![]() California always leads the way. California Drives the Future of the Automobile Impatience with fossil fuels is moving and shaking California, which is the sixth largest
economy in the world and the state with the dirtiest air. The leaders have
their sights set on hydrogen.
California governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, came to office October 2003 promising to sign an executive order to create a "hydrogen highway" with hydrogen fueling stations every 20 miles on California's major roads. "I intend to show the world that economic growth and the environment can coexist," he told constituents in his January 2004 State of the State address. This may sound strange coming from a former Hollywood action hero who has owned at least seven Hummers, gargantuan vehicles that only get 10 to 12 miles per gallon. But Schwarzenegger is coming through on his promise. Six months after taking office, he signed an executive order to develop the new California Hydrogen Highway Network by 2010. The fueling stations are meant to spur the commercialization of fuel cell vehicles, which use hydrogen, the lightest and most abundant element in the universe, to produce electricity and pure water vapor with zero emissions of pollution. The Highway is planned to have up to 100 filling stations and 2000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010. So far, the automakers have placed 120 light-duty fuel cell cars on the road, while the energy companies involved: Shell, Chevron, British Petroleum and Air Products, which works with hydrogen, have built 24 stations. About 15 more are planned and three have been decommissioned. The pumps are being placed in the parking lots of "big box" retail stores, in the maintenance yards of bus stations, at rest stops along highways, at a university and other places.
The drive to introduce fuel cell vehicles is getting a big boost from legislation the state adopted in 1990 requiring that 10 percent of new vehicles produced for sale by 2003 be "zero-emissions." This has since been modified to require that by 2008, only 250 vehicles of the 10 percent must be zero emission, such as fuel cell or battery electric; the others must be low-emission hybrids or super-clean vehicles. A University of California professor and transportation analyst, Daniel Sperling wrote in 1994 that the ZEV (zero emission vehicle) mandate "had probably spurred more progress in electric propulsion technology in a few years than took place over the course of twenty years under the combined auspices of the auto industry and DOE." He said, "Every major automaker in the world has now invested in electric vehicle development. ... Hundreds of companies are sprouting up to develop and commercialize critical technologies of the future, such as flywheels, batteries, ultracapacitors and fuel cells." In the early years, the primary purpose of the energy stations on the hydrogen highway will likely be to provide hydrogen for stationary fuel cells used by buildings and industry, according to California government officials.
Installed in the garage, the appliance could fuel a vehicle overnight when electricity rates are lower. Water electrolysis takes six to eight hours to produce enough hydrogen to travel 50 to 70 miles. The large amount of electricity used can mean costly electric bills and increased pollution by dirty coal-burning power plants unless the electricity is produced with wind turbines or solar panels. Extracting hydrogen from gasoline, natural gas, methanol or coal requires less electricity than water electrolysis and is therefore more cost effective, but the process creates a waste-water byproduct and fails to break reliance on Mid East oil. Some of the hydrogen produced by the fueling stations on the Hydrogen Highway will be reformed from fossil fuels, but Schwarzenegger has promised that a "significant and increasing percentage" will be produced using renewable energy. The U.S. Department of Energy under Bush envisions that natural gas and coal could be used to produce hydrogen "for many decades." In the future, "renewables and nuclear" may supply the electricity for water electrolysis, said the department. Some in California are advocating that the engines of the automobiles already on the road should be modified to burn hydrogen. For instance, David Freeman, who was a top energy advisor to the former governor, Gray Davis, energy advisor to President Carter and manager of the Sacramento Utility District, said in a speech in July of 2003: "It’s not a secret. It’s a wellknown fact that the internal combustion engine loves hydrogen. We don’t have to wait for the fuel cell." Fuel cells do not burn hydrogen -- they involve no combustion in producing electricity. But with engine adjustments, internal combustion engines can burn hydrogen. Hydrogen does not produce as much power as gasoline does when it is burned since hydrogen burns at much higher temperatures, but hydrogen burns more efficiently than gasoline. "The exhaust is almost nothing but harmless water vapor plus trace emissions from tiny amounts of engine lubricants," said Peter Hoffmann, who edits the Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Letter, "If combusted with oxygen, no carbon monoxide, or carbon dioxide is emitted. No unburned hydrocarbons, no stench, no smoke, nor any of the other carbon-bearing, earth-befouling discharges we suffer today." Professor Andy Frank, who teaches mechanical and aeronautical engineering at the University of California, Davis, said an engine can be modified to burn hydrogen for $1,000 or $2,000, but it could be considerably more expensive if one purchases an injection system that is sure to be leak proof.
