Comments on: Honda’s hydrogen future may lie with solar home refueling

By: Lazybones

Lazybones — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:51:43 +0000

I’m all up for technology Mike and its at least good to see so many inovations in such a short period of time, all trying to have a go at replacing the grand old ICE. Even the compressed air solution looked good for a while. For me anything that cuts out but big oil has to worth a go, they are now just too powerful for their own boots. It wouldn’t be so bad if we saw H2 filling stations sponsored by some hippie tree hugging group, but thats just not case.

Producing H2 from feedstock is a good inovation, but its never going to yield the sort of demand thats required for a Hydrogen economy. I mean we need some big numbers to replace oil, the world uses 80Million barrels per day. Given a barrel is about 250ltrs and the energy density is higher than uncompressed H2. It gives you some idea of the scale of the problem.

I think the most efficient technology is the only way forward. But i’ll be checking some of those links you mentioned

By: Mike Halpin

Mike Halpin — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:35:08 +0000

Lazybones please do not let a bad rap with an oil company cloud your judgement on an exciting technology that keeps getting better by the day. Do not take my word for it but check out the glowing reports of the following companies who have replaced batteries with fuel cells in their fleet of fork lift trucks, Bridgestone Firestone’s, Wal-Mart, United Natural Foods, Wegmans Foodmarkets, Vestas, and this is only the start of the trend.
I am not knocking batteries as I do believe our future electronic vehicles will be powered by a combination of fuel cells, batteries and super capacitors.
Hydrogen can be produced from a variety of feedstocks if we produce it from fossil fuels that is still okay in my book. We steam reform it the same way we produce petrol, the difference is that we have a clean fuel when we use it in a fuel cell and it has twice the efficiency of an internal combustion engine.
The nano technology for splitting water with sunshine gets better by the day and you do not need clean water, urine is a great feedstock it takes less power to split it.
When you have had a rethink on H2 you never know we might be pissing in the same pot to gain that extra mileage.
Open your heart and mind and let the sun shine in we are at the crossroads and are ready to reinvent the automobile, you can’t stop progress!

Mike H.

By: Lazybones

Lazybones — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:47:45 +0000

Technically Mike your right, infact just 2 years ago I was very pro H2. Its only when like so many I starting doing my own research on why don’t we have it already did I then realise we’ve all been taken for a ride.

I’ve explained on many occasions why I think H2 if flawed when used for Automotive. Fuelcells are an awesome space age technology, but useless for cars.

The problem I have, having worked in the oil industry is trust. I’m totally sick of the way we constantly get mugged by the oil companies. Just last week before the long public holiday a 17c rise overnight in the price of PULP, yet no signifcant rise in the price of oil.

So just imagine for a minute. We have a H2 infrastructure, affordable H2 cars, zero emissions…but wait a minute I still have to go to a petrol/H2 station run by an oil company to fill up. Do you think they will stop ripping us off with H2 prices?…. no chance. Just look at the H2 infrastructure we already have in Norway & California. Supply & Price is controlled by various oil companies with Shell being the biggest player.

The only way is to cut them out of the equation and plug your car into the local grid and support the local energy economy or go off grid and produce your own with wind and or solar.

By: JEKYL & HYDE

JEKYL & HYDE — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:23:54 +0000

HERE’S MY TWO CENTS..

i’m looking at doing a 3 kw solar system for my home to reduce a VERY PAINFULL electricity bill.its $12500 cost is made somewhat easier due to the fact that if i’m quick enough the gov’t will be forced to buy “my” power back at 3 times what i pay for it.the potential savings over a seven year period could be in the order of 20-30 grand.

so would i pay say $25000(in reality its probably double that) for a 6kw station to recharge a hydrogen powdered car to go 50-60kms a day.michael caton’s famous words from “the castle” come to mind…

By: clayton yaun

clayton yaun — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:37:40 +0000

All these zero emissions cars are promoted with mothing but hype. Basically they are all electric cars…..have to be plugged in to recharge…..and surprise ! the electricity they are plugged into is sually generated with using COAL or some other EMISSIONS PRODUCING fossil fuel ….so NOTHING is gained. NO THING ! The holdup for all this well intended effort will be nothing short of cheap electricity generated using renewable technology like solar of some sort……NOT Photovoltaic which is weak and expensive….you get nothing for your money and never will. This guy from Bloom energy is a deciever too. He reminded me of the PV promoters. He held up a little 1 KW box saying that it would power one house in Europe…..then he held up two little boxes and claimed that it would power ONE American house. I split a gut laughing…….two kilowatts won’t even run the air conditioner on the average American home. 4 KW might run a 1 ton AC unit……and my AC is a 5 ton unit. I hate all this deception…….and then well intended American go waste money for their good causes…..and it is wasted. Right now, thermal solar will buy your 5 times the power you will get with a PV system……..Go get a thermal solar hot water heater with your money and wait for some other good products with a short payback period to come onto the market. Electricity made via some concentrated solar will probably pave the way….until then…..don’t waste your money.

