This is just going to slow progress down and make them continue to spend billions on oil per year with no progress being made to stop relying on oil.
Ridiculous decision.
Good to know they’ve got their priorities in order. I was actually thinking what Tom said.
It took them this long to realise people don’t want V8s so no reason they shouldn’t be completely behind on this too: jump on the EV bandwagon when Japan and Europe are already looking ahead to hydrogen.
God what an idiot. The only thing I can think of that Obama isn’t doing better than George Bush. So what are immediate sollutions? Hybrids? Because we all now know that they aren’t all that green. Hydrogen is the only way and it should be funded.
Check out this video,http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7365305906535911834 here’s some good bits 33:59mins to 39:13 Pantone Geet fuel processer,01:05:07 to 01:11:35 electic car that never needs a recharge and 01:20:27 to 01:31:48 crystal energy converter.
Fundamental failure…
Protecting the immediate future and ignore the real long-term issue will solve nothing!
The Italians, Germans and Japanese will perfect the technology.
Just be patient. Iv’e seen BMW cars running on cells, Honda and Toyota are onto it and Fiat as well. Ive even seen an electric car by Fiat that did 30km/h in their museum from 1904, so its always been in their intentions.
I find it hard to believe the US admin are planning 10-20 years ahead they should check the dipstick on oil reserves.
Electric will not be viable in this term of office for Obama and I doubt even in the next.
Do they really believe that an 18-wheel truck is going to be able to travel coast-to-coast on batteries? Or is there going to be a second generation of investment in railroads? The last time big bucks were spent there was in 1880s. We may be able to get 100 maybe 200 miles in EV but recharging is still too slow.
H2 is viable in California thanks to a Republican Governor – Arnold Schwarzenegger and will be the fuel of the rest of the world.
This is an awful decision when billions are being wasted in less fruitful ventures by this government.
This doesn’t surpise me at all. The Hydrogen enconomy numbers just don’t stack up. When you look at the energy loss from producing 100Kw of energy, then packaging this into H2, getting this to your H2 network then into your fuel cell car. The amount of energy left to drive the wheels is like 30% of what you started with. Then there’s the cost of the infrastructure and the cars. Even the honda has a price tag of 1M US.
Take 100kw of energy, pump it over the grid and into a battery and amount of energy left to drive the wheels is about 80%. Given we have electricity everywhere all ready. And battery technology is only improving (look up the new Nanotech battery). The pros for a simpler EV will out swing Hydrogen in 10 years easy.
The only reason Bush backed Hydrogen is because he’s an oil man, the majority of hydrogen production comes from fossil fuel using GAS only 5% is from Electrolysis. The oil companies favour H2 because you have to fill up at their stations where they can control the supply and price. Just look at the majority of media featuring a H2 filling station and you’ll see a petrol company logo backing it.
The saudi oil minister has already been vocal on the subject of ethanol blended fuel. Whats he going to say if we all start pluging are cars into the wall at home & work and sending our cash to local energy suppliers?