But the technology that lets me get 65+ MPG in my Honda Insight is here NOW!

http://www.boston.com/cars/articles/2002/01/02_0109_bush_abandons_high_mileage_program_for_hydrogen_fuel_cell.shtml

Bush administration joins automakers in push for fuel cells, abandons effort to boost gas mileage

By Ed Garsten, Associated Press, 1/09/2002

DETROIT (AP) - Abandoning a Clinton-era effort to boost gas mileage, the Bush administration announced a pact with the auto industry Wednesday to promote the development of pollution-free cars and trucks powered by hydrogen fuel cells. It will probably take years to mass-produce such automobiles. But Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said the program will help reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil and clean up the air.

"The long-term results of this cooperative effort will be cars and trucks that are more efficient, cheaper to operate, pollution-free and competitive in the showroom," Abraham said at the North American International Auto Show.

The plan replaces the Partnership for a New Generation Vehicle program started by the Clinton administration to develop a vehicle with a fuel efficiency of 80 miles per gallon. Abraham said that plan was not cost-effective and did not result in affordable cars.

Just how much money the government will commit to the fuel cell project is undecided, Abraham said. Proposals for the 2003 budget are due in a few weeks.

Fuel cells produce electricity from the chemical reaction that happens when hydrogen is combined with oxygen. The only waste product is water. Fuel cells are already used to provide electricity on space shuttles.

The cells have gained favor because gasoline engines produce carbon dioxide, considered the primary cause of global warming, and other pollutants.

The cost of fuel cells has dropped sharply in recent years. Still, automakers have said 2010 is the earliest date that any sort of mass-market versions of such vehicles could be available.

One expert said the new partnership, called Freedom Cooperative Automotive Research, could accelerate the timetable.

"I think the biggest thing is, this will let the auto industry do what they do best, which is developing technology," said Thaddeus Malesh of market researcher J.D. Power and Associates.

DaimlerChrysler AG plans to market a fuel cell-powered bus by the end of this year and some passenger cars by 2004. Ford Motor Co. also plans a "limited build" of fuel cell vehicles by 2004.

General Motors Corp. chairman Jack Smith said the Clinton plan had focused attention – and money – on efforts to improve fuel efficiency. He added: "As far as we're concerned, this is our highest priority in R and D investment and has been for some time."

Abraham said foreign automakers are welcome to join the partnership.

Hydrogen can be produced from natural gas carried aboard vehicles or from pure hydrogen, which would require development of a hydrogen refueling infrastructure akin to gas stations. The pact between the government and the auto industry will also focus on developing such an infrastructure.

Ross Witschonke, a vice president at Ballard Power Systems Corp., which supplies fuel cells for DaimlerChrysler and Ford, said the partnership will help overcome one of the major obstacles to a "hydrogen society."

"To me the most significant thing about this is the emphasis on the hydrogen infrastructure," he said. "This is a real opportunity to put a lot of investment into the storage, the production, the delivery of hydrogen."

Environmental groups scoffed at the new program, saying it is not so much aimed at developing emission-free fuel cells as it is at holding off legislation to increase fuel economy standards.

"What is needed is regulatory guidance to raise efficiency across the board in cars and light trucks," said John DiCicco, a senior fellow with Environmental Defense.

Ann Mesnikoff of the Sierra Club said: "It's an enormous waste of taxpayer money."

The Clinton plan had pushed industry development of hybrid gasoline-electric cars, now just entering the market. It also focused industry attention on finding ways to improve fuel economy without reducing car size and zip.

Automakers in the program developed prototypes of vehicles capable of getting more than 70 mpg, three times better than most cars now on the road. But mass production was unlikely in the next few years, as had once been expected.

The Bush administration proposed cutting funding for the program a year ago. Congress kept it alive, even as some environmental groups and taxpayer advocates called the program an unnecessary subsidy for the auto industry.

-- Anonymous, January 09, 2002

Answers

I don't have any confidence that Bush will lead us in a direction that's primarily good for the average citizen versus good for his cronies in big business, especially the oil industry. Fuel cells are interesting, but there are a lot more promising paths to follow than that. Unfortunately, the paths often bump right into established big business turf, which is a no-no for any professional politician.

Here's an interesting site that discusses some stuff that is floundering in the background now, or being held off the market. From the home page scroll down to New Energy on the right hand side.

Link

-- Anonymous, January 09, 2002

But, just imagine the possibilities of auto design this opens up.

there may alternative fuel sources, but anything that steers us away from our dependence on oil is a good thing.

Maybe this is the Macintosh of fuel? heh heh

-- Anonymous, January 09, 2002

If the fuel cell cars due in 2004 generate as much favorable publicity from users as the hybrids, like the Honda owned by Brooks, then it might lead to earlier development of other technologies after all.

-- Anonymous, January 10, 2002

It needs to be installed in a car that is more functional. Honda never pushed the two-seater Insight. (Toyota was more aggressive with its four-seater Prius.) However, if the hybrid technology had originally been part of something like the 4-seater Civic, I think it wouldn't have needed any encouragement. Mileage would have been a bit less than what I have now, but still much better than anything out there. IMO, the Insight is a very attractive car, and the Prius is a bit ridiculous. That may have slowed down sales of the Prius somewhat.

-- Anonymous, January 10, 2002

From what I've heard so far, the new cars will have a standard chassis, and you can select different body styles to put on it. The chassis should last about twenty years, and you can buy a new body when you want a new car.

In fact, we were discussing the ability to make the cars modular, so you could put the cab of a truck on the chassis, and have a truck bed behind, or switch to an SUV type rear when more seating is needed. I would imagine the parts would be rather heavy to move around, compared to a truck topper for example.

The style of the vehicles can and probably will change dramatically. No need for a hood over the engine since there isn't one, so more trunk space. Or more seating room, like the VW bus.

Could be very interesting...

-- Anonymous, January 10, 2002

Cool. I want the comfort of a Daimler, the space of a big station wagon, the toughness of an SUV, the gas mileage of a moped. . . I think I have to settle for a horse-drawn Winnebago.

-- Anonymous, January 10, 2002

"the gas mileage of a moped"

I can tell you that I get about twice the mileage as my neighbor's son's testosterone racing motorcycle. That sure surprised me.

-- Anonymous, January 10, 2002