backtop

Gadgets Ford Seeing Green with SUVs
Brandon Hill (Blog) - November 27, 2006 9:16 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 37 comment(s) - last by techhead97.. on Nov 28 at 7:52 PM

2008 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Explorer Limited

2008 Ford Escape Hybrid "spy shots"

Spy shots courtesy car online
Ford to unveil two new environmentally-friendly SUVs at this year's L.A. Auto Show

At this year's L.A. Auto Show, Ford is expected to show two eco-friendly SUVs -- one of which will be soon available for the public to purchase. Later this week, Ford will unveil a fuel cell-powered Explorer and a second generation Escape Hybrid.

Ford has been secretly testing its 6-passenger fuel cell Explorer for the past year in Motown and has logged over 17,000 test miles with the vehicle. The vehicle features a  50 kW hybrid battery and two 65 kW electric motors -- one on each axle. As to not impede on cargo/passenger space, hydrogen tank is mounted within the central tunnel normally reserved for the transmission, transfer case and driveshaft.

The fuel cell Explorer is said to achieve 350 miles on a single tank of hydrogen. For comparison, a V6-powered 4WD Explorer can travel 337.5 miles/450 miles (city/highway) on a single tank of gasoline and a V8-powered 4WD Explorer can go 315 miles/ 450 miles (city/highway).

Also on display will be Ford's new 2008 Escape Hybrid. The previous generation compact hybrid SUV has been quite popular due to its attractive price tag and many can be seen zipping through New York City as taxi cabs. With the help of its second generation hybrid drivetrain, the 2008 Escape Hybrid is sure to improve on the current AWD model's 33MPG/29MPG (city/highway) figures.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Where's the hydrogen stations?
By cyberguyz on 11/27/2006 9:51:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The fuel cell Explorer is said to achieve 350 miles on a single tank of hydrogen . For comparison, a V6-powered 4WD Explorer can travel 337.5 miles/450 miles (city/highway) on a single tank of gasoline and a V8-powered 4WD Explorer can go 315 miles/ 450 miles (city/highway).


Where would you get the hydrogen? I haven's seen any service stations that can offer you a fill-up. If there are any I am sure they are more than 350 miles apart...




RE: Where's the hydrogen stations?
By d33pblue on 11/27/2006 10:03:52 AM , Rating: 2
The only real problem with hydrogen vehicles right now are lack of an infrastructure to fuel and service them. That, ultimately, may be the hardest part of hydrogen adoption. Hydrogen storage, fueling, and metering are currently non-existent to the general public and completely uncompatible with their analogous gasoline counterparts.

It is going to be *very* expensive to equip gasoline stations for hydrogen distribution. Hopefully the cost will primarily fall on the fuel companies and not the gas stations themselves. If we get stuck waiting on country mom-and-pop stores to spend many thousands of dollars on hydrogen equipment, adoption will be very slow indeed.


RE: Where's the hydrogen stations?
By sdedward on 11/27/2006 10:42:44 AM , Rating: 5
Thats not the only real problem. Another problem is the fact that currently fossil fuels, the ones we are trying to decrease dependance on, are a major source of hydrogen. Until there is a way to economically, financially and resource-wise, to create hydrogen fuel, we are robbing Peter to pay Judas.


By heulenwolf on 11/27/2006 12:36:58 PM , Rating: 2
Chicken or the egg. This is just a first step. Car companies have a research budget. Gas stations don't. If they are going to sell any H-fueled Explorers anytime soon, maybe they'll start with fleet customers who would rather keep their fuel dispensing centralized (e.g. existing Natural Gas fleets). It may turn out, it may not. Its certain to never turn out if nobody builds any H-fueled cars, however.


RE: Where's the hydrogen stations?
By walk2k on 11/27/2006 1:18:33 PM , Rating: 3
Hydrogen comes from water , not oil.

The energy to split it can come from any source. Wind, solar, geothermal, coal, etc etc etc...

The reason you don't see hydrogen tanks at every gas station is SURPRISE the oil companies own them all!


By doctor sam adams on 11/27/2006 1:36:06 PM , Rating: 2
Hydrogen does come from water, but the energy required to produce it is so great the source generally has to be fossil fuel to enable mass production (at the moment).


RE: Where's the hydrogen stations?
By Whedonic on 11/27/2006 4:30:22 PM , Rating: 1
There's currently much more economical to crack hydrogen from fossil fuels than from water.


By ChristopherO on 11/27/2006 6:42:26 PM , Rating: 3
Actually Honda had a really cool concept... They would attach a hydrogen extractor to the natural gas line of every house... If your home got NG service, then the extractor would replenish itself of the course of the consumption of normal NG usage.

