AutoblogGreen

"Again, the U.S. military is proving itself to have both the budget and the will to pursue next-generation transportation technologies..."

Right. Hydrogen is the perfect fuel for people and organizations that can freely spend other people's money.

"...which will eventually filter down to commercial and consumer vehicles."

Wrong. People who have to use their own money aren't going to be buying hydrogen, because it will be more expensive to make and use, compared to any other way of generating and using energy.

Reply

Thank you Howard. Hydrogen is amazingly wasteful because you need to make it, compress it, transport it, then convert it to electricity in a fuel cell. Just skip all those steps and use Lithium Ion batteries like Tesla Motors and all the others.

Hydrogen Fuel Cells must be stopped!
http://www.efcf.com/e/reports/E17.pdf

Reply

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/02/21/bp-sinks-500-million-into-bioscience-research/
"If I was BP, I'd buy A123 Systems and become the leader in lithium-ion batteries instead of carbon sequestration."
Make up your mind Dan batteries or Hydrogen from fossil fuels.

Actually NGV are more efficient then Hydrogen as shown in the following government report.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/symposium/presentations/brooks.pdf
On page 23 - the million dollar fuel cell prototype doesn't even match the CNG Prius in energy consumption.

Reply

The military-industrial complex favors a new drug... Hydrogen.

Reply

Yup Hydrogen is a bad idea... it's just outer so car maker can still charge a buck to change your oil and spark plugs.

Give me batteries or CAPS... That I can plug in my wind or solar generator...oups can't do that..

Someone wont be making money off my back...

Reply

"Just skip all those steps and use Lithium Ion batteries like TeslaMotors and all the others" Yeah, because when you need to power a 20ton armored vehicle, an additional 5 tons of batteries to power it doesn't really make much difference in the scheme of things.

Not to mention that maybe, just maybe, military needs for refuelling mightbe just a little more pressed for time than your average commuter in LA who can just "plug it in overnight".

I think Hydrogen makes a lot of sense for the military. The key here is that it can be generated on the fly and pound for pound is more efficient than batteries. Plus, what is going to be easier to get to someone out in the field who is now out of energy, a new set of batteries (or the energy to power the onboard batteries) or some hydrogen in a tank? Plus the Hydrogen can be generated anywhere vs. CNG. All you REALLY need is a source of power and water and although the technology doesn't exist to make that happen today, at least they are putting the money into making ithappen. If you don't think the military has the capability to produce the necessary energy, have a look at our submarines. And no, it's not feasable to have a thousand nuclear humvees running about whereas it is feasable to have nuclear powered mobile hydrogen generation stations which feed the supply line of hydrogen

Reply

"The key here is that it can be generated on the fly and pound for pound is more efficient than batteries." -- Owen

Wrong twice in one sentence. The "on the fly" generation is purely a daydream, and using hydrogen is less efficient than... just about anything else.

"Plus, what is going to be easier to get to someone out in the field who is now out of energy, a new set of batteries (or the energy to power the onboard batteries) or some hydrogen in a tank?" -- Owen

Answer: A tank of biodiesel, which has a little over twice the energy in the same volume as liquid hydrogen, and is much safer and easier to handle, in addition to being a boatload cheaper, and doesn't require invention of whole new technologies, or the building of whole new infrastructures.

Hydrogen makes great rocket fuel, because for a rocket, the one thing that matters most is weight. Volume, cost, containment, and safety are all lesser issues for rocket fuel. For any other power usage, hydrogen makes no sense, because there are already several alternatives that are available today that are far superior.

Reply

Hydrogen tankers in the battlefield - this is interesting. They will be 10 times bigger then a gas tanker for the equivalent fuel and even more flammable. A terrorist shoots one of the tankers and he blows up a whole US military base. New nano batteries do not explode.

FuelCell Humvees are going to be just as heavy as Electric ones to protect that huge highly flammable hydrogen tank.

Where exactly are they going to get water when they are stranded in the desert? One drop for me - one drop for my humvee....

New batteries recharge in 10 minutes.

No infrastructure no problem for EVs just use solar and wind power - water not required.

Reply

Where are they going to get water when they are stranded in the desert?
Hydrogen tankers will be 10 times larger then gas tankers for the equivalent energy. What if terrorsits hit those huge targets?
The highly flammable hydrogen tanks will be huge to power a humvee a decent distance. The protective covering for such tanks will compare unfavorablely to battery weight.
New Batteries take 10 minutes to recharge.

Reply

Hydrogen has more energy per kilogram (or per pound) than any other chemical fuel, but it is extremely bulky - a gallon of gasoline has 4 times the energy of a gallon of liquid H2. Compressed H2 is worse, 1 gallon of gas has the energy of 5 gallons of H2 compressed to 10,000 psi! And, of course, a gallon of biodiesel has more energy than a gallon of petrol.

From a logistical and supply perspective, H2 is a nightmare. While petroleum fuels and liquid biofuels are relatively dense and can be stored and transported in readily available containers, H2 requires special expensive and heavy high pressure tanks, or expensive (and venting!) cryogenic flasks, or very expensive and heavy metal hydride alloy tanks. It would even be easier to provide electrical power via wires or charged batteries than by hydrogen.

Reply

10min charge needs huge charging station and something thats generating huge power or storing it. this is flawed for the battle field. batteries would only be useing as hybrid cell and basecamp setup etc. hydrogen is difficult to move, if a tank runs out on the field it will be a mission to fill her up unless they can make backpacks they can put a few miles into it to shift it quick(re WWII docos) i think dedicated biofuel is more ideal, as you can still use a jerry can, easy to move, same shipping and pumping as currently used. i think they should look hard into portable cellulistic fuel things like with bacteria and stuff like they have been working on. they can fill the tanks with the local planet life and food scraps. tanks use turbines these days which burn anything, so quality control isnt a issue, just quantity. i dont know what quantities the army needs, but it will be less then the 700million cars in the world need, so biofuel would be more accessiable for them.

Reply