BMW is abandoning its work on hydrogen-powered internal combustion engines, admitting that the technology has run its course.
Despite rumours that the Bavarians were getting out of new fuel altogether, the company has confirmed that its future efforts with hydrogen will be focused on fuel cells and improving storage systems like cryogenic reservoirs.
BMW and Mazda have been the only two mainstream manufacturers to seriously pursue internal combustion hydrogen technology, with most others preferring to use it to supply a fuel cell and produce electricity.
The main advantages are cleaner running and the continuation of the internal combustion engine, a piece of machinery that you could say has had considerable investment poured into it over the past 150 years.
But the negatives proved too much for BMW in the end.
The tank in the Hydrogen 7 chilled the gas to a liquid at -253 degrees (rather than compressing it to around 800 bar as others have done), a process that takes around a third of the energy in the tank to achieve.
The hydrogen was also rather unstable in the onboard storage and evaporated from full to empty within three weeks.
Fuel efficiency was also a worry, returning figures of 29.4 litres/100km and taking the car no more than 200km.
BMW says it will continue to service the 100 7 Series-based Hydrogen 7s it developed, but future advancements to internal combustion hydrogen units appear as good as dead.
Read between the lines – on going development of regular petrol and diesel engines as with hybrid technology will be the focus for the seeable future. It appears good ‘ole Toyota wasn’t far wrong after all … mmm !!
H2 ICE cars have always been an utter waste of time, I doubt even Fuel Cells will make it to production. We’ll have to wait until 2015 to see for sure.
BMW are pushing their EV mini’s everywhere, so I guess the writing is truely on the wall for H2 as an alternative fuel.
No Lazy bones, it’s just too expensive to process Hydrogen in these current times. Look back at the tunr of the twentieth century, the combustion engine was the tits, yet in the 50′s we had jet engines propelling craft through the sky. Fast forward 50 years and combustion engines have come alongway as has the Jet aircraft. It’s all about time and cost. BMW do not have the money to research it, far to early in the piece. Give it a few more decades and Hydrogen will be back oin the agenda as ways to produce it cheaply are discovered.
H2 has been in development for nearly 50 years. The main problem being it takes a lot more energy to produce H2 than it gives you back. It can’t ever be classed as sustainable. In a word, H2 is doomed.
Correction, it takes alot of energy to produce it from water, if produced from natural gas it is far more energy efficient but costs in the region of U$2 a kilogram, which means to be a profitable fuel it would have to sell for more than 3 dollars a litre. Fossil fuels are cheaper to produce and sell, hence Hydrogen is to expensive to make in our current time.
Well 3 things there.
1) Producing a new renewable fuel from a fossil fuel is pointless. We need something totally renewable. But this is the main reason the oil companies love H2.
2) What is the point of turning Natural gas into H2 then H2 into electricity to power a car. You might as well just run a Natural Gas powered car. Everytime you convert energy you lose something
3) What do we do when there is no more gas?
Hydrogen will be back in about 20 years when oil skyrockets. The big companies know that H2 will power their vehicles way in the future and they should experiment with it now to see what has to be improved. The article said the H2 ICE would be abandoned and not Hydrogen altogether. Look at the fuel cell in the Honda FCX Clarity. With a bit more R&D and investment the costs should come down. Look at the batteries in Hybrid tech, the were damned expensive when they first arrived and now look at what Toyota and Honda have done with them.
Yeah Shak, Where are you going to get all that H2 when the oil runs out?? Currently 80% comes from Natural Gas. As Oil demand peaks, gas demand will start to strain.
Also keep in mind that a fuel cell car has an Electric Motor, Lithium Ion battery + a Fuel Cell Stack. Kind of makes sense to dump the Fuel Cell Stack (The most expensive part) and use a bigger battery. Even the Honda FCX uses 3 times the energy of something like the Nissan Leaf.
Then consider this, once you start plugging in your car and running for 200kms for a few bucks. Are you really going to switch to a more expensive technology where an Oil Company governs the price of the H2 you put in your car?? Even at todays prices an FCX costs $20USD to fill up.
For Nuclear Fission they say sea water.
Nuclear fission requires H2, so maybe they could extract it form sea water o.0.