The device wasn't cheap, but I think this is really the way to go and eventually optimal for commuters.


RE: Where's the hydrogen stations?
By AaronAxvig on 11/27/2006 10:04:38 AM , Rating: 2
Here is the government's station locator page: http://afdcmap2.nrel.gov/locator/


By marvdmartian on 11/27/2006 11:48:42 AM , Rating: 1
Oh, good deal! I only have to travel 750 miles, to Phonix, AZ, in order to find hydrogen!!

Good thing I'll be driving an SUV, as I'll need to tow a crygenic trailer behind me, with enough capacity to go another (minimum) 800 miles, just in order to be able to do the round-trip to the filling station! ;)


RE: Where's the hydrogen stations?
By TomZ on 11/27/2006 10:05:49 AM , Rating: 2
http://www.google.com/search?q=hydrogen+fill+stati...

You're right - they're not exactly as plentiful as gas and diesel stations. Hydrogen-fueled vehicles are not generally viable for the public at this point due to lack of infrastructure. Ford's hybrids are much more practical in this regard.


RE: Where's the hydrogen stations?
By zsouthboy on 11/27/2006 10:07:45 AM , Rating: 2
That's a chicken and egg problem, though.


By copiedright on 11/27/2006 4:14:16 PM , Rating: 2
In Japan I know of two hydrogen refilling stations.
One is owned by Mazda and allows a grand total of two cars refilled per day!


Looks Good
By Mazzer on 11/27/2006 10:09:36 AM , Rating: 2
Getting away from the hybrid/fuel cell debate this is the first picture I have seen of the new Escape. As a car guy I love that it has a much more aggressive front end but still has the same 'cute' back end.




RE: Looks Good
By TomZ on 11/27/2006 10:15:05 AM , Rating: 4
A guy would never talk about a car's "cute back end." :o)


RE: Looks Good
By DigitalFreak on 11/27/2006 11:10:49 AM , Rating: 3
'less he was gay.


RE: Looks Good
By gsellis on 11/27/2006 3:35:46 PM , Rating: 2
Cars are girls.


RE: Looks Good
By killerroach on 11/27/2006 11:49:34 AM , Rating: 4
Agreed that it isn't too bad for a glorified station wagon (which is about all these smaller, lower-to-the-ground SUVs for the soccer-mom crowd really are), although the gas mileage still isn't particularly impressive for being a hybrid. I know I shouldn't be expecting miracles or anything, but 33/29 is only really a slight improvement over the non-hybrid 2007 Escape XLT, except for the city mileage (the XLT nets 20/24).

So, all things considered, it's meant as more of an urban vehicle, I take it. Nothing wrong with that, just would probably stick with something noticeably smaller if I was spending a lot of time in city traffic (probably along the lines of a Honda Accord, Ford Fusion, or Chevy Malibu, which would be more maneuverable, cheaper, and have comparable to better gas mileage).

But when was a hybrid SUV necessarily about being practical?


RE: Looks Good
By Myrandex on 11/27/2006 3:44:58 PM , Rating: 2
Those figures were only on the old model, as this model is supposed to improve upon those figures.


RE: Looks Good
By tfranzese on 11/27/2006 4:30:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I know I shouldn't be expecting miracles or anything, but 33/29 is only really a slight improvement over the non-hybrid 2007 Escape XLT, except for the city mileage (the XLT nets 20/24).


I believe you're reading that wrong. The current AWD is 33/29 and the numbers for the hybrid are not listed.


MPG estimates are a joke
By DigitalFreak on 11/27/2006 11:08:27 AM , Rating: 2
The MPG estimates for the gasoline powered vehicles are a joke. The testing is done in a controlled environment, so they are the "best case". Rarely does anyone hit those numbers.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/c...




RE: MPG estimates are a joke
By TomZ on 11/27/2006 11:12:07 AM , Rating: 2
That's true of all cars, hybrid or conventional. The reason for this is that EPA sets objective standards for the industry, and individual manufacturers self-certify their MPG ratings based on these standardized tests. On the plus side, at least the tests are objective, so they can be used to compare between different models and manufacturers. On the down side, maybe the EPA tests could be made more realistic, although this is technically challenging.


RE: MPG estimates are a joke
By marvdmartian on 11/27/2006 11:56:21 AM , Rating: 5
If I recall correctly, the EPA will force the auto industry to adopt new standards of testing for the 2008 or 2009 model vehicles. Finally, after years of everyone (including the auto makers, from what I understand) telling them that the standards were skewed, they've decided to change them. Basically, this will be more realistic, since they'll be testing the cars with the a/c on, more electrical stuff running, etc.

