German Automakers Working On Hydrogen Fuel Cell Tech (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader writes: For the past several years, Japan has been trying to encourage development of hydrogen fuel cell technology for cars. Now it seems some German manufacturers are getting interested as well. "Audi used last week's North American International Auto Show in Detroit to debut its h-tron Quattro fuel cell SUV concept, and the UK's Autocar is reporting that Mercedes-Benz has green-lit for production a fuel cell version of its GLC SUV." The Audi vehicle has a range of roughly 600km. BMW has been working on this problem too: "For quite a while, the company was experimenting with internal combustion engines that used H2 instead of the traditional hydrocarbon fuel. More recently, it showed us an i8 and 5 Series powered by fuel cells, although neither is set for production."

Comments

Havent they been working on it for a while now?

[Osgeld]

Audi:
2004 - Audi A2H2-hybrid vehicle
2009 - Audi Q5-FCEV[1]
2014 - Audi A7 h-tron quattro

BMW:
2010 - BMW 1 Series Fuel-cell hybrid electric[2]
2012 - BMW_i8 fuel-cell prototype[3][4]
2015 - BMW 5-Series Grand Turismo fuel-cell prototype[5]

Daimler:
3 Mercedes-Benz F-Cells completed a 125-day around the world drive in 2011
1994 - Mercedes-Benz NECAR 1
1996 - Mercedes-Benz NECAR 2
1997 - Mercedes-Benz NECAR 3
1999 - Mercedes-Benz NECAR 4
2000 - Mercedes-Benz NECAR 5
2002 - Mercedes-Benz F-Cell based on the Mercedes-Benz A-Class
2005 - Mercedes-Benz F600 Hygenius
2009 - Mercedes-Benz F-CELL Roadster
2009 - Mercedes-Benz F-Cell based on the Mercedes-Benz B-Class[6]
2013 - Ford Motor Company, Daimler AG, Renault and Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. are expected to launch in 2017.

Volkswagen:
2000 - VW Bora Hy-motion-Fuel cell
2002 - VW Bora Hy-power-Fuel cell
2004 - VW Touran Hy-motion-Fuel cell
2007 - VW space up! blue
2008 - VW Passat Lingyu Hymotion[21]
2014 - VW Golf Hymotion

Thanks for the non story asshats

Re:Wow! Germans?

[fruviad]

Just be sure to test the fuel cells using ONLY the German tests. Independent tests may show different results.

Again?

[Grishnakh]

What's wrong with these automakers? Haven't they figured out by now that hydrogen is a total waste of time and effort? They tried this silliness back in the 90s and it went nowhere. It's a terrible fuel. It doesn't occur in nature like oil, so you have to use electricity to generate it (like by hydrolysis of water), and it's horrible for storage and handling because it's such a lightweight gas, unlike gasoline and diesel which are relatively easily-handled liquids; you have to have a highly pressurized tank to hold it, and leakage is a problem because hydrogen molecules are so small, so you're not going to get great range, and you've got a highly pressurized tank of highly combustible gas in your vehicle, which is a really bad thing if you have a crash.

The future is electric cars, not hydrogen, and the intermediate step is hybrids. Tesla has already proven EVs work great, and only need cheaper batteries to be practical for the commuting masses, and the Chevy Volt and Toyota Prius have proven that hybrids are practical now.

Re:Again?

[james_shoemaker]

H2 fuel cells are being investigated as they are a way to get an electric car without the problems of a battery electric car. Battery electric cars still have the issue of long long charge times.

Re:Again?

[Motard]

Plus, Teslas (for instance) are always dragging around an extra 1000lbs.

Re:Again?

[mlts]

Ideally, the best fuel would be something with a high energy per volume, such as the Audi-made synthetic diesel (e-diesel) from CO2 in the air, or perhaps ethanol. Something that doesn't need anything more significant than a liquid storage tank, as opposed to what is needed for CNG, or even LP gas. Cars get into wrecks, and who knows what might puncture the gas tank, so having a complex system is nice, but if it takes out a city block if the vehicle using it gets rear-ended, it isn't workable.

Then comes the engine. Moving to an IC engine design means that you get 1/3 of the energy coming out as torque, and the rest as heat or exhaust. Engine design isn't an easy task either, because it will see environments that the engineers have never even anticipated. So, it would be generations of engines before a H2 motor became as reliable as what moves an average gasser.

What would be the ideal, is what the parent poster mentions -- high capacity batteries. Get a type of battery that is portable, fairly safe (think LiFePO4 batteries), can work in the temperature extremes that vehicles are put to, and has a high discharge/recharge cycle rate. If this gets within a tenth of what gasoline has for energy by volume, this changes everything. The IC engine can be tossed, and electric motors used.

For the average Joe Sixpack, what does the hydrogen economy bring? It means more energy used (hydrolysis is very energy wasteful), so utility prices go up and more base load power plants needed. Hydrogen is very explosive, so expensive means have to be used so mitigate damage to the tank and lines. This means vehicles cost more. There has to be an ecosystem put in place to fill up on H2 or replace fuel storage cells... and that is expensive, which gets passed to the consumer.

