GM to have fuel cell cars in showrooms by 2012

I thought a couple of weeks ago they I remember reading an article up saying when will have it sooner?

Anyway it does not matter because Honda will start saling hydrogen vechicles by the 2008 or the end of 2008.

Wow. And Toyota looks the other way when it comes to Hydrogen

Hydrogen sounds dangerous but it is actually very safe. Hydrogen goes straight up. People who panicked and jumped off the burning Hindenburg right away should have waited until the gondola got close to the ground before jumping and running away from the radiant heat of the inferno. Hydrogen storage on cars could be designed to survive a head-on collision at full speed.
I believe that we are destined to eventually embrace a hydrogen economy. It fits right in with solving many of our environmental problems. Hydrogen energy, like nuclear energy, is a clean energy.

Everyone seems to forget that petrol is explosive too.
And you know, it wasn't the hydrogen that caused the fire on the Hindenburg? It was the paint on the fabric, and a static shock from the mooring line. Ignited the paint, which is why the outside burned. And yes the hydrogen will just go straight up.

Rupert, you are right on all accounts. I think it's funny people say "Oh no hydrogen?? But that could explode!!!" As if our internal COMBUSTION engines with rapidly oxidizing hydrocarbon chains don't have that danger. Anyway I am a little skeptical about the date. It seems this hydrogen technology has been just over the next hill for decades. I hope their right though...and to think, the emissions are pure water.

I hate to be argumentative, but petroleum under normal conditions is flammable not explosive. It does not detonate it deflagrates. Its degree of volatility depends upon the grade and if it is gasoline or diesel. Diesel burns much slower than gasoline. These fuels must be mixed with air and compressed to be of sufficiently fast deflagration. There is a point where the compression is high enough that it will spontaneously combust [knocking]. Hydrogen has a high flammability span, and I am quite sure that it spans, depending on the mixture percentages, both the deflagration and detonation regimes.

I remember a demonstration first semester of college, my Chemistry I professor taking a large balloon and filling it with hydrogen gas to about 3 ft wide. He put it on a very long pole and surrounded the balloon with smoke. This was a large auditorium styled room and was probably the largest class I have taken at about 200 students. Then took another long pole with a wick on the end and lit it. When he placed the flame on the balloon, you could see the shock wave travel through the smoke and the pressure differential was enough to open a door on the side of the room. The boom was unbelievable loud, but the most startling thing is I was sitting in the back ¾ of the room and it was so hot that at the time I was amazed I still had eyebrows. For a split second there was a huge fireball where the balloon had been.

The thing is oil is not pressurized under normal conditions which decrease its volatility. You take gas, and light it; it will burn sure, but relatively slowly. If you have hydrogen gas, it is always pressurized. The burn rates are so different in these situations that they are not really comparable at all. Pressurized vesel failure at times can lead to the spontanous combustion of the hydrogen gas.

hydrogen cars are good but will there be enough hydrogen pumps in some countries seems like petroleum will still be the demand

but will they work???

Honda and BMW will beat them. Surprising.





Not.

I just realized something. Honda was first for the hybrid, but they didn't capitalize on it... they're going to be first in the mass-production of hydrogen, too, so they better market it in every magazine, à la Prius.

Despite his being de-boosted Arcy brings up a good point; infrastructure is not created overnight. In my mind, if your desire is to make it to a hydrogen economy, then the most rational intermediate step is hybrid technology until such time as the infrastructure has been put in place; which would probably take on the order to decades.

In addition, I don’t know who exactly has and has not thought of this, but even if all that is produced from cars is water vapor: that is not truly environmentally benign. Environmentally benign is zero emissions. You can argue that it is better, perhaps. If enough water vapor is released into the atmosphere rises, condenses and falls as rain, it is possible to induce a permanent state of flooding. At this point that is all that supposition is; a possibility and a worst case one at that. I have not seen a study on what effect x additional volume of water vapor would have on the environment.

Further, I know that some people in the world support some of these technologies with the belief that it will destroy the oil companies. I am here to tell you that such a circumstance is not going to happen. Hydrocarbons have such wide and varied uses that it is very difficult to remove it from economies. Everything from painkillers to plastics is made from hydrocarbons. In addition, what about jets? The first product that is refined from crude oil is aviation fuel. Even the entire transportation industry will still need fuel for quite some time, and not just because the infrastructure in going into place. In fact, it behooves the aircraft companies in a way to keep hydrocarbon fuels as their source in a long term way, for when your hydrogen economy kicks in, it will unrestrain the market and the price of fuel will fall- and they are not out any R&D costs.

whine, whine, whine. How about actually give GM Congrats for actually being an American Company that's up on the times for once. Geez...