PDA

View Full Version : GM "Sequel" Hydrogen Concept


Naga Royal Guard
12-30-2004, 10:15 PM
GM will unveil a new hydrogen-powered vehicle, following are some stuff I researched on it: <p>+0-60 in under 10 seconds ( remember the first prius?) <br>+300 miles on one full hydrogen tank<br>+said to be "near-production" <br>+should be similar in size/shape to the Caddy SRX<br>+sits on the same "skateboard" chassis as the Hy-wire/Autonomy ( probably extensively updated too; b/w the autonomy and hy-wire, the chassis was reduced in size considerably )

LEXUS FAN!
12-31-2004, 01:10 AM
only 300 miles to the tank...that is not good...i thought hydrogens are fuel efficient

JBlair
12-31-2004, 02:03 AM
You're thinking in terms of fossil fueled engines. The mpg with fuel cells is different, because IIRC, fuel cells only produce water as exhaust and use a fuel that is one of the most abundant resources on the planet. (easily replenishable too)

Naga Royal Guard
12-31-2004, 12:02 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JBlair</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> use a fuel that is one of the most abundant resources on the planet. (easily replenishable too) </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>not quite

JBlair
12-31-2004, 03:57 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Naga Royal Guard</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br>not quite</TD></TR></TABLE><br>Explain

SV
01-01-2005, 10:30 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JBlair</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Explain</TD></TR></TABLE><p>it's supposed to be very difficult to get 100% emissions-free hydrogen just from water. apparently it's easy to get hydrogen from a gasoline, but that kind of hydrogen pollutes

Naga Royal Guard
01-01-2005, 11:37 AM
thats right, you cant just "get" hydrogen, its an energy inefficient process as we speak

JBlair
01-01-2005, 02:52 PM
the beauty of hydrogen, however, is that is one of the most abundant resources on earth. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0">

taskbearer
01-01-2005, 08:07 PM
yep, most abundant resource that you'd have to work your ass out to get it in pure form. <p>Here we go again with yet another hydrogen blabbery from GM. The concept is near production in the sense that it would cost more than a rollsroyce if produced <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bangin.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>GM would continue to saturate us with some more hydrogen slurry. its all hype!hype!!hypw!!!,but we all know from history that they would not be sucessful. They did the same thing with the EV1...eh...eerm, where is GM on the EV radar now?

