Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement
« Back 1 [2]

Friday, May 05, 2006

Hydrogen Reality Check

Continued from page 1

By Kevin Bullis
smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

These rate of adoption numbers, which Heywood says are borne out by the rate with which efficient diesel engines have spread over the last 25 years in Europe, suggest that short-term changes in fuel consumption must come not from the development of new technologies, but from the wiser use of existing ones. "We don't have any options other than to reduce the energy requirement in a major way," he says. Consumers should buy smaller vehicles that use less gas, drive slower and for shorter distances, and optimize fuel economy by staying on top of routine maintenance, such as keeping their tires inflated properly.

Heywood admits these ideas might not be rapidly adopted: "It's not American to conserve. We seem to have drifted into that attitude. Our culture doesn't bring us up to think about conserving. It brings us up to think about consuming."

Heywood says changes in behavior, however, could be encouraged in several ways. Crackdowns on speeding would save gas. High prices at the pump help some, but prices at the time of vehicle purchases are also important. Heywood suggests that, in addition to toughening government fuel economy standards, which would give manufacturers more incentive to make vehicles that use less gas, consumers should be awarded rebates when buying smaller, more economical cars, as well as be assessed extra fees when buying gas-guzzlers.

He also thinks a higher gas tax could be palatable, if presented correctly. The money could go into the highway trust fund, which he says is now suffering, providing a justification for the tax beyond just penalizing drivers. Since such a tax would be highly regressive, disproportionately affecting the poor, who might get stuck driving used SUVs, for example, Heywood also proposes a selective reduction in their income taxes to compensate.

Meanwhile, petroleum-based fuel consumption continues to increase, in the United States and other major countries such as India and China. "We can do something about this -- but can we on a global level get down to below what we're consuming now? That's an unbelievable challenge," Heywood says.
« Back 1 [2]

Comments

  • Prof Heywood on Hydrogen
    Guest (Dennis Hart) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    His comments on taxes are not accurate. He proposes there be penalities for buying a gas guzzler like an SUV.. There are already such burdens on the people with these vehicles. The vehicle costs more in the beginning, so the sales taxes and excise taxes are higher than for a tiny econo-car .. Annual fees for registration are higher, fuel consumption is higher, tires cost more.  EVERYTHING about a large vehicle is higher priced..
    The Prof needs to let the tax concerns to the politicians and work on a system that helps the overall situation. He has the education and know how to change the fuel consumption problem mechanically, through devising a better machine. This is what we need..

    Dennis
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • [no subject]
      Guest on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      I could be wrong (and I'm not saying I agree with him anyway), but I think he was talking about making the SUV-type vehicle less favorable than expensive vehicles with new, more expensive fuel-efficiency technologies, not simply standard fuel-efficiient.
      Rate this comment: 12345
    • SUV's and taxes
      Guest (Dan) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Your argument failed to mention the tax break people got for buying a vehicle over something like 4000 lbs.  It allowed a business to deduct the full cost of that vehicle in one year, consequently you have all sorts of self employed professionals and their families driving Suburbans and other SUV's that do not need them for work.  Thankfully, that's been repealled. 

      I believe Hybrid technology will begin to take a serious foothold in the market.  Up until now,  the additional cost just wasn't worth it but with gas prices climbing and people sayiong the days of gasoline under $2 are gone for ever, people will be searching for 40-50 MPG
      Plus,  the manufacturers are making normal looking cars with the tech, not just that funky looking Prius!
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • tax break for over 4000#
        Guest (Gary D. Lewis) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        The politicains screwed up the over 4000# truck. The intention was with more trucks on the road
        would translate to more goods transported. This obviouly did not work
        Rate this comment: 12345
  • A different home for fuel cells
    Guest (Mark Wonsil) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    The energy issue goes beyond just vehicles. Many are turning to electricity to reduce the demand for fossil fuels in the home or office. Since nuclear is still has issues for many, the fuel cell may find its home producing electricity for residential use. It may also find a place with the automobile -  although not on the car but in the garage as a source of power for the hybrid.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • The mother of invention
      Guest (dan) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Tom Friedman,  the New York Times columnist made an interesting point, saying he hopes for Oil at $100 a barrel!  Because only then will America get deadly serious about our dependance on foreign oil and put our engineering master minds to work to find a solution...   Necessity is the mother of invention!
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • cost of oil
        Guest (peter mastellone) on 05/09/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        People do not like change...they are basically insecure....they will change only when they relize there is no other way. Don't sell your wisdom short....$150.00 per barrell should wake our future "Children of the Corn" up! Oil is way too important for other things then to Burn!!!
        Rate this comment: 12345
      • Re: The mother of invention
        youngandgeeky on 09/15/2008 at 6:45 PM
        Posts:
        1
        well... back in 2006 with a barrel of oil at about $60.00 a barrel, $100 a barrel sounds like doomsday. now, with $120.00 sounding "cheap" I think that the public and oil companies will not willingly go to other sources of energy without significant willingness of the US gov't to fund hydrogen fueling stations and the like.
        eather that or when oil hits $200.00 a barrel thats when the market will turn to alternitive sources
        Rate this comment: 12345
    • Re: Why Hydrogen
      Guest (George Santamaria) on 05/06/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Promoters of the benefits of hydrogen are like children who tell their parents to write another check.

