In response to the fuel cell and hydrogen discussion I've dug up a post I did on RIG some time ago. As an answer to the reliability question - I'd estimate you'd have to shell out about $5,000 to replace your fuel cell after 15,000 miles after it got poisoned by a bad load of fuel.
Rig post-
Some words about fuel cells, since most people don't seem to understand them.
They run on hydrogen which can be produced in three ways:
1. Make it from water. This is great for the environment, because when you burn hydrogen you get water. But, this requires a huge amount of electricity, so is thermodynamically a very big waste of energy. The only way this could ever be a solution is if we make vast amounts of extremely cheap electricity from nuclear sources, or other like wind & solar. Don't hold your breath on this one.
2. Make it from gasoline. This is what GM and other car makers are working on. The biggest problem is that the platinum used for a catalyst can be poisoned by sulfer or nitrogen contaminants in the gasoline, wrecking the fuel cell in a matter of minutes. Clean gasoline that won't poison the fuel cells will require massive refinery upgrades world wide - again don't hold your breath. You think RFG is expensive, just wait for "ultra pure gasoline". Cars powered by gasoline fuel cells are expected to use 50% less gasoline, so don't believe the 100% drop in demand crowd either. Another shot at the 100% drop crowd - where do you think our plastics, wax, lube oil, asphalt, grease, and detergents come from? If you don't know the answer, crude oil would be a good guess.
3. Make it from natural gas. This is not a bad solution as natural gas is pretty clean of the catalyst poisons that plague the gasoline cells. But, where is all the gas going to come from? Take the rising heating demand, rapidly rising electrical generation demand, and then throw in powering the world's car & truck fleet and you really haven't solved the energy crisis. Again, don't hold your breath.
A final parting shot at hydrogen (per #1) - it is extremely explosive. The energy in hydrogen combustion compared to natural gas combustion is awesome, and natural gas is no slouch as the NM pipeline explosion & fire demonstrate (melting sand into glass, crumbling concrete, etc.). Hydrogen is also very hard to seal and contain at pressure. When hydrogen explodes it doesn't just leave twisted metal wreckage, it leaves big craters in the ground. Take a few smoking craters that used to be a bus full of school kids, and the nation will be thinking twice about riding around in cars with hydrogen tanks attached.
Sorry for the unpleasant images, but I get a little tired of those shallow thinkers that believe they have found the magic bullet to cure our energy crisis. We will find something someday, but not tomorrow. In today's long term = six hours market mentality anything more than a few years off might as well be science fiction. Don't hold your breath, and don't underestimate the energy crisis we are now in.
Sharp |