What this will do to the average mile per gallon figures that the government forces on the automakers ought to be interesting to see. If all of a sudden Ford's or GM's average mpg drops from the government mandated numbers, to say, 5 mpg below that, and it's due to new testing, will the government still force them to make cars more economical?

It'll be interesting.....we'll see if the auto makers can make more economical engines, without losing out performance at the same time, like they were incapable of doing during the 70's. Hopefully, 30 years of engineering technology will pay off!


RE: MPG estimates are a joke
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 11/27/2006 11:17:19 AM , Rating: 2
My car is rated at 25/31. I regularly get around 28 in the city and about 35 on the highway.


RE: MPG estimates are a joke
By Spivonious on 11/27/2006 12:29:50 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah mine's rated at 26/34 and I regularly get 26/37. It all depends on how you drive.


RE: MPG estimates are a joke
By TheLiberalTruth on 11/27/2006 12:47:31 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, mine's rated 30 mpg for the highway and I regularly get 30 to 34 doing the speed limit in OH and PA (65mph) and 30-31 in WV (70mph).
Then again, I'm that one guy you see actually doing the speed limit.


Hybid and fuel cell. Why?
By Guigsy on 11/27/2006 4:40:48 PM , Rating: 2
Here in Europe we've only got a handful of hybrids like the Prius and the Lexus 400h (??? the suv). I don't get the point. Plain straight diesels get as good or better mpg, especially in real-world use and yet cost less money to buy and service. The diesel in Europe has been pretty close the the US 'ultra low sulphur' standard for about 5 years without legislation, so there's no 'green' reason to choose a petrol/EV hybrid.

At the moment, the hydrogen for fuel cells is made with fossil fuels; it's far easier and greener to just burn it in your engine. You can of course make hydrogen with renewable sources like wind, but then you could do that with electricity for the power grid too, and that'd be easier too. All your appliances still run on the same electricity and the power lines still work, so there are no infrastructure issues. However, nobody can be bothered to make green electricity, so why are they going to bother with making hydrogen in an sustainable way?

Fuel cells are not green - that's marketing hype sold by the car makers. The hydrogen that powers it has to be made in a renewable way for them to be green. Then you can just do what BMW have done and burn the hydrogen (which is essentially what a fuel cell does) but in a conventional engine. It's roughly the same efficiency, the emissions are the same as a fuel cell (just water) and we can do it now. Hell, we could even have dual fuel cars as a stop-gap for when the hydrogen gas stop isn't convenient, which isn't an option for fuel cell cars because it's too bulky.

I just don't get it, just make smaller lighter cars and drive less. And yes, here in Europe our cars are getting bigger (although overall mpg has been about the same for years) and we're driving further and more often. We’re in the same boat. However, we do have this odd thing where when a car model gets bigger, they introduce smaller models underneath. The Ford Focus? We have two models smaller, as do most manufacturers this side of the pond.




RE: Hybid and fuel cell. Why?
By ninjit on 11/27/2006 5:34:46 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, hybrid systems should be used on ALL vehicles including your precious diesel vehicles you love in Europe, and those oh so cutesy small cars that are everywhere.

Hybrid system is about improving efficiency of any existing internal combustion engine.

Even guys with huge trucks would be silly to balk at a system that gives them more power at the same or better gas mileage. The Honda Accord and new Lexus hybrids are examples of this.

There's no reason why you can't replace the Gas/Petrol engine with a diesel one and still reap the same benefits - it's just that none of the car companies have bothered to do it yet.

And I agree with everything you've said about Hydrogen, I've already ranted about this below.


RE: Hybid and fuel cell. Why?
By Guigsy on 11/28/2006 9:08:44 AM , Rating: 2
Petrol/gas engines have weak areas that are well complemented by a small electric motor so there are good gains to be had by going hybrid. I'm guessing diesels and electric motors have more similar characteristics, so benefits wouldn't be as obvious? Maybe the efficiency gains wouldn't be that great and not worth the cost? Maybe adding hybrid power to a diesel is pointless??? An extra half a ton of batteries and drive for a hybrid does have downsides.

