Honda rolls out new zero-emission car

Someone else noted this but it has be stressed again and again, hydrogen technology is NOT zero-carbon unless the electricity used to make the hydrogen is generated from a zero-emissions source, like solar or wind. Hydrogen is just an energy containment technology, not an energy generation technology.

Hydrogen, biofuels, it's all a smoke screen that doesn't really solve the problem. Just give up driving completely and ride a bike.

Don't forget.....it also costs 8 million dollars to build.
Lets see if I get it right.....electricity is used to make hydrogen then used to fill a tank in a car and then used to make electricity to drive what is then an electric car.......seems to me that for a few less million dollars we could eliminate a few steps here

this is a lease only vehicle being used to test it's real world usability. only available in areas like irvine and a few other o.c. areas.it's a great idea, but how much coal is being burned to make the hydrogen? honda has been at the forefront of technology for a long time, but they could have done something like this before it became too late.

when i first saw the add for this it's all "emits nothing but water vapor".... which is something like 60% of the atmosphere. CO2 is nothing in comparison. i agree that this *could* be much worse, but how can we really know?

so we hope. as long as its not in the wrong direction

I don't think that anyone is pretending this car is the solution to the energy or global warming crises, but a step in the right direction. This is how products develop and evolve; by triggering thought, discussion and challenging others to do better.

This is just as 'in-between' a true solution for our use of gasoline as bio-fuel is. Hydrogen energy uses an excessive amount of electricity to make the fuel. Where does that energy come from? Most commonly from coal or nuclear power plants.

Sounds great and all but I'm sure there is a catch.

Diode, I do recognize that methane gas is a global warming agent like CO2, but I would like to know if I was correct about my assumption about how you were claiming water was a greenhouse agent.

The451, I think that most Hydrogen cell vehicles take Oxygen from the atmosphere to combine with the stored Hydrogen to produce an electric current. It is possible in that case for the cars to produce emissions other than water; however, if those emissions truly are a problem then they can be solved by storing both fuels in separate tanks in the vehicle.

and where is the fuel station for this thing?

Understandably the automakers are looking for the one-size-fits-all magic bullet fuel, but I think we need to embrace a wide range of fuels.

Obviously it would be cheaper (and easier) for Ford if ALL vehicles simply switched to a single fuel source such as hydrogen or E85 or whatever.

But we need to move away from that one-size-fits-all mentality.

Some demographics (retirees, students, etc) only drive short distances so an electric car would be an excellent option. Or even one of the new "air-powered" cars that run on compressed air!

Bio-disel might be good for other areas with different climates. (Arizona eats up batteries in the extreme heat -- might not be good for an all-electric car)

Hydrogen might work best for longer distances and/or hauling heavier loads.

My concern is that in the interest of maintaining a psuedo-monopoly and to simplify mass production that the auto makers want to just shove one alt-fuel onto everyone.

"Yer all driving hydrogen fuel cells," barks Ford. "Get used to it."

Of course they are barely audible over the sound of their prototype all-electric cars being crushed in the background.

Personally, I'd much rather have a maintenance free all-electric car that I can charge in my garage overnight rather than deal with a hydrogen fuel cell. And I'm sure others would rather have a fuel cell.

Will the auto-makers allow multiple fuel types to be manufactured or will they force just one on us?

That lady looks like she might bite someone!

Random, but is that the woman in the photo the actress who played Marie Warner in 24 (season 2 or 3, I think)??

Her face is expressing how ugly that car is. Could they not make a decent looking car?

Yo Poison the Monkey
"Boycoot AP, use another site for this!"
Why ?

here you go the451, basically, new studies are coming out by some major universities and other scientific bodies trying to find this out. the biggest problem we truly face, is once its warm enough that methane starts to be released, we're fucked.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/11/1110_051110_warming.html
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/
http://www.physorg.com/news11710.html
http://nov55.com/gbwm.html
http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/gases.html#wv
http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/causes12.jsp

good good

I believe that Diode is making a reference to waters specific heat. Water has a very high specific heat, meaning that it takes a lot of energy either gained or lost to change the temperature of water. This means that water is capable of storing vast quantities of thermal energy.

If this is what Diode is referring to though, he is misguided. The global warming issue is not caused by waters ability to absorb and store energy in the form of thermal heat, but instead from carbon dioxide's ability to reflect thermal heat. Normal light passes unhindered through most of the elements in our atmosphere, including CO2; however, once the light comes in contact with many of the solid or liquid surfaces on our planet it is absorbed and then released as thermal energy. That is what makes a rock that has been sitting in the sun all day warm. The thermal energy then rises into the atmosphere, and some of it is reflected back (or trapped) in the atmosphere by green house gasses, one of the most abundant being CO2. This is needed, or else our planet would freeze. But global warming is caused because there is an overabundance of green house gasses, namely CO2.

Where do you fill it up if you buy it?

I hear they won't be in full blown production until 2018.

Don't people realize that h2o is worse than co2 in the atmosphere in regards to global warming? great job, way to speed up the process honda...keep praising them goresheep

A zero emissions car? What's the catch...there has to be a catch, right?

Another reason for me to move to Cali.

if only electricity costs were incurred, current electrolyzers could produce hydrogen for $3.0 per kilogram at industrial electricity prices; an ideal system could produce hydrogen for $3.0 per kilogram at slightly lower than commercial electricity prices. As demonstrated, the cost of electricity is a significant factor for electrolytic hydrogen production.

from:

http://www.solartoday.org/2004/may_june04/h2_afford_it.htm

the california fuel cell partnership won't give an answer to the cost either lol
http://www.fuelcellpartnership.org/index.html

I'm anxious to see how well these end up working.
Cross your fingers they'll work well.

awesome.

@dmirti

they have fueling stations for them

"Hydrogen can also be produced from water by electrolysis. If the electricity used for the electrolysis is produced using renewable energy, the production of the hydrogen would (in principle) result in no net carbon dioxide emissions. On-board decomposition to produce hydrogen can occur when a catalyst is used." -wikipedia

seems like it should be cheap, since it uses water, but i've heard it's expensive, too. gonna try to find out what it costs to fill 'er up...

Boycoot AP, use another site for this!

I'm still quite skeptical about fuel cells. It seems like another way to placate consumers. I'd love to see them embraced, but I remain wary.

Hey cool! It's finally out. Gorgeous machine... But where do we fuel it up? And isn't it terribly expensive to make hydrogen?