Even more insidious, is the fact that the H2 economy will be tied to a limited group that provides the H2 creation and distribution. With an electric vehicle, it doesn't care where the electricity comes from. It can come from a solar array, a water turbine, a wind turbine... there are many ways from the ground up to make usable electricity that it provides robustness. We really do not need another monopoly/cartel.

Hybrids need to go past the novelty stage, to becoming something every vehicle has, just like power door locks. For example, a hybrid pickup, if coupled with an inverter that can handle heavy loads, would make the need for a PTO generator moot. Since a vehicle engine has a lot more in the way of pollution controls than most generators, it is better, environmentally, to have that engine do the work. It also means one less motor to worry about. GM has tried attempts at a hybrid pickup, but the ideal would be to have the technology in the 2500 and 3500 vehicles, which the beefed up electrical storage would be a lot more useful. Even more useful would be a hybrid diesel. If FCGEN (an European group making a fuel cell that runs on diesel) gets something useful out there, then the vehicle could be made entirely electric, but a diesel fuel cell (generating 3-10kw) able to keep the batteries powered, eliminating range anxiety.

tl;dr, the absolute best thing are electric vehicles. Second to that, diesels and synthesizing diesel fuel which doesn't go boom due to vapors. In the interim, it would be nice to see hybrid diesels. Hydrogen is a nice dog and pony show which really is a distraction, and would cause far more expense to every party (except the H2 makers.) Not worth it.

Re:Again?

[Motard]

Imagine if the Hindenburg was filled with gasoline fumes. Everyone would've blown to tiny bits. In fact, most of the people aboard the Hindenburg survived.

Re:Again?

[orzetto]

The charge times are a factor, but mostly it's cost, cost, cost!

Batteries are economically unsustainable: Li-ion batteries (the type with high energy density that you need in any battery vehicle) cost about 500 $/kWh. You can expect it to drop somewhat through the next decades, say to 300 in 2050, but they are already being mass-produced and unless a significant, revolutionary breakthrough happens, this technology has already delivered what it can.

Hydrogen storage, instead, costs about 12 $/kWh, much cheaper (I'm talking of the only commercial technology, compressed hydrogen at 350 or 700 bar). In addition to that, you need the fuel cells to convert hydrogen to power, and they cost about 300 $/kW (not kWh, kW). However, they are not mass-produced, in which case projections indicate they would cost about 50 $/kW or lower.

Now, trust me on this one (or do the calculations yourself): of the world's 10 most sold cars, almost all have one kW in the engine for every kWh of fuel in the tank (netting for engine efficiency). So mass-produced hydrogen cars can have a powertrain that is an order of magnitude cheaper than batteries by the kWh when mass-produced. Not only you can build a car that drives 500 km—you can afford it too!

But what about efficiency, I hear someone in the back shouting: it is true that batteries are about 90% efficient, and the electrolysis, compression and fuel cells train is about 40% efficient. However, consider this: a battery can operate for about 1500 cycles before end-of-life. Every kWh of capacity will store and release 1500 kWh, which in consumer prices (different by country, I know) is about 150 $. This means that the cost of batteries is much higher than the cost of the energy they will store through their entire lifetime. Efficiency in operation actually takes a back seat when investment costs are this high.

Finally, what about capacity? Li-ion batteries store 0.25 kWh/kg (that's why Teslas are so heavy). Hydrogen (including the pressurised tanks, that are 90% of the weight, and netting for 50% efficiency) provides 2 kWh/kg, again one order of magnitude higher.

To be clear: there is a marked for batteries and one for hydrogen. Smaller applications for short usage are better with batteries (think commuter cars). Larger applications, or applications that in general need a lot of energy compared to power (taxis, buses, trucks, even ships) are better served with hydrogen.

Re: Again?

[WindBourne]

Lol. Tesla and LG are already well below 200/kwh. In fact, gm claimed that lg was below 145/kwh and approaching tesla's costs. Tesla is thought to be below 125/kwh, and says that they will be well below 99/kwh by 2020. So not even close to your rant.

Re: Again?

[WindBourne]

And the rest of your rant is way off again. First off, Tesla and LG are thought to have much higher cycles. It is already known that first gen Tesla batteries in roadster went to about 150k before hitting 85% capacity. Now MS has several cars with 125k and are still around 95% capacity. However, where will the fuel cell on fcv be by 100k miles? They will be in the trash because they have to be replaced every 50k miles or so. Then lets add the fact that 96% of all hydrogen in the world comes not from electrolysis, but by burning a rich nat gas mixture which produces far worse emissions. SO No, the real expensive vehicle are lh2.

The hydrogen economy is a scam

[plopez]

The cheapest way to produce large amounts of hydrogen is by hydrocarbon fractionation This process starts with, wait for it, natural gas. It also produces CO2 which is a powerful greenhouse gas.