300 Miles … and Counting
By Larry Burns
GM VP, Research and Development and Strategic Planning
What an exciting day yesterday!
I've been working on advanced technologies for a long time, but yesterday has to be one of the highlights of my career.
That's because we met our goal of driving the Chevy Sequel fuel cell vehicle 300 miles without refueling it – going from our Honeoye Falls facility in New York State down to Westchester County. This is the farthest a fuel cell vehicle has ever been driven on one tank of fuel on public roads, not on a test track.
Three hundred miles on the road and the only thing that came out of the tailpipe was pure water. In addition, the hydrogen used to power the Sequel, was derived from hydropower at Niagara Falls — a clean, renewable resource. This means that the entire process — from the creation of the hydrogen to the use of the fuel in the vehicle — was virtually carbon dioxide free.
This is an important step toward large scale petroleum-free and emission-free driving.
Make no mistake, though; this is about much more than a historic road trip. It's really a central part of GM's strategy to diversify our energy sources and displace petroleum, which is used by about 98 percent of today's autos.
Hydrogen will play an important role in our effort to displace petroleum. It simultaneously increases our energy independence and security, while removing the automobile as a source of emissions.
We believe that hydrogen fuel cell technology has great potential — and is the most promising way to set our nation, and our world, on the pathway to renewable energy. And I am proud to say that, as of yesterday, we are 300 miles closer to making that vision a reality.
RELATED
Sequel Flickr set
How Fuel Cells Work
46 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
I hope we see those in-wheel motors in the Volt! When will GM reveal it’s drivetrain for the Volt?
Please!
Just give us a simple, straightforward, plug-it-in-at-night electric car!…
You know… like GM used to… in the 90’s… or did you “forget”!!!
Not a whole new around-the-frickin-block fancy-so-only-the-big-guys-can-produce-it technology….!
Gee-eez, American auto-makers! Cut out the crap! No wonder you’re losing everywhere you turn! You pick losers every time! For years on end! … mind-boggling!
Larry said:
That will be great Larry – as soon as you figure out how to put a couple of Niagara Falls in each of the 50 states.
As you no doubt well know, the long pole in the tent is not the technology of burning hydrogen in a fuel cell, but the logistics of finding a supply of hydrogen that isn’t subject to the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Unfortunately, there are no free pools of hydrogen laying around waiting for us to tap into them as we did with petroleum. Almost all of the hydrogen on earth is so firmly bound to oxygen molecules that it takes more energy to separate them from that oxygen than we will ever get back by burning the hydrogen.
V/R
Gary Dikkers
I’ve been following GM HydroGEN program for a number of years now and seeing that there now exists a vehicle that can actually perform at the same level as a conventional car is very promising.
There are now only two major roadblocks in the way, and unfortunately big ones: creating the infrastructure to generate hydrogen, and the task of minimizing the final consumer cost of the vehicle. I assume that the current hydrogen vehicles cost at least in the multi-hundred thousand dollar category, if not millions.
Thus the march to make the HydroGEn project a consumer reality is one step closer.
Lastly, I wanted to mention a somewhat simple idea in regards to electric since the mention of alternative energy and alternative propulsion seems to be so highly discussed: batteries.
One thing I’ve been thinking about for years is the fact that just about the only reason electrics are slow to be accepted is that consumers do not like the idea that there is a limit to their potential range. Run out of power without a charging station and suddenly you’re in trouble. I understand how a concept like the Volt can eliminate this fear. But as you’ve mentioned, the idea of removing the automobile from the pollution equation is your top goal. So the Volt, while cleaner is not the final answer.
I’d like to suggest the simple idea of simply having easily removable batteries that can be exchanged at charging stations. As we speak, there exists the ability to charge batteries in 10 minutes or less. But being the impatient people that we are, it would be much more convenient for most if they could simply pull up to a station just like a gas station, and pay a small fee to “lease” a new battery from the charging station. Look at the batteries like videos or DVDs; you pay maybe $5 for a freshly charged unit. These batteries would all be of a standard size and be universal in the same way that plugs, light bulb sockets, and camera film is. All cars would sport the same shape of battery. With improved technology, the battery remains the same shape while the battery itself improves.
In this way, a battery can be closely monitored for age, weakness, and so on. Car owners never have to worry about the batteries wearing out, and gas stations can slowly retrofit their operations into charging stations.
Of course perhaps battery technology might become so advanced in the next few years that they can be recharged instantaneously and all a person would need to do is pull up to a plug at a station, plug in for 2 minutes, and be on their merry way.
Either way, if a true electric car is to be devised, consumer worry must be removed and replaced with the very convenience they are accustomed to.
You won’t have to convine me, a trained engineer, but people will associate hydrogen power with Hindenburg disaster. You have accomplished a lot but have a long media struggle maybe tougher than the actually engineering.
As long as the “Sequel” looks like the original “Volt”, this is a success.
Congratulations to you and your team Larry – excellent achievement.
This is only of minor interest. Though a great acheievement hydrogen has no delivery mechanism. It has to be presurized more than the Air car in France which runs on simple compressed air or
super chilled.