      Whereas most energy resources, oil in the ground as a prime example, could be thought of as money in the bank, Hydrogen is but a check to get that money out of the bank.

      My real point is that Hydrogen R&D priorities are way out of whack.  There is way too much emphasis on end-use technologies at the expense of developing a low-cost source.  One example is thermochemical splitting of water using nuclear heat as an energy source.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • Re: Re: Why Hydrogen
        Guest (Steve Howe) on 05/08/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        Cost effectiveness is the issue, absolutely. R&D on coal to hydrogen (especially low-rank) is one interesting area of activity.  If doable on a large scale at a competitive cost viz coal to liquids, all you then need is an effective way to transport and store it.
        Rate this comment: 12345
  • Prof Heywood and taxes
    Guest (David Matthews) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Travelling regularly to Europe and having just returned, there is not the angst about gas prices that is found here. The reason is simple, gas prices 5 years back were about 85 Euro cents a litre now they are 98 cents. The cars also use less fuel. There is no doubt that higher fuel prices encourage more economical cars. A gradual increase in the tax on fuel is desirable to reduce consumtion but who collects the money so raised and what is done with it matters most. Unfortunately in Europe it goes into the general taxation and not into development of alternate energys or systems.
    Concerning the use of Hydrogen as a gasoline replacement, that is pure fantasy. Hydrogen can only be produced by electrolysis or from hydrocarbons. Electrolysis needs energy, and using hydrocarbons leaves us where we are now. 
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • sources of hydrogen
      Guest (Mark Sethre) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Electolosys can be derived from windpower or other environmentally
      favorable sources.    Windpower is ideally suited for producing hydrogen, as it's less suited to adding power to the electricity grids due
      to it's unreliable timeliness.
      The technology is within reach.  The leadership needed to make the
      commitment is virtually non-existant.   Our self-important
      press, who think they're so educated, are ignorant on energy matters.   The politicians today are
      of the lowest quality, and are capable of nothing better than legislative stagnation, at best.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • Hydrogen from Aluminum
        Guest (Gary D. Lewis) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        you should check out
        www.hydrogenpowerinc.com
        Rate this comment: 12345
        • Hydrogen from no compressed cylinder
          Guest on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          I forgot to mention that
          www.hydrogenpowerinc.com
          does not need a compressed gas cylinder. I think this is sooo cool. All you need to do is go to a 711 hand in your old canisiter of
          aluminumoxide and buy a canister of aluminum power add that to your car add water and drive away
          Rate this comment: 12345
        • Hydrogen from Aluminum sounds postive
          Guest (Mark Sethre) on 06/04/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          http://www.hydrogenpowerinc.com/techdiagram.html
          If this technology is practical,
          that obsoletes my statement.
          That is encouraging indeed.
          How far away is this technology?
          When will the first vehicles and
          stationary generators based on
          this technology go to market?
          If I sound impatient, I am.
          I want to know if this "Hydrogen
          Now" product is compelling enough
          for a major manufacturer to begin
          using it.
          Rate this comment: 12345
    • Hydrogen production
      Guest (Frank Baylin) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Electrolysis via renewables or non-renewables is not the only way to produce hydrogen. Other methods, some relying on microbes, are being developed. Clearly a breakthrough is necessary and many are being explored. Check out www.nrel.gov. We are headed at 100 mph towards a concrete wall. Let's hope the rise in prices continue and people start taking responsiblity.
      Rate this comment: 12345
    • Taxes and Insurance reform
      Guest (Randy Dutton) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Why not eliminate the nearly double insurance and taxes for two vehicles and let the driver pick the most efficient vehicle for the required purpose?  Sometimes a pickup truck or SUV is necessary, often a little commuter car is all that is needed.  A driver can only use one vehicle at a time - why charge nearly double for insurance?  And why not drop the sales tax for the second energy efficient vehicle? Legislatively, this could be done overnight.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • SUV rental
        Guest (Horton) on 05/12/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        Why not rent an SUV or pickup for the few times that you have a legitimate need for one, instead of owning two cars?

        Legitimate need=towing a boat or RV, building a house. To take 10 kids to soccer practice, use a minivan.

