Fuel Cell Update: Chrysler Working With California Partnership
Jan 31, 2008 at 10:36AMBy Reg Modlin
Director of Environmental and Energy Planning
I’m proud to announce that Chrysler is the newest member of the California Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP). The CaFCP is a collaboration of 34 organizations including auto manufacturers, energy providers, fuel cell technology companies and government agencies working together to promote the commercialization of hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles.
People are sometimes surprised to find out that Chrysler has been actively pursuing zero-emissions vehicles since 1998, well before our merger with Daimler. Our company has a proud history of engineering innovation, and our efforts to develop zero-emission vehicles are no exception.
One of the most exciting developments in this arena are hydrogen fuel cells, which produce no pollution and offer a wonderful mix of performance and practicality. Chrysler pioneered this technology, which releases energy from the reaction of hydrogen with a catalyst and oxygen, a true zero-emission process.
In fact, Chrysler first built the Natrium concept back in 1998. The Natrium was the first functional fuel cell-powered vehicle with on-board hydrogen reformation.
This concept was based on the popular Chrysler Town & Country minivan. The on-board reformation system addressed the issues with range and storage of hydrogen gas by accumulating hydrogen in a solid form and releasing it when needed. This was only the beginning.
When Chrysler and Daimler merged, the newly formed company operated the largest fuel cell vehicle fleet in the world — more than 100 fuel cell vehicles gaining valuable practical experience through day-to-day operations.
Hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles emit pure water vapor as exhaust. Fuel cell systems are part of Chrysler’s advanced-propulsion technology umbrella, which includes efficient gasoline engines, advanced diesels and hybrid powertrain systems.
Our first focus when it comes to any new technology is ensuring its safety. We apply that focus to hydrogen-fueled vehicles, and it directs everything we do. We understand how crucial it is that consumers feel safe when they’re traveling with hydrogen fuel in their tank, when they’re fueling up at the pump – really, whenever they interact with hydrogen fuel.
The public hasn’t had the opportunity to really understand this fuel yet, which is something we’re working hard to correct. Hydrogen fuel could play an important role in diversifying our zero-emission offerings and reducing our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, as well as complement other green technologies we’re pursuing. Despite the public’s interest in renewable fuels, there is often a technological adversity that accompanies strong demand in the market.
Put simply, most people would prefer to let their neighbor try out new technology, hydrogen fuel cells, for example, before they would consider using it. This is equally true for hydrogen fuel, and it’s a big obstacle to overcome. We must educate the policy makers that help shape its opinion.
As we approach these questions, there are also some practical issues that could stall development and require further inquiry.
For example, how many hydrogen fuel pumps did you drive past on your way to work this morning? As great as these zero-emission fuels are, if there is no infrastructure it becomes a moot point. Only by fostering cooperation between our industry, government and the general public can we address these practical concerns. Our membership with the CaFCP is about a healthy step in that direction.
Del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS FEED
3 Comments
I’m hoping to see in the near future technology that offers subtantial improvements in miles per gallon. It seems that even with hybrids if I as a consumer do not want to sacrifice the practicality and performance of an SUV such as the Durango the extra money I would need to spend for a vehicle that gets approx. 18 mpg city/19 hywy which just doesn’t seem worth all the extra cost of buying the hybrid when I get just barely 13mpg with my RAM truck. I’m holding off for now but looking forward to the day when the hybrid SUV’s can offer greater than 30mpg’s which I think can be possible considering all the accomplishments this country has made already.
Of course, I like Chrysler and I’m not attacking them or what they are doing. Researching possible environmentally friendly solutions is a very good, commendable thing. . . It’s just that playing with hydrogen fuel cells is simply throwing good money after bad. There are so many more viable options to be explored. These options are often ignored because they aren’t as ’sexy’ as hydrogen. Well, hydrogen will never work well enough, never ever. Put your money towards something that has a chance of success.
First off, I’d like to state that I’m all for alternative fuels. However - we need technically and economically viable alternatives - not smoke and mirrors - if we are ever going to replace crude oil as our primary fuel source.
On the planet Earth, H2 (Hydrogen) is not a naturally occuring compound (There are various processes that produce trace amounts of H2 as a step in a larger scale chemical process.) This means that you can’t mine for it, pull it out of the ocean, or collect it from the air. . . Not without putting more actual energy into collecting the Hydrogen than you could possibly get from burning it or processing it through a platinum catalyst fuel cell (you think replacing an engine is expensive? - wait until you have to replace a fuel cell with a pound of platinum in it). So - you see - Hydrogen is not actually a fuel in the sense that it is an energy source; but rather it is an energy carrier in the same fashion that a copper wire is an energy carrier and a battery is an energy source. You have to put energy into something else (like water) in order to produce Hydrogen. More energy than you actually get from the Hydrogen. So where does the energy to produce all of this Hydrogen come from? Hydrogen can be produced from a variety of methods, but most of the energy can be traced back to coal, methane, or good old crude oil. So you might only get water and Nitrogen coming out of the tail-pipe of that fuel cell vehicle, but that much more coal or methane or oil was burned at a refinery or power plant to produce that hydrogen. More coal or methane or oil than if you were to burn them in your car. That doesn’t sound too environmentally friendly to me. Also, there are big issues in terms of Hydrogen storage. You can charge up certain solid substances that will release hydrogen when heated - the problems with these substances is that they are very heavy, usually highly toxic and use some of that energy that you put into them, so more actual hydrocarbon based fuel is used. You could chill the hydrogen and liquify it or store it at very high pressures. These solutions are also problematic. If you chill the hydrogen, you have to spend a whole bunch of energy to chill it to the extremely low temperature required to liquify it and keep it cold, then you’ve got to spend more energy to heat it up for use in a fuel cell. Due to the extremely low density of hydrogen and the laws of physics, storing hydrogen as a gas means that in order to store the same amount of energy in one gallon of hydrogen as you’ve got in one gallon of gasoline, you would have to compress the hydrogen to several thousand pounds per square inch. You would actually spend much more energy compressing the hydrogen than you could actually get from burning it. Also, storage containers for gases at those kinds of pressures are extremely heavy and if the tank ever ruptured - say in an accident - the fuel tank would literally become a rocket and your car would literally flop around in the air like an untied balloon being released. Dispite popular misconceptions, hydrogen generally doesn’t explode, it’s flame speed is so fast that it typically burns too fast to ‘go boom’. If you were going to run a car off of a highly pressurized gas and you could choose between a tank filled with hydrogen and a tank filled with air - both stored at 10,000 PSI - the actual difference in the amount of energy stored would be neglegable, as the energy stored by simply compressing a gas to that degree is many times greater than the energy stored in the same mass of Hydrogen. So, if we wanted to run our vehicles on high pressure gases, we would be better off using free air than expensive hydrogen (the cost per unit of energy of hydrogen is extremely high - much higher than gasoline) we could all have cars that work like those little ‘Air Hogs’ toys.
My point: Hydrogen isn’t a viable alternative fuel, it’s not even a fuel in the strictest sense.
Hydrogen is the modern day equivelant of a company’s PR group saying “Don’t look over there . . . look at this cute bunny rabbit I’ve got here, that’s right look at the bunny rabbit.” It’s all smoke and mirrors, the much touted hydrogen economy is a clever scam used to appease the environmentalist willing to take warm and fuzzy over real facts and hard data.