backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 54 comment(s) - last by masher2.. on Feb 14 at 10:52 PM

GM's Bob Lutz and the Chevy Sequel - images courtesy AutoblogGreen
GM readies its first fuel cell for regular production

GM is accelerating its plans to bring production-level fuel cell vehicles to consumers. The company announced that a production version of the Chevy Sequel concept car introduced in 2005 will be put into service in 2010.

The Sequel uses GM's third generation fuel cell technology and makes uses of regenerative braking and a rear-mounted lithium-ion battery pack. Forward propulsion is provided by a hub motor in each rear wheel and an electric motor for the front wheels. The electric motor is the same one used in the all-electric Chevy Volt concept introduced in Detroit.

GM expects that the Sequel will have a range of 300 miles and can go from 0-60 in 10 seconds -- or about the same as a 2007 Honda CR-V crossover. Top speed for the vehicle is pegged at 90MPH.

GM has already built two Sequel prototypes and expects to get even more real-world experience with fuel cell technology with a test fleet of 100 Chevy Equinox crossovers. Each Equinox, which normally is powered by a 3.4 liter V6 engine, is powered by a hydrogen fuel cell instead.

GM's cross-town rival, Ford, is also working on hydrogen fuel cell technology. The company recently showed off a prototype Edge crossover with a fuel cell hybrid electric powertrain and plug-in capabilities.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Nice. Still need to work on performance though.
By vdig on 2/13/2007 3:37:46 PM , Rating: 2
Kudos to General Motors for attempting to push such a mainstream release for 2010. Environmentally friendly options are always cool in my book. Further, anything that reduces the overall influence of traditional fuel is refreshing, and long overdue. I may not see traditional gasoline getting reduced to nothing, but options are wonderful for (almost) all concerned.

A few caveats still remain. That top speed - if this vehicle can only go that fast, I really hope the mileage is better than good. If not, a hybrid for the upper ranges would be ideal, for those who want that instead of lower gas consumption.

The other problem is getting these hydrogen cells out en masse for general consumption - no, not eating. A hydrogen refueling station would need to be established for easy access by all motorists, and should refueling take too long, simply swapping empty cells for filled ones would be the proper method. The empty cells can then be charged at the station until full, without hindering drivers by recharge time. If not, refueling will be a PITA.

Here's hoping the future is friendly in regards to fuel cell powered vehicles!




By FITCamaro on 2/13/2007 4:04:25 PM , Rating: 4
It doesn't use gas at all. So yes gas mileage will be good. Infinite in fact.

And 90 is plenty fast for even highway travel considering the fastest legal speed limit I know of is 75. At least in the US.


By GhandiInstinct on 2/13/2007 4:08:33 PM , Rating: 3
What if you're on an empty stretch being chased by a huge gorilla going 100mph? Wish you had that extra HP huh?


By Oregonian2 on 2/13/2007 6:50:18 PM , Rating: 1
What if the gorilla was doing 250 mph!


By Captain Orgazmo on 2/14/2007 1:34:46 AM , Rating: 1
If the gorilla was going 250 MPH, I'd just drop the spoiler on my Bugatti Veyron, and hit the gas. No problemo.


By Samus on 2/13/2007 10:54:45 PM , Rating: 2
Most modern 4-cylinders still struggle to go 100MPH, so I don't see the big deal here, especially considering it's practically SUV height and girth, raising its ground clearance, center of gravity and drag coefficient.


By jtesoro on 2/14/2007 12:33:15 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe they can bundle in some bananas with the car. Use the entire fruit for the gorilla. Anything else, toss out the banana peel and aim for the feet.


By smitty3268 on 2/13/2007 4:35:18 PM , Rating: 2
It is good enough for most people, although it makes me wonder - will it feel powerful enough to pass cars going 70?

There did use to be some highways in Montana that didn't have any speed limit, but I think they might have set them to 80 recently.


By PrezWeezy on 2/13/2007 5:58:26 PM , Rating: 2
Well when you are in a gas powered vehicle, getting from 60-70 doesn't take as much horse power as it takes torque. So in order to start going faster you need an engine that produces a good amount of torque, and since gas engines can only do that by accelerating thier RPM's, you can feel a low powered car. However, electric motors have 100% of their torque from 0-90 in this case. You never have to build it up by downshifting. So chances are even though the top speed is somewhat low, it wont feel gutless


By ralith on 2/14/2007 10:19:28 AM , Rating: 2
"Well when you are in a gas powered vehicle, getting from 60-70 doesn't take as much horse power as it takes torque. So in order to start going faster you need an engine that produces a good amount of torque"

If power is by definition the time rate of change that energy can be dumped into the system how can it be unimportant to this situation? If you can't change the energy going into the system in a reasonable amount of time you will not change state very fast.


By mindless1 on 2/14/2007 5:51:18 AM , Rating: 1
This is why our cars pollute so much, people that keep thinking it needs to go REAL FAST, be the all mighty powerful rocket ship phallic symbol GT Turbo.

Problem is, no matter how fast it would be, someone out there wants to feel special by having something a little faster, and faster, and here we are today. Right now we could save as much gas just making lighter weight cars with smaller engines, none of this multi-hybrid stuff would be necessary to take a first step of recognizing excessive qualities.

You don't need to pass cars going 70! If you are in that much of a hurry, take a plane. On a shorter trip the time savings isn't significant.


