I think the hype on fuel cell cars may finally be starting to die out. This has to be the first mainstream press article on the subject I've read that's not gushing with
Popular Mechanics 1950s gee-whiz futurism - you know, the illustrated car adverts showing deliriously happy people cruising past in their giant bulgmobiles with 12' fins?
If affordable FCVs were
right around the corner (read: ~5 years away) and they were as affordable and (relatively) simple as ICE vehicles, then all the hype would mean something. But they're not. Even if we assume that the major cost issues associated with fuel cell manufacture disappear overnight they still won't make sense because the hydrogen infrastructure has to be built up from scratch - and it's not going to be as cheap as the gasoline infrastructure. You're
always going to pay far more "per gallon" for hydrogen than you will for gas.
The major hurdles on FCVs?
- The sheer mass of platinum required to make low-temperature hydrogen fuul cells
- The supporting pumps, battery pack, cooling systems, and monitoring/control systems combined are far more complex than the average engine - complexity is the enemy of reliability
- Even under laboratory conditions, the lifespan of the Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) in a fuel cell isn't as great as the average engine's lifespan ... and I believe that it dereriorates with greater demand. PEMs are very sensitive to contamination as wel.
- No practical/affordable vehicle fuel cell stack in existence today can supply enough power to meet the peak demands of the vehicle - a supplementary battery pack to "buffer" demand from the fuel cell is necessary for acceleration and high-speed travel. Whether FCVs can operate at high-speed for long periods of time remains to be seen since you're limited to peak fuel cell stack output once the battery pack is drained
Yes, I used the term "cheap" to describe the gasoline infrastructure - hydrogen is a volatile, light gas that evades even the best seals. Since we all know that it would be the end of America to "refuel" at home, we're going to have to build hydrogen fueling stations to maintain those most precious, core American institutions - gas stations and convenience stores.
I have no idea what a "hydrogen" pump is going to cost, but I'm going to guess that it's going to be quite a bit more than a gasoline pump, what with the multiple redundant seals and high pressure required (~10,000 PSI on most prototype FCVs). It's going to take a great deal of energy to generate that kind of pressure - twice - both at the pump and from the pipeline or fuel truck that feeds the "gas station."
Did I mention that hydrogen is volatile? Ever seen a demonstration in a chemistry class? Touch a match to a hydrogen balloon - there's no flame, just a little flash, a lound bang, and often singed eyebrows on the part of the instructor doing the demo. That demo is typically done with a 2:1 mixture of hydrogen and oxygen - otherwise there would be even more hydrogen reacting with a mixed atmosphere, which might tend to dislodge ceiling tiles,
really injure the instructor, and cause more damage by
burning a bit slower.
I feel safer living close to a gas station - where they only have to contain a liquid that doesn't burn so fast, with vapors heavier than the atmosphere - than I would living next to a large store of hydrogen with people coming and going. And the occasional smoker too stupid or self-righteous to stop smoking as soon as he gets within sight of the place.
Barring some unforseen scientific breakthroughs, fuel cells will remain interesting laboratory devices and niche-application power/heat/water supplies. Hydrogen is the ideal fuel only on paper - it has too many problems in practice.
I have to wonder why we're so hopelessly stuck on the idea that vehicles need
fuel anyway. Energy is essential to performing work, and fuel is but one way to store it. Engines usually more complex than motors - engines consume fuel to produce energy and do work; Motors do work with supplied energy.