Nuclear thermal prodcution of H2 will be the future, cheap and plentiful, we just need to replace coal fired powerstation with nuclear plants.
Fortunately it’s the auto companies that will decide when and where they will sell fuel cell electric cars fueled by hydrogen. 90% of the major automakers are continuing to invest and making good progress in refining the technology (cost down, size down, performance up). It’s these experts that are showing us this is viable technology. They’ll sell consumers a 100% electric vehicle with the driving range, fueling convenience, and performance they demand.
Not that simple, the auto companies are dependant on the oil companies to provide the H2 infrastructure. Shell is the most proactive of all the majors to do this. Even then you can’t hide the lack of efficiency of a fuel cell compared to a simple battery. Thats why in the next 5 years almost all the majors will have a production EV of some kind. But none will have a Fuel Cell car to sell.
Then comes the problem of cost, fuel cells are very expensive and don’t last the lifetime of the car, not to mention they are far more expensive than batteries. Most of the current fuel cells available are limited to 100Kw of power. Doesn’t really ignite the passion of driving with just 100kw to play with does it.
lazybones
“fuel cells are very expensive and don’t last the lifetime of the car, not to mention they are far more expensive than batteries”
- NOT True, how about you do some research before you start talking about something you clearly now nothing about. The newest fuel cell stack from GM is designed to last 200.000 miles, and has a price of $30/kW, on the other hand, the best Li-ion batteries on the market(Tesla) cost about $200/kW, and are designed to last about 3-5 years.
“Most of the current fuel cells available are limited to 100Kw of power”
-Are you joking? stop talking about Fuel Cells, you just don’t know a thing about them.
It’s actually the low power applications (small city cars) that have power outputs of 100kW and under that will be powered by batteries. All the other applications with higher power demand (SUV, Sports cars,trucks) will have a combination of batteries and fuel cells, this is because of the high power demand, which makes it impossible to propel them with batteries only due to range.
it is obvious that you have some misguided fascination with battery powered vehicles, i suggest you start thinking outside the box and do some real reseach.
Snaez, i’ve done a lot of research on the technology and clearly your clueless. GM Fuelcell stack for less that 3K, your dreaming mate. The cheapest stack i’ve see costs $500USD per KW so 50K USD for a 100Kw Fuelcell Stack. Compared to 30K USD for a Tesla replacement ESS. Remember the Tesla is 185Kw motor. Show me where you got your price!!!
“The newest fuel cell stack from GM is designed to last 200.000 miles”
The Nanotech battery being used in the Lightning GT will last 3 Million Kms. This car will be onsale next year. When will the GM Stack be available. 2015, 2020 ,2030.
“All the other applications with higher power demand (SUV, Sports cars,trucks) will have a combination of batteries and fuel cells, this is because of the high power demand, which makes it impossible to propel them with batteries”
Yup, you don’t understand the technology to make a statement like that.
Since I provide facts and you don’t, why don’t you read about these products:-
Tesla Roadster (A Battery Sports Car),
Killacycle (A Battery Super Bike),
Ford Focus BEV (A Normal non City Car),
Nissan Leaf (A Normal non City Car),
Smith Electric Truck (Yes a Truck)
And saving the best til last (An SUV), there’s this famous guy who owns an electic RAV 4. His name is Tom Hanks, you may of heard of him.
Name me one FC car that has a power output of more than 100kw.
It’s a secret that Toyota technology > BMW technology. But BMW like to muck around with big alloys, low profile tyres, firm springs and shocks.
I wouldn’t say firm springs and shocks on evey BMW, blame those run flat tyres!!
LOL. Anti spam = BMW
Yes, Toyota tech REALLY IS as good as German tech. Thats why the whitegoods manufacturer has reliable N/A engines putting out over 100hp/litre of displacement into production, and not trying to pump 240kw of stupidity through the front wheels without the aid of a tricky diff to stop it understeering into the nearest *insert (pole, tree, car, wall, house, garage, Segway, pedestrian, hampster) here*. (Funny how it always comes back to TuRD)
Sure, BMW have the answer to a question no-one asked with H2 ICE, but they gave it a good crack. Could T have done better?