Ford Airstream Electric Concept Car

Not to be upstaged by GM's plug-in electric concept vehicle, Ford has unveiled its own concept. The twists are design by Airstream and a hydrogen-powered fuel cell to charge the battery. From the AutoblogGreen article: "The fuel cell, made by Ballard, turns on automatically when the battery charge dips below 40 percent. With the on-board charger (110/220 VAC), the battery pack can be refilled at home. Ford says the HySeries Drive is 50 percent smaller and less complex than conventional fuel cell system and should have more than double the lifetime."

Comments

But why is it so ugly?

[Original Replica]

Is that visual design supposed to be some sort of physically manifested sarcasm about "green" cars? How do they expect to win over the SUV crowd with the mirror plated SissyMobile? At least make the thing look respectable when pulling up to Home Depot.

To be honest, the conversion cars are more...

[zappepcs]

appealing. http://www.electroauto.com/index.html Examples of some that are available. They are less shiny, less costly, and still get the same performance as standard plugin systems that are new. I just don't like the way that such cars seem to require a special new look. meh! Just build a nice commuter car with fantastic mileage, that's what we really want.

Driving Hazard

[NFN_NLN]

If you're driving with the sun behind you and this thing is driving towards you, the glare would blind you enough to veer off the road!

No, BAD idea - depends on Unobtanium

[Engineer-Poet]

Two kinds of Unobtanium, actually:

• The inexpensive, long-lived room-temperature hydrogen fuel cell, and
• Hydrogen fuel every 150 miles or so.

Without either of those, this is just a short-range electric car. <yawn>

PEM fuel cells have been one of the two stumbling blocks for hydrogen vehicles for years. It wasn't long ago that a stack for a car cost a half a million to a million dollars (due to hand-assembly and platinum content) and had a fairly short lifespan. Li-ion batteries to get the same range would cost a fraction as much, and they are coming down in price/kWh at a steady rate. Lifespan is going way up with the new chemistries and nanoparticle materials.

Hydrogen is the other form of Unobtanium. It would take something like a trillion dollars to build out a new hydrogen-fuelling infrastructure to replace petroleum motor fuels. (Got a spare trillion handy, or did it go for Bush's War?) Further, the production of hydrogen from non-fossil energy sources is very inefficient; a PEM electrolyzer is maybe 75% and a PEM fuel cell is about 60%, for a best-case throughput of 45% (before compression energy is considered). In contrast, a lithium-ion battery is about 95% efficient.

There are no ways around this; production of hydrogen from e.g. aluminum is much lossier than electrolysis. Making a renewable hydrogen economy requires not one but two kinds of Unobtanium.

So why's the US government pushing hydrogen? It's my suspicion that the oil interests want all the alt-energy money spent on things which cannot work, thus guaranteeing that taxpayer-funded research will never threaten their gravy train. A few million dollars in campaign funding thus buys them many $billions in increased revenue; probably the best investment they could ever make.

Re:No, BAD idea - depends on Unobtanium

[donaldm]

Picking the right type of sustainable fuel is extremely difficult however it is very important for politicians to understand the energy equation of each fuel source. Unfortunately I think most politicians are "technological cretins" and only have a interest in what will get them elected or re-elected so choosing viable and appropriate fuel sources becomes more and more reliant on "interest and lobby groups".

Currently fossil fuel (includes diesel and petrol) is mainly used for transport and looks like being this way for some time to come. Alternative fuels in the form of bio-diesel and ethanol are being touted as a viable alternative to fossil fuel however even these fuels have their drawbacks since you still need to actually grow, harvest, produce and deliver the fuel to the consumer. Bio-diesel is currently seen as the most viable alternative fuel (cheaper and less polluting) since most diesel vehicles can run on it with little or no modification while petrol engines do need to be modified (some more than others) to run on ethanol which is not that environmentally friendly and has a lower energy equation than bio-diesel. On average diesel is approx 30% more efficient and diesel engines usually have allot more torque at much lower RPM than their equivalent petrol counterparts.

You are right so say "So why's the US government pushing hydrogen? It's my suspicion that the oil interests want all the alt-energy money spent on things which cannot work, thus guaranteeing that taxpayer-funded research will never threaten their gravy train.". I would add many governments are touting this around the world and so far nothing has come of it although hybrid (ie. petrol/electric and diesel/electric) are viable. Again you really have to look at the energy equation (time does play a part here) to see if current hybrids are truly viable and cost effective.

Before everyone runs out and buys a diesel (equally applies to a hybrid) I would suggest you do some homework since diesel cars are normally more expensive than their petrol counterparts and you may have to travel a fair distance before you start to save. If the costs are the other-way around (mine was) then it becomes easier to make the decision. Of course buying a motor vehicle is a matter of personal choice and prestige as well and fuel efficiency may not even enter the equation.

The following is an interesting read on the potential ways of manufacturing alternative fuels. The heading reads "'Flashy' New Process Turns Soy Oil, Glucose Into Hydrogen" so read into that what you may.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/11/06110 3083833.htm

Re:Uhhh Hello Earth to Detroit

[rbinns]

Here is the thing: hybrids do not provide substantial fuel economy and environmental impact gains for people driving long highway commutes. It works very well in a frequent stop-and-go driving situation. While Toyota put the Prius on the market, GM spent their time developing a 2-mode hybrid bus providing both a boost in efficiency and comfort. When the bus leaves a stop, it relies on the electric motor while slowly ramping up the natural gas diesel engine. These buses have replace the fleet of tour buses at Yosemite National Park, where tour guides have reported seeing more wildlife on tours as these buses do not produce as much noise as previous buses, hence not scaring the animals away.

FYI, in GMC's booth at the NAIAS today is the 2-mode hybrid Yukon. This is due out in 2008.

Toyota may have beaten Detroit to the consumer hybrid table, but their days of dominance in this field is numbered. GM alone will, as of 2008, have a hybrid sedan (Aura Green Line), hybrid crossover SUV (Vue Green Line), and full size truck SUV (hybrid Tahoe/Yukon/Silverado/Sierra). That means you can drive a hybrid that actually looks like a regular car (imagine that!) instead of a poorly executed fashion statement.