What is it with Basem Wasef and million-dollar cars? First he test-drove the Lamborghini Reventon for me here at the Cars site, and now he's reviewed the hydrogen fuel-cell powered 2009 Honda FCX Clarity for About.com's Alternative Fuels site. Not that the FCX Clarity will cost consumers a million dollars -- actually, those lucky few Californians who get to lease one will do so for 36 months at $600 per month, which includes insurance coverage. So what's it like to drive fossil-fuel-free? Find out in Basem's 2009 Honda FCX Clarity test drive and review. -- Aaron Gold
Photo © Basem Wasef
HOOORAY FOR HONDA!!!
Is this the way out of the oil darkended wilderness of energy blackmail and greed? Probably not, but does it light the way of hope that there can be personal transportation without polluting fossil fuels? ooooh yeah! Now that we know it CAN be done the flood gates should open up. If the USA wants to be a true world leader, it should aggressive offer to subsidize and reward companies like Honda to keep this ball rolling and start others in different directions. The knowledge that something can actually be done opens the possibility of innovation at a breathtaking pace. We all stand to gain, so we need to push our legislators to financially enable these entrepreneurs of technology. Well, we ALL don’t stand to gain… a few sheiks, oil execs, and their “bought and sold” politicians shall voice their scepticism, but we know who you are!
I’m retired and I’m thinking I don’t need two cars anymore, so one fuel efficient car makes sense to me. Whether I buy a hybrid, a hydrogen fueled or a diesel depends more on the cars styling than most manufacturers realize. Just because the car is innovative and engineered out the wazoo doesn’t mean it has to look like an angry refrigerator. I can’t honestly consider a Prius or a Clarity because they’re just too ugly and the dashboards require an electrical engineer to adjust the AC.
OK, I’m done
Right now the vast majority of hydrogen is made from natural gas. By striping the carbon from natural gas to make hydrogen you end up with EXACTLY the same carbon output as burning it but with less usable power output.
Next Hydrogen is nasty stuff. Not really from fire aka the Hindenburg fear but it is hard to store and to transport. Hydrogen loves to leak and you can not just put Hydrogen into a pipe line meant for Natural Gas. Look up Hydrogen embrittlement for details. Generation Hydrogen from water takes more electrical energy than you get from using the Hydrogen in a fuel cell so using that seems a bit iffy. You can get it from coal but again you are wasting some of the energy from the coal and producing some carbon.
Not to say it isn’t interesting and that it doesn’t have a future but it isn’t a super slam dunk solution.
The real reason why we keep using gas and lately diesel full has nothing to do with any conspiracy by the government or big oil companies. The real reason is that they work really really well. They are a mature and efficient technology with a huge and expensive infrastructure in place.
If we get enough green electric to make lots of hydrogen in the future it may be cheaper and easier to just us it with atmospheric carbon to make synthetic fuel.
I’m sure all your technical arguments are all very sound. But the hitch is that the resources of oil are finite (even with new discoveries off the coast of Brazil) and the demand for those dwindling reserves are rising exponentially with the tremendous development of India and China. We are headed toward a crisis and though as I said above this may only be the spark that sets off a chain of explosive new discoveries. We have to support new discoveries. Criticism gives no security with a future of looming energy shortages, should we comfortably maintain the status quo.