        Similarly, why not bike or bus to work, own no car, and rent a sedan for road trips?
        Rate this comment: 12345
        • vehicle rental
          Guest (Randy) on 07/18/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          Renting a vehicle for many would be the way, but not for all of us who live in a rural environment and use the towing or carrying capacity frequently.
          Rate this comment: 12345
    • Simple solutions to gas efficiency
      Guest (Randy Dutton) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Require gas stations to provide free air-filling services.  Poorly inflated tires waste fuel. Often gas stations don't have the air inflation equipment or charge $0.50 per use.  That is a disincentive for individuals to keep tires at proper inflation, which not only results in poor gas mileage but increases accidents and tire wear.  The California Legislature, years ago, mandated gas stations provide the air free.  I've not seen any studies that show whether it worked or not but it certainly made it more likely people would check their tires.
      Rate this comment: 12345
    • Gasoline tax
      Guest (George Fleming) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Gasoline rationing is the only fair way to reduce consumption.  When the stockbroker must bargain with the homeless man for gas coupons, we will have gone a long way toward solving the worst of our problems.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • Statistics Lie
    Guest (Keith) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    While I am sure this man has done his homework, I have a basic belief that statistics and projections lie. Sure, if things continue status quo, it will take a long time for hydrogen - or another great technology - to be widely adopted. However, we need a Manhattan/Appollo project mentality. I guarantee we could be using hydrogen in 10 years (or less) if we really wanted to.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • The problem is ...
      Guest (Mike) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      10 years (or less) ago people were saying that.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • The problem is ...
        Guest (Schwee) on 05/12/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        I was six years old when I saw my first fuel cell vehicle, and I am now 40. Virtually nothing has changed, and nothing changed in the 35 years before that. It's a beautiful idea. So is perpetual motion, and turning lead into gold.
        Rate this comment: 12345
  • No new taxes
    Guest (CKE) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    An additional government gas tax is just another unwelcome hand stuck in the consumer's already-empty pockets, taking out hard-earned cash and giving nothing back in return. Any rational person can see that increasing the costs of delivering a good to the consumer without a larger offsetting tangible economic good is the definition of inefficiency. Academic professors should stick to improving their technologies and contributing, if they can, to the effectiveness of our daily energy-consuming devices - where they actually have some training to do so. Oh by the way, that's not some great insight that the hydrogen foolsell economy is a lot farther off than everyone, MIT included, had been spouting. It's not 50 years, it's more like 100 years or never. The more likely long term scenario will be electrically-charged vehicles with new type rechargeable batteries.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Why Hydrogen?
    Guest (David Claypool) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Exactly what do we hope to accomplish by using hydrogen gas vs. hydrocarbons in our automobiles?  The two main SOURCES of hydrogen are hydrocarbons (by reforming with CO2 byproduct)and electrolysis of water (using electricity produced by hydrocarbon combustion).  It does have some pollution advantages vs. hydrocarbon combusion in congested cities.  But until we have ALL of our electrical energy coming from sources other than hydrocarbons hydrogen will never be a replacement for hydrocarbons as an energy source.  This is reality/perspective that NOONE wants to talk about as they continue the feel-good myth of a hydrogen "energy source".
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Re: Why Hydrogen?
      Guest (Kev) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      "But until we have ALL of our electrical energy coming from sources other than hydrocarbons hydrogen will never be a replacement for hydrocarbons as an energy source."

      What's so magic about having ALL our hydrocarbons replaced? You seriously believe hydrogen is useless until then? I have read that hydrogen in cars increase power and mileage up to 15% at a ratio of 15:1. Just lookup hydroboosting. In fact I think all cars should have that built in because it's a well known technique, can run on cars unmodified and I wouldn't be surprised if we could supply that much fuel to all cars with current alternative power sources.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • You're talking about something different...
        Guest (Mike) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        Using hydrogen gas in an ICE is different from having a Hydrogen FUEL CELL powered car. Two different designs. I believe this article is refering to the former.
        Rate this comment: 12345
    • Exactly right
      Guest (Schwee) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Mr. Claypool is exactly right. It is self-delusion to believe hydrogen will save us from our dependence on fossil fuels. Hydrogen is in fact not an energy source at all--it is an energy transport medium. And it is a horrible one, at that--expensive and dangerous to store (remember the Hindenburg?), almost impossible to keep from leaking, dangerous to dispense, takes up a huge amount of space. The idea of a hydrogen econmy is a pipe dream, and the sooner we accept it, the better.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • Hindenburg - hang on a minute
        Guest (Roy Davis) on 05/11/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        Schwee and Claypool are right that hydrogen has lots of problems - I agree completely.  But let's not drag out the Hindenburg and beat that dead horse any longer - it caught fire and burned because of the dope in the fabric covering, not the H2. 
        Rate this comment: 12345
        • Hindenburg
          Guest (Schwee) on 05/12/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          OK, granted on the "dope" observation. And hydrogen is dangerous as hell, sure, but so is gasoline.

          However, gasoline is neither as volatile nor as explosive as hydrogen, and it isn't a gas.
          That's one of a thousand reasons why gasoline is the ideal fuel that it is.

          The point is, how do you dispense hydrogen? Do you want your grandma fitting a 5000 psi hydrogen hose to her fill pipe?

          Given the choice of hydrogen or a recharge of a Li-ion battery pack, I'd take the battery pack every time. And I hate batteries.

          Heywood's point--and it's an excellent one--is that hydrogen is not a FUEL, sillies. It's the equivalent of a battery, and at present it's a terrible choice for a battery.
          Rate this comment: 12345
  • Unbelievable, for sure
    Guest (Steve Koelzer) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Who’s in the driver seat?  Sounds like big money.  All this rhetoric about solving oil issues always turns around and gives short shrift to hydrogen.  Making hydrogen by not reforming natural gas or carbon sourced electricity is a huge problem only surmounted by the global oil heating war one.  Here’s what the people are doing at the grass roots level, an effective reduction in fuel consumption. Hydrogen is "currently" made for used on demand on board vehicles from many different electrolyzer manufacturers in increasing numbers and claiming up to 50% reduction in fuel consumption.  This is exciting for newer cars which control fuel rate by oxygen sensor microprocessing as it makes it easier to install hassle-free.  Works for diesel trucks too.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Unbelievable, for sure-2
      Guest (Steve Koelzer) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Of course, if all vehicles could do this half the fuel would not be consumed, sold, produced.  Likewise, profits from this commodity would be lost by companies like EXXON representing 22M daily.  Stockholders would be outraged.  Green would wage war on green.  Here we go again.  Another oil war may give us all gas, Hydrogen gas. Or not.  But remember, when Germany was cut off from oil in WWII they made their own using peat burnt to carbon monoxide and hydrogen from watermill electricity for water hydrolysis (I think Mobil owns Fischer-Tropsch process now).  Similarly cut off from hydrogen we’re able to do something auto manufaturers, oil and military can’t, won’t or didn’t think up as it ultimately partly solves the ugly problem.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • Do you think Joe Cell could be it?
    Guest (Manan) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    I see the hype around all the alternative fuel sources.  I have been reading a lot about the joe cell a very cheaply made orgone accumulator that can run motors.  This is it the technology thats outside of the box of social norm but it also seems to defy normal physics as we understand them.  Read all about this at www.freeenergynews.com
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Joe cell
      Guest (Bob) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      I think the joe cell might be the answer, or the Papp engine.
      http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue51/papp.html
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • Joe cell
        Guest (Bob) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        Reading that again I wonder if the Joe cell is not doing the same thing without the noble gas after the fuel line is disconnected.My first thought was everything would exit on the exhaust stroke, but who knows. I am not an engineer.
        Rate this comment: 12345
  • Totally New Energy Source
    Guest (LeeMc) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    The big wiz now is corn ethanol @ .7 -1.27 equiv gal if fossil energy per equiv gal of ethanol, now much of a Green Improvment, We have developed a new crop/process that will produce 2 times the ethanol/acre as corn, and at ZERO FOSSIL ENERGY INPUT,
    see > sorganol.com < or search > sorganol < this is truely a 'green fuel',, LFM
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Oil for food, not vice versa
      Guest (Steve Koelzer) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      I heard a surprising. Even corn as an alternative "green" ethanol fuel source runs off of oil, on NPR radio.  That’s because the fertilizer used has a petroleum base it its manufacture.  A platinum catalyst converts nitrogen gas to ammonia and thence to nitrate at high pressure & temp.  Since sorgohol (it sounds better) is not a nitrogen fixing plant it’s not a truly "green" fuel.  In fact it’s an annual crop and most likely will be rotated with corn.  The guy who’s trying to promote this is trying to sell his harvesting juicer machinery invention which still needs improvement.
      Rate this comment: 12345
    • [no subject]
      Guest (bill) on 05/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Ethanol can't be sent down a pipeline. That's why ga is spikong now. They have to switch to a summer blend which now requires ethanol instead of MTBE.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • Methanol Economy
    Guest (Bob Hargraves) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Check out George Olah's new book, Beyond Oil and Gas: The Methanol Economy. He shows how practical it is to use the existing petroleum distribution system for methanol derived from CO2 and H2O, synthesized by nuclear power.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Nuclear & Solar electricity
      Guest (Steve Koelzer) on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Methanol is made (2001) by the electroreduction of carbon dioxide on an electrodeposited polycrystalline platinum porous electrode in perchloric acid.  Byproducts are formic acid and (trace) methane.  If Olah, et al. can do it by reversing their methanol fuel cell (see http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=16466&ch=biztech) let’s just put solar photovoltaics to work at home! while we have the credits available.
      Rate this comment: 123