JBlair
01-01-2005, 09:35 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>taskbearer</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yep, most abundant resource that you'd have to work your ass out to get it in pure form. <br> </TD></TR></TABLE><br>Since there is some misunderstanding about how it all works, and the simplicity of the hydrogen part, here is an explanation:<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The "Hy" in Hy-wire stands for hydrogen, the standard fuel for a fuel cell system. Like batteries, fuel cells have a negatively charged terminal and a positively charged terminal that propel electrical charge through a circuit connected to each end. They are also similar to batteries in that they generate electricity from a chemical reaction. But unlike a battery, you can continually recharge a fuel cell by adding chemical fuel -- in this case, hydrogen from an onboard storage tank and oxygen from the atmosphere. <br>The basic idea is to use a catalyst to split a hydrogen molecule (H2) into two H protons (H+, positively charged single hydrogen atoms) and two electrons (e-). Oxygen on the cathode (positively charged) side of the fuel cell draws H+ ions from the anode side through a proton exchange membrane, but blocks the flow of electrons. The electrons (which have a negative charge) are attracted to the protons (which have a positive charge) on the other side of the membrane, but they have to move through the electrical circuit to get there. The moving electrons make up the electrical current that powers the various loads in the circuit, such as motors and the computer system. On the cathode side of the cell, the hydrogen, oxygen and free electrons combine to form water (H2O), the system's only emission product. (See How Fuel Cells Work for more information.) One fuel cell only puts out a little bit of power, so you need to combine many cells into a stack to get much use out of the process. The fuel-cell stack in the Hy-wire is made up of 200 individual cells connected in series, which collectively provide 94 kilowatts of continuous power and 129 kilowatts at peak power. The compact cell stack (it's about the size of a PC tower) is kept cool by a conventional radiator system that's powered by the fuel cells themselves. <br>This system delivers DC voltage ranging from 125 to 200 volts, depending on the load in the circuit. The motor controller boosts this up to 250 to 380 volts and converts it to AC current to drive the three-phase electric motor that rotates the wheels (this is similar to the system used in conventional electric cars). <p>The electric motor's job is to apply torque to the front wheel axle to spin the two front wheels. The control unit varies the speed of the car by increasing or decreasing the power applied to the motor. When the controller applies maximum power from the fuel-cell stack, the motor's rotor spins at 12,000 revolutions per minute, delivering a torque of 159 pound-feet. A single-stage planetary gear, with a ratio of 8.67:1, steps up the torque to apply a maximum of 1,375 pound-feet to each wheel. That's enough torque to move the 4,200-pound (1,905-kg) car 100 miles per hour (161 kph) on a level road. Smaller electric motors maneuver the wheels to steer the car, and electrically controlled brake calipers bring the car to a stop. The gaseous hydrogen fuel needed to power this system is stored in three cylindrical tanks, weighing about 165 pounds (75 kilograms) total. The tanks are made of a special carbon composite material with the high structural strength needed to contain high-pressure hydrogen gas. The tanks in the current model hold about 4.5 pounds (2 kg) of hydrogen at about 5,000 pounds per square inch (350 bars). In future models, the Hy-wire engineers hope to increase the pressure threshold to 10,000 pounds per square inch (700 bars), which would boost the car's fuel capacity to extend the driving range. <br></TD></TR></TABLE><br>source: <A HREF="http://www.howstuffworks.com" TARGET="_blank">http://www.howstuffworks.com</A><p>And for an explanation as to how hydrogen is liberated for use in fuel cells, here is information from the same site:<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Advantages of the hydrogen economy<br>In the previous section we saw the significant, worldwide problems created by fossil fuels. The hydrogen economy promises to eliminate all of the problems that the fossil fuel economy creates. Therefore, the advantages of the hydrogen economy include: <br>The elimination of pollution caused by fossil fuels - When hydrogen is used in a fuel cell to create power, it is a completely clean technology. The only byproduct is water. There are also no environmental dangers like oil spills to worry about with hydrogen. <p>The elimination of greenhouse gases - If the hydrogen comes from the electrolysis of water, then hydrogen adds no greenhouse gases to the environment. There is a perfect cycle -- electrolysis produces hydrogen from water, and the hydrogen recombines with oxygen to create water and power in a fuel cell. <p>The elimination of economic dependence - The elimination of oil means no dependence on the Middle East and its oil reserves. <p>Distributed production - Hydrogen can be produced anywhere that you have electricity and water. People can even produce it in their homes with relatively simple technology. <p>One of the more interesting problems with the hydrogen economy is the hydrogen itself. Where will it come from? With the fossil fuel economy, you simply pump the fossil fuel out of the ground (see How Oil Drilling Works) and refine it (see How Oil Refining Works). Then you burn it as an energy source. Most of us take oil, gasoline, coal and natural gas for granted, but they are actually quite miraculous. These fossil fuels represent stored solar energy from millions of years ago. Millions of years ago, plants grew using solar energy to power their growth. They died, and eventually turned into oil, coal and natural gas. When we pump oil from the ground, we tap into that huge solar energy storehouse "for free." Whenever we burn a gallon of gasoline, we release that stored solar energy. <p>In the hydrogen economy, there is no storehouse to tap into. We have to actually create the energy in real-time. <p>There are two possible sources for the hydrogen: <p>Electrolysis of water - Using electricity, it is easy to split water molecules to create pure hydrogen and oxygen. One big advantage of this process is that you can do it anywhere. For example, you could have a box in your garage producing hydrogen from tap water, and you could fuel your car with that hydrogen. <p>Reforming fossil fuels - Oil and natural gas contain hydrocarbons -- molecules consisting of hydrogen and carbon. Using a device called a fuel processor or a reformer, you can split the hydrogen off the carbon in a hydrocarbon relatively easily and then use the hydrogen. You discard the leftover carbon to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. <p>In the future, barring some technological breakthrough, it seems likely that one of two things will happen to create the hydrogen economy: Either nuclear-power or solar-power generating capacity will increase dramatically. Remember that, in a pure hydrogen economy, the electrical generating capacity will have to approximately double because all of the energy for transportation that currently comes from oil will have to be replaced with electrically generated hydrogen. So the number of power plants will double, and all of the fossil fuel plants will be replaced. <p>The electrical-generation problem is probably the biggest barrier to the hydrogen economy. Once the technology is refined and becomes inexpensive, fuel-cell vehicles powered by hydrogen could replace gasoline internal combustion engines over the course of a decade or two. But changing the power plants over to nuclear and solar may not be so easy. Nuclear power has political and environmental problems, and solar power currently has cost and location problems.<br></TD></TR></TABLE><br>As you can read, hydrogen production is quite a simple process, as I said, and one of the easiest fuels on earth to produce.

Naga Royal Guard
01-01-2005, 09:39 PM
rofl, its not - trust me <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0">

taskbearer
01-02-2005, 02:26 AM
JBlair, its no wonder you think hydrogen production is easy, you're getting your information from a sixth grade level site that makes everything seem like cany. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bangin.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>Hydrogen production is very tedious and its hard to avoid pollution when producing it. Generating hydrogen from Natural gas as it is currently done gives off CO2, so it is an illusion giving zero pollution at the site of use while polluting at the site of production. It negates the point of using hydrogen on a large scale. <p>Then if you consider producing it using electrolysis from renewable sources, hydrogen always contain a SIGNIFICANTLY lower amount of energy than was used in making it. We are even having a big problem implementing renewable energy sources talk of a switch to hydrogen economy. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/laugh2.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>To give a clearer picture of the source to wheel efficiencies of hydrogen fuel cell, heres a comparative analysis.<br>Fossil fuel power plants are around 30-40 % efficient, except combined cycle natural gas plants, which are about 50 %. In this case, the "oil well/coalmine/etc. to power plant" losses are very small, so we can forget that. Electricity distribution is close to 90 % in well-designed systems, so grid power produced by fossil fuel is between 30 and 45 %. If we use that to power an electric car, the battery can be about 85 % efficient, electric motor and control system 90 %, so we have "source to wheel" efficiency between <B>20 and 32%</B>. Now for a really bad example, consider a fuel cell car powered by liquid hydrogen produced by electrolysis where the electricity is produced by a coal plant. If the plant is 40 %, electrolysis at most 70 %, liquefaction 66 %, fuel cell 65 %, electric motor 90 %. All in all we get a dismal <B>10 % efficiency or a still disappointing13%</B>if we compress the hydrogen. Combined with the poor efficiency, the electricity generated from hydrogen would cost four times as much as grid electricity. <p>All I'm trying to say is that its better to use batteries than hydrogen, Volvo has already proven this with their 3CC. Its only a matter of time that the automakers wake up from this hydrogen halucination. Enjoy <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0">

Naga Royal Guard
01-02-2005, 05:18 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>taskbearer</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">JBlair, its no wonder you think hydrogen production is easy, you're getting your information from a sixth grade level site that makes everything seem like cany. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/bangin.gif" BORDER="0"> <br> </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>yeah,. that can be a bit of a problem <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/laugh2.gif" BORDER="0">

spwolf
01-02-2005, 10:32 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>taskbearer</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>All I'm trying to say is that its better to use batteries than hydrogen, Volvo has already proven this with their 3CC. Its only a matter of time that the automakers wake up from this hydrogen halucination. Enjoy <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I think that people that follow the industry know this, however there are several reasons why companies still taut hydrogen:<p>a. ultimate goal of eco vehicle is much closer with hydrogen than fossile fuels<br>b. hydrogen fuel source is indefinite<br>c. most companies are far behind Toyota and Honda in hybrid systems, and they try to make it sound as if hybrid system is an worse option and that they are working on something much better - hydrogen.<p>Toyota for example knows this very well. In fact, their goal is to use hybrid system in hydrogen engines as well, because they will bring efficiency of any kind of engine up.<p>Most journalists still write about hybrids as mid-term solution to the final goal - hydrogen, not understanding that hybrid system is ultimatly always going to be the more efficient than anything else.<p>I am getting sick of all these companies claiming some prototypes while most of them have nothing even close to be ready for production and most systems are just wish on the paper. BMW mentioning their dual system (hydrogen+petrol) for production sometimes in 2007 is utterly stupid. How inefficent will that system be in 2.5ton vehicle? Just an stupid gimmick that will never see the production.<p>Hydrogen is THE FUTURE, due to its eco friendliness that will be much more important in the future, when our planet will suffer from high pollution levels, however hydrogen engine paired with electric engine is what the future really holds for us - and it is not due to efficiency since something like diesel - hybrid will always be much cheaper and more efficient technology, however diesel engines are run on depletable energy source and are actually high pollutants.

Naga Royal Guard
01-02-2005, 12:47 PM
but it is w/ fact that getting cheap, clean and pure hydrogen isnt going to be easy and the hybrid systems are indeed the prelude to hydrogen systems

JBlair
01-02-2005, 01:01 PM
See, though, the thing of it is that the information does clearly say that the Hydrogen economy would also require a major overhaul of the energy sector. I never said that you could snap your fingers and have hydrogen, it just is not as hard as you make it seem to be. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>taskbearer</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> <p>All I'm trying to say is that its better to use batteries than hydrogen, Volvo has already proven this with their 3CC. Its only a matter of time that the automakers wake up from this hydrogen halucination. Enjoy <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><br>What you have obviously failed to realize is that batteries need a source of electricity for their power. At present, almost all of that electricity comes from Fossil-fuel power stations, which would result in just as much pollution to power the battery car as for an internal combustion engine. The answer to that problem, at least in the intermediary, has been the development of hybrid powered cars. Those, however, are only a short-term solution. Remember when automakers were soundly criticize, as you are criticizing them now, about the fact that hybrids would never take hold and that they were a pipe-dream bound to fail. Now look at it; every major automaker on earth is scrambling to produce hybrids. Despite your obvious bias against the concept of hydrogen powered cars or fuel cells, there is absolutely nothing standing in the way of a hydrogen car once the infrastructure is in place.

taskbearer
01-02-2005, 04:35 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JBlair</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>What you have obviously failed to realize is that batteries need a source of electricity for their power. At present, almost all of that electricity comes from Fossil-fuel power stations, which would result in just as much pollution to power the battery car as for an internal combustion engine. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>UhUhmm... Thats the same with hydrogen, currently its being produced from natural gas and the same pollution scenario occurs with electrolysis. Because majority of all present electricity is generated from fossilfuel, either batteries or hydrogen would pollute. on the other hand electricity from green resources would create true zero pollution. This is where my efficiency comparison on the previous post comes into play. <p>FACT: no matter what a battery system would always be more efficient than converting electricity to hydrogen and then back to electricity in fuel cell to drive electric motors. <br>INFO: elctricity and hydrogen are forms of energy,<br>1. they both have to be produced either using fossil fuel or renewable energy.<br>2. they both need to be stored: hydrogen in pressurized tanks while electricity in batteries.<br>3. they both leak in storage.<br>4. the process of storing electricity is way more efficient at 90%, pressurizing hydrogen is at most 70%.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JBlair</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Remember when automakers were soundly criticize, as you are criticizing them now, about the fact that hybrids would never take hold and that they were a pipe-dream bound to fail. Now look at it; every major automaker on earth is scrambling to produce hybrids. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>What automakers, they knew the possibilities of hybrids, they themselves were skeptical about commercial viability. it was up to toyota and honda to prove the system COMMERCIALLY viable. Now they know its inevitable not to produce hybrids. Just as Spwolf said the only reason nearly every automaker has a fuel cell program is just because it sounds clean. <p>They all know they can't sell one anytime soon. The situation with fuel cells is going to be similar to batteries in the 90's. After a while every automaker would abandon their fuel cell effort and fuel cells would be left to consumer electronics, where they would flourish. Then when they are ripe, commercial viability in cars would be jsut on the horizone. More enjoyment <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.germancarfans.com/images/forums/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> <BR><BR>
<i>Modified by taskbearer at 6:39 PM 1/2/2005</i>

Naga Royal Guard
01-02-2005, 05:33 PM
<IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> taskbearer

JBlair
01-02-2005, 10:25 PM
Its called baby steps, with the first being hydrogen powered internal combustion engines, then moving on to fuel cells. The advantage of fuel cells, is that, when the technology is far enough along, they will have a range that batteries could not match. Besides that, for longer range batteries, they need to bigger and heavier, sacrificing what little (and I do mean little) efficiency advantage they have over a fuel cell or regular gasoline engine. Not to mention the fact that batteries are limited-life storage mediums; sooner or later they will die and their toxic innards will have to be disposed of. Fuel cells and hydrogen are different than the battery powered crap-cars of the 90s; they have real advantages and there is an understanding that they are the only option if the automobile is to survive for past this century. Automakers won't abandon them as easily as you may think; they know it will take time to get them on the road, but they also understand that being last to have one when they do take hold is detrimental to their business. Each option has advantages and disadvantages, but the industry is moving toward fuel cells because they believe that the cars must have a balance of efficiency and performance, but also must be reasonably like internal combustion engines in characteristics. (no, I do not mean NVH or any of that crap)<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by JBlair at 11:31 PM 1/2/2005</i>

Nick
01-02-2005, 10:35 PM
I dont think these corporations should be criticized for the further development of these types of technologies...for if they dont develop these kind of things, and dont go further into understanding making these things viably possible, then these technologies which show a lot of potential may never make it to real world...it is up to the corporations to push these kinds of things, and bring these ideas to life...the more they are developed, the closer they become to hitting the streets...

thegriffon
01-02-2005, 11:11 PM
Batteries themselves are a major source of pollution, and present another major problem for high-energy applications - weight and energy density. Even consumer electronics companies are developing small fuel cells in response to increased power demands from mobile devices. That means power needs to be generated on board. Even with the aid of batteries and hybrid systems to increase efficiency the internal combutstion engine is extremely innefficient. Stationary power generators producing much higher power levels are much more efficient, making up for the losses in hydrogen storage, and not solely dependent on fluid hydrocarbons for fuel. A much wider range of material can also be used in hydrogen reforming plants, much more simply than creating a standardised synthetic fuel. Landfills, oil crops and high carbohydrate crops could all be used as feedstock for hydrogen reformers with little or no external energy required (cane, beet and grain farmers would be very happy).

Naga Royal Guard
01-04-2005, 12:53 PM
that settles it then, pictures should be around soon..........