While we don't have many SUVs like you do in the states, cars are growing fast. Each new model seems to be 8 inches bigger than the one it replaces. We don't all drive teeny euro-boxes. The mid-sized and most common sized cars are Ford Focus / Honda Civic / VW Jetta sized.


agree
By techhead97 on 11/27/2006 6:41:36 PM , Rating: 2
I worked on fuel cell stacks for several years.
They are good for homes but not cars. H2 is currently way too expensive to produce in terms of the amount of energy you need to make it from water etc. You can not store much on the vehicle. Even still you need to store it at 10000psi to do so. Houses already have nat. gas and can be converted to h2 for the cell and the waste heat can be used to heat the house in the winter which makes it more cost competitive overall. i think plug in hybrids will be big in the next 5-10 yrs of gas prices stay high.




RE: agree
By Guigsy on 11/28/2006 8:42:00 AM , Rating: 2
Is turning natural gas into H2 for a fuel cell any more efficient than just burning it in a generator?


RE: agree
By techhead97 on 11/28/2006 7:52:26 PM , Rating: 2
yes it would be more efficient for a stationary application and of course much quieter. and more reliable once all the kinks are worked out.


-shortly
By THEREALJMAN73 on 11/27/2006 10:18:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
one of which will be soon available for the public to purchase shortly.


Wording? ^^




RE: -shortly
By Chudilo on 11/27/2006 10:35:47 AM , Rating: 2
Fuel Cell vehicles are currently viable only as Fleet vehicles by large corporations with large fleets and the government. It is relatively easy for them to create their own Hydrogen/service stations withing their own fleets contracting the car manufacturer as a major partner. That way both companies benefit from use/ real day to day usage date.

Fuel Cell vehicle costs are prohibitive at this time as most of them are made out of custom semi-hand made parts. However a limited production series like this will enable establishment of processes that are needed to mass produce them sometime in the future.


Hydrogen is the ultimate vaporware
By ninjit on 11/27/2006 5:24:59 PM , Rating: 3
I never used to be one for oil-company conspiracy theories, but I've read a lot about alternative fuels, and Hydrogen is honestly the worst of them all.

The ideal solution would be all battery electric vehicles with more efficient and eco-friendly power distribution and generation on the grid. In fact it's definitely a real and economical possiblity today, but never really got off the ground because auto-manufacturers and oil-companies wouldn't let it.

The oil companies didn't like it because it would cut them out of the transportation loop completely. They like hydrogen because it's a business model they already know, a fuel that needs to be produced, that needs to be delivered, and stored in a tank on a vehicle. And since they are the ones that are pushing for it, they get to dictate when and how it gets phased in and oil gets phased out.

For those of you complaining about the chicken and egg problem, it isn't really relevant here.
The big oil companies already have plenty of money to put in the infrastructure now, and it won't change their distribution method at all.
They already have gas stations all across the country, they just need to add another tank and another filling-machine to them. They already truck much of the gas around each state from central distribution centers - they just need another central tank for hydrogen and another truck for it.

But they aren't going to, not until they've milked oil for every penny they can, and as it gets scarcer their profits go up. And once they're done, they'll switch us over to hydrogen and still have everyone in the country firmly by the cajones.

The more I read about hydrogen this, and hydrogen that the more sick I become.

The Fuel-Cell for explorer above is perfect example of this: the damn thing IS an electric car, if they just stuck a battery in there instead of stupid fuel cell we'd be good to go today, but noooo they say it's still a long ways off because of all the problems with hydrogen delivery and storage.

And do you know what they intend to use to make hydrogen? Elec-f*@&ing-trolysis!!!! So we'll be taking electricity to make hydrogen, then taking hydrogen to make electricity in our cars - how retarded is that????

I'm going to stop now before I explode - I'm usually pretty open when it comes to corporate bashing, (i.e. the whole Microsoft and McDonalds ranting doesn't normally sway me) , but this hydrogen and big-oil thing is just so blatantly obvious. I think they need to be impeached on monopolistic anti-competitive practices for stiffling out other possible alternative fuels.


If anyone doesn't understand or wants to know more on what I'm bitching about, I suggest watching the film "Who Killed The Electric car?" - yes the title itself is obviously biased a bit, and I already knew a lot of what they cover before I saw the movie, but it was still interesting to see who they pointed the finger(s) at, with specific examples.




Hydrogen Cars etc
By Cuboid on 11/27/2006 6:26:31 PM , Rating: 2
I really don't see the point in hybrid cars anyway esp in Europe. The only benefit to owning a hybrid car in the UK is that you are exempt from paying the congestion charge in London.

Hybrids only work up until 10mph then the petrol engine kicks in ith a crappy whine

Hydrogen cars would be sooo much better for the environment anyway. Stop slagging the mpg you get because these are FIRST generation PRODUCTION cars. The technology will get better in the future along with the mpg's of them too




well....
By muffins on 11/27/06, Rating: -1
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments







botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki