To: IRVINESULLY who wrote (304 ) 1/14/1999 7:24:00 AM From: Mr Metals Respond to of 2513
“HYDROGEN WILL be the most important energy source of the 21st century,” predicted Fritz Vahrenholt of Deutsche Shell, part of the consortium behind the station. “Long-term, it will replace oil and gas.” Indeed, one scenario Shell is working with is that by the mid-21st century, renewable sources — sun, wind and water — will provide half of our energy needs. And half of those renewables, the scenario envisions, will go toward fueling hydrogen cars. PLUSES, MINUSES Early prototype vehicles using special fuel cells have harnessed 70 percent of the energy created from the combustion of hydrogen — compared with the mere 23 percent of gasoline's potential exploited by standard engines. On top of that, hydrogen cars produce nothing more objectionable than water, whereas the exhaust fumes from gas-driven cars are seen by many scientists as contributing to what they feel is a global warming trend. On the downside, cooling hydrogen down to the minus 423 degrees Fahrenheit at which it becomes a liquid requires so much energy that attempts to commercialize the technology have so far been thwarted. Automakers such as DaimlerChrysler have sought to get round such problems by building a prototype using the more easily manageable fuel of liquid methanol. The car itself then converts this into hydrogen gas for immediate use. DaimlerChrysler and GM are among the carmakers that hope to be ready by 2004 to offer vehicles either running directly from hydrogen or from converted methanol, depending on market needs. DaimlerChrysler and other automakers have also invested heavily in Ballard Power Systems, a company that's working on making fuel cells more manageable. The Chicago and Vancouver, Canada, transit systems have been testing Ballard fuel cells on specially fitted buses. Fitting standard cars is another matter, with the fuel cells still too large to fit affordably into them. ENVIRONMENTAL FALLOUT Some environmental groups view hydrogen cars with great skepticism, arguing that the overall energy expenditure — including that used in the manufacture of hydrogen in the first place — is still too great and means there are no ecological benefits, at least so far. “Huge amounts of energy are actually destroyed during the process,” said Wolfgang Lohbeck of the German arm of Greenpeace. “We're not saying there's absolutely no future for hydrogen as a fuel, but at the moment this type of thing is just a publicity stunt.” Reuters contributed to this story. MM