The conclusion of a 1976 Southern Research Institute study said: "While the invisibility of the flame makes the fire difficult to locate and fight, firefighters can get very close to the flame (assuming they know where it is) without injury. Since it is also difficult to feel warmth from the flame, a person can easily move right into the flame and be burned, but surrounding objects do not heat up and ignite unless touched by the flame directly." Hydrogen can be mixed with a colorant or with small quantities of gaseous hydrocarbons to increase the flame visibility. Dan Sperling, director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California at Davis, said we have to be careful not to put hydrogen in a negative light. "It does have safety concerns," he said, "but so does gasoline. Consider the many fires and explosions from gasoline. None of these would have happened with hydrogen." The 1976 SRI study revealed: "Out in the open, without confinement, it is almost impossible to bring hydrogen to an explosion with a spark of heat or a flame. It can only be detonated with a suitable initiator such as a heavy blasting cap. ... When confined in a completely closed space -- a room or a tank -- hydrogen can be detonated over a wide range of concentrations ... It takes very little energy to ignite a hydrogen flame -- about 20 microjules. Methane requires 12 times as much energy -- 290 microjules to set off a burn. Gasoline needs about 240 microjules." Sensors are being developed that will detect hydrogen leaks. Professor Frank said safety concerns will cause long delays in moving the country toward a hydrogen economy. But even if there were no safety concerns, he doesn’t see hydrogen as the best alternative for breaking dependence on fossil fuels. He and many energy experts say it is an inefficient use of electricity to use fuel cells, that more energy is always invested to create the hydrogen than is contained in the hydrogen. They say it would be simpler and more efficient to use electricity to charge batteries that power electric vehicles. Professor Frank advocates that we focus instead on a technology "ready-togo" that gets more than 100 miles per gallon -- plug-in hybrids. Plug-in hybrids were being discussed in engineering literature as vehicles that could fix the shortcomings of electric vehicles, then Professor Frank built the first one. The major problem with electric vehicles when they were taken off the market was that they only get 120-150 miles before the battery has to be recharged.
But now there is an electric vehicle, the plug-in hybrid, that has an unlimited range. These vehicles have the capacity to go 60 miles solely on electricity supplied by a battery before automatically shifting to an internal combustion engine that burns gasoline or ethanol. Professor Frank explained that the reason he designed the vehicle to have an electric range of only 60 miles when a range of 120-150 miles possible is because batteries are expensive. To recharge the battery, the vehicle is plugged into a 120 volt wall socket. "When one forgets to recharge the battery at night, gasoline can just be burned the next day, but daily travel would cost three times as much," said Professor Frank, a Chinese American with a quick smile. "However, it would still be cheaper than driving a conventional car since the plug-in hybrid is very efficient. Running soley on gasoline, this vehicle gets twice the fuel economy of a conventional gasoline car." When the calculation includes the all electric range, the plug-in hybrids get over 100 miles per gallon. Professor Frank and his students have re-engineered nine sedans and sport utility vehicles to be plug-in hybrids. One was a Ford Taurus that originally got 24 miles per gallon, but now gets 68 mpg once the engine has shifted to gasoline. To achieve this fuel economy, Professor Frank did not merely put batteries in a conventional automobile. He made the engine much smaller and simpler, with
Professor Frank says plug-in hybrids vehicles could "get us out of the Middle East and Iraq right now. … Seventy percent of all people driving would use no gasoline at all on a daily basis if they plug-in at night when electricity rates are cheaper. The remaining 30 percent would use only a small amount of gasoline per day. … The liquid fuel could easily be ethanol that we currently produce for blending with gasoline [in California.] Thus, these plug-in hybrid electric vehicles could use no gasoline at all." The vehicle could cut an individual’s trip to the gas station from 35 to 5 times per year and reduce U.S. consumption of gasoline by 90 percent, according to a three-volume report published cooperatively by the California Air Resources Board, the California Energy Commission , The National Renewable Energy Laboratory and other organizations. Former Secretary of State George Shultz and former CIA director James Woolsey promoted plug-in hybrids in a policy paper decrying "the dangers of oil dependency." The country "would be substantially more secure" if plug-in hybrids were marketed, they wrote. Professor Frank said, "The buzz is that all the automakers in Japan are interested in building plug-in hybrids |