By masher2 (blog) on 2/14/2007 9:51:26 AM , Rating: 2
> "This is why our cars pollute so much, people that keep thinking it needs to go REAL FAST..."

No, our cars pollute so much because we drive so many miles in them. Every year, the average American lives further and further from where they work and shop.


RE: Nice. Still need to work on performance though.
By Jeeves on 2/13/2007 4:37:14 PM , Rating: 2
I believe you're missing the main caveat: hydrogen is not an energy source but merely a means of transporting energy - and it's neither efficient nor enviromentally sound! Right now, most hydrogen is produced from Methane, which could be burned directly with a much higher efficiency.

So, unless you use only renewable energy to produce hydrogen through electrolysis, you wont do the enviroment a favor - otherwise you're better off with traditional gasoline. A possibility to reduce CO2 emissions would be using nuclear energy for power generation and thus electrolysis, but at least here in Germany that's politically impossible - unfortunately. So let's hope for fusion ...


RE: Nice. Still need to work on performance though.
By Grast on 2/13/2007 6:19:34 PM , Rating: 2
Jeeves,

I was about to flame you but your use of fusion as a viable solution for generating power for electrlysis is a good solution that solves the whole CO2 and fossil fuel argument.

However if GM can get the drive train and manufacturing issues resolved in an economical way, a solution to the hydrogen issue is available. Until someway to generate cheap and non-fossil fuel burining energy is invented, we have an energy source that can be used for the interume.

The anwser is ethanol or methanol fuel cells. Neither fuel is perfect due to the energy or land use associated with the generation of the fuel, but it is an alternative. The bonus is that transportation and refueling issues are resolved. This method would get the U.S. away from diesal and gasoline vehicles until fusion is available for an hydrogen economy.

later....


RE: Nice. Still need to work on performance though.
By Samus on 2/13/2007 10:58:09 PM , Rating: 2
Hydrogen is only going to be 'more' successful than other, BETTER alternatives because Hydrogen is a good alternative to gasoline because of its similar delivery mechanism.

I just wish we could have fuel cell 'cells' much like we have propane tanks we exchange at gas stations, so there were no pumping necessary.

Just drop a new 50lb tank in and your ready to go another 300 miles. If you can't lift 50lbs. then you can't drive. Makes perfect sense. I should be presidente'


By Trippytiger on 2/14/2007 12:02:50 AM , Rating: 2
Similar delivery mechanism? Not so much. There is almost no existing distribution infrastructure that can be used for hydrogen delivery. You can't just stick hydrogen into the tanks at a gas station, since neither they nor the pumps are designed to be able to deal with a gas. Massive investment would be required to put up new 'hydrogen stations' for people to be able refuel their vehicles.

However, there is a well established infrastructure for delivering (uncompressed) liquid fuels to vehicles in the form of those gas stations. They could easily be retrofitted to deliver methanol or ethanol, to be either burned directly in a conventional ICE or used in things like methanol reformer fuel cells. Unfortunately, ethanol is rather energy-deficient compared to gasoline, and methanol reformer fuels cells are not as efficient at hydrogen fuel cells.

But, we're in luck! There also exists infrastructure to deliver electricity in the form of the electrical grid. Battery (and/or ultracapacitor) technology is still a little bit wanting for this to be viable on a wide scale, but if it can be improved to bring its energy-to-weight (and cost) ratio in line with fuel cell vehicles, or even conventional vehicles, then we're all set.


RE: Nice. Still need to work on performance though.
By Slaimus on 2/14/2007 3:27:14 PM , Rating: 2
Burning methane causes a lot of waste in heat, whereas electron transfer hooked up to an efficient electric motor would be very efficient since there is no reaction loss.

The main problem is that producing hydrogen releases CO2 as well, so it does not help greenhouse emissions. We need a cheaper and less polluting way of making hydrogen.


By masher2 (blog) on 2/14/2007 3:52:36 PM , Rating: 2
> "The main problem is that producing hydrogen releases CO2 as well, so it does not help greenhouse emissions..."

Producing hydrogen from electrolysis produces no CO2 emissions. Producing it through steam methane reformation of waste methane actually results in negative emissions, as the methane that would have otherwise been vented is a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2.

Producing it from non-waste sources results in mild emissions. Still, saying it "does not help" is quite incorrect, as the reaction generates a single CO2 molecule for four H2 molecules. That's a far better ratio than the 6 carbon atoms released from oxidation of one hexane chain (the most common constituent of gasoline).



By FredEx on 2/14/2007 2:11:04 AM , Rating: 2
I think you will find that the top speed is electronically limited to 90 mph, it isn't the limit of the capabilities of the system. To answer the ones wondering about passing at speed, as some have said the electric motors should have the same torque throughout their operating range and will most likely accelerate rather well at cruising speeds.


Why hydrogen?
By Marlowe on 2/13/2007 4:36:35 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't the production of the hydrogen fuel for these vehicles very energy costly and not so efficient? The hydrogen is converted back to electricity in the car right? Why go this route via hydrogen?

Can you store so much more energy than a battery? When the Tesla can go 250 miles today I'm sure we will have batteries that can go 300 miles in 2010..?

Is it because it's faster to refuel? But I recently saw this new Subaru R1E or something in Japan that could recharge 80 % of its battery charge in just 15 minutes! Here it is: http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/country/jcf/n...

I don't understand that hydrogen thing that's all.. Someone care to explain? Isn't purely electric better?