Oh , the government tax credits, Why does our government give the same percentage tax credit for PV as for Thermal solar when thermal is about 5 time more efficient? Why the extra waste?

By: Mike Halpin

Mike Halpin — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:30:15 +0000

A lot of people seem to be confused about hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and do not consider them as electronic vehicles [EV's] they are one and the same all have electric motors driving the wheels. The difference is how we produce the electrons the old way is to store them in a battery the new way is to produce them on demand by stripping them from hydrogen via a fuel cell. Both have their merits there is a growing trend to replace the batteries in fork lift trucks with HFC’s because they are more cost effective.
HYDROGENHEADS and BATTERYHEADS should unite as we all believe that electronically powered vehicles is the way forward in this electronic age we live in.
Mike H. founder HYDROGENHEADS

By: Jim Jonas

Jim Jonas — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:09:17 +0000

H2 hydrogen will be the way we will go.I know there are people who totally disagree.
I want every kind of new energy with no oil base. We as far as I am concern need to get off oil.Oil was less expensive now we will be at $3.00 a gallon. We can’t budget nor can we afford to keep this up. I hope H2 fuel cells and jobs become a reality.Oil base Products need to be change.Plastics are on the floor of the Pacific ocean.I know this plastics need to be picked up off the floor of the Ocean and maybe no longer used. Pollution that has affected our food supply.OK Please lets get this moving.

By: Pauly

Pauly — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:40:40 +0000

Also dont forget the FC-X that you see in the image above, is still a Prototype. If you were to buy it, it would cost millions!

Thats why the cars are leased to people in the U.S.A and Japan.

There is still alot of work that needs to be done on them, and seriously… Good on Honda for putting so much effort behind it. They have come along way, and they have a infastructue long way to go still.

But their aim was to have a Hydrogen car on the road that people could buy that would be the same price as a Honda Legend (70 – 80K)

Going off the suspected price of the Volt and these LEAF and IMEV cars, it doesnt seem to bad.

But it all comes down to our Government to supply us with the correct refuelling to adobt these kinds of cars.

By: Lazybones

Lazybones — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:57:15 +0000

You can’t change the Physics, H2 is classed as an energy carrier. You always need more energy to get H2 then it gives you. Its has and will always have a negative EROI when produced using renewables. The only people backing H2 are the oil companies because 80% of H2 comes from fossil fuel.

We’ve been driving cars for over 100 years, and H2 research is nearly 50 years old. Its window of opportunity is almost completely lost. Its time to accept this white elephant.

“The only things EVs do, is transfer the problem of pollution from oil companies to electric companies”

Norway produce over 98% of their electricity from renewables (no nuclear), but still can’t say the same for H2, and they have a H2 highway.

Fuelcells have some great applications in aerospace and energy storage, but not transport. And last be not least, once you get used to plugging your car in. Why on earth would you go back to a system of paying an oil company for H2 where they set the price.

By: Shak

Shak — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:46:52 +0000

Man has made this mistake once before. We could have had Hydrogen much earlier, but some big boss thought Petrol would be much more viable, which it was for a bout 50 years. Because of this, all the auto makers forgot about how much work could have been done on hydrogen, and now we have to work even harder so that too much EV infrastructure is not built up. IMO we need EV stations and and Hydrogen station to be built alongside new Servo’s after 2020. I have been trying to campaign to the Federal government to mandate this law, so that after 2020, all new servo’s will be ready with quick charge and hydrogen filling stations. That way they would have ten years to work out the kinks for the quick charge stations and, if what Honda is saying is true, the Hydrogen stations should have been mad more efficient by then. Remember, when petrol was first discovered, most cars drank 20l/100km, and that was considered good. i think a bit of dirty hydrogen and 160km from EV’s is good for their first few attempts.