There is no way to truck
large volumes to a station nor cheap way to produce it at a station. This is a tech that is sadly much farther than 10 years out.
Put more money into the volt and battery tech. Or why not try to build an Air car like they did in France?
Larry:
Excellent job!!! Please keep up the great work you are doing not only in the field of Hydrogen Fuel Cell work, but also the Plug-in future such as the Chevrolet Volt.
One suggestion: Perhaps consider looking into producing your own set-ups to produce H2 at home, such as Honda is doing with their “Home Energy Station”. This could help a great deal for the lack of H2 availability. Just some food for thought.
Again, Congratulations on the Road Trip milestone your team has just accomplished!
My neighbor had a Honda fuel cell vehicle in his driveway this morning. It has been there several times.
It had a “Dist.” plate on it, so it must belong to Honda.
It looked a lot like the Sequel, I sense maybe a little smaller.
Are any of the Sequels in drive home status yet?
Just think if every sewer plant in America was a methane digester. And we powered fuel cells with the methane. Then we would have real green electricity to power electric cars, homes, business. And the electricity would be in each city not generated at some far away place burning coal. The possibilities are endless. Gm could get in the energy business.
I heard a podcast interview of a GM official saying all the components in the Sequel are three year old technology. Imagine what they have in the labs now. That is probably what will go into the Volt. GM has really done the most obvious thing in producting a series hybrid. I can’t understand why Toyota did not go this route unless they are and it has not been announced.
With a Series Hybrid so many complicated parts like the trasmission are eliminated. This is a bold move and I wish the newly formed Volt team luck and am sure they are excited in bolting the e-flex platform together. I wish we had a separate blog for the Volt with weekly candid updates since I think it is what most people are interested in!
GM should be congratulated on sharing it’s intention to build a radical Series Hybrid. Toyota keeps silent.
“That will be great Larry – as soon as you figure out how to put a couple of Niagara Falls in each of the 50 states.”
Hi Gary,
who’s telling, that only huge waterfalls could contribute to hydro-power? In Germany there are numerous hydro-power-plants at many rivers, for example, (since I grew up not far from there) at the “Main” between Wuerzburg and Aschaffenburg. The “Main” is a wide, slowly flowing river, which (BTW) is used by cargo-ships. Those power-plants partly were already built in the early 20th century and still deliver a considerable amount of electricity to the region. Of course there are still other renewable, emission-free sources, which have to be increasingly used. German car-manufacturers are ambitiously working on fuel-cell-technology, either. As long as Hydrogen is produced from “clean” electricity, I hardly believe there’s an alternative to fuel-cells as a long-term solution.
What is more, is the fifth generation of GM’s hydrogen power plant that debuted in the Chevrolet Volt.
Half the size yet still achieves the same distance.
If only the money from our Government would be there to put the infrastructure in. Then we’d be on the path we need to be.
Congrats GM & the entire hydrogen power train team!
Just think if every sewer plant in America was a methane digester. And we powered fuel cells with the methane. Then we would have real green electricity to power electric cars, homes, business. And the electricity would be in each city not generated at some far away place burning coal. The possibilities are endless. Gm could get in the energy business.
Posted by: Aaron Claudy on May 17, 2007 3:13 PM
Mexico would be in the gas business with Re-fried bean production hitting an all time high. Your seat could be modifide to allow gas deposits as you go. You could also get Al Gore to lobby Taco Bell for carbon credits for each bean burrito sold.
No more smelly poltry and hog trucks going down the road. They would all be inclosed and running on Animal methane production. Future cars would have a pod where you could install your own cow.
Edvard said:
Great idea Edvard. There is no reason all electric cars couldn’t have identically shaped batteries that slide out of the car on a tray for easy replacement.
That way if you’re traveling across Nebraska on I-80 in your electric, all you would have to do when you need a charge is pull into the nearest car/truck stop.
The attendant would pull out your discharged battery and slide in a freshly charged one in its place. You would pay a fee for the service and the energy in the freshly charged battery and would be quickly back on the road — probably faster than it would take the kids to go to the bathroom and get a Slurpee. In turn the service station would get your discharged battery to recharge overnight for another car the next day.
The key would be to have all automakers on board with using a common, universal battery that could be quickly pulled out of the car and replaced.
That would probably take a unified effort that couldn’t exist — after all, look at how many different types of cell phone and computer batteries there are. Each company thinks it necessary to have their own proprietary battery. Do you think GM and Toyota would be any different?
Good idea though.
Best,
Gary Dikkers
yeah, it’s me again! i would like to see the Sequel put into production as soon as possible, say within 5 years, and i would definitely get one. Make it a plug-in with a nice socket.
Cheers!
Fuel cells seem to make more sense than batterys of late. people could buy hydrogen reformers and put them in their garages than refill at home, only having to use commercial stations on long trips.
I’ve been reading about how GM may have to raise the costs of their cars by as much as $5,000 a car due to newer fuel milage standards the fed may soon enforce. Seems to me that if GM would stop squandering money on unpractical dreams such as the hydrogen car, they could develope affordable vehicles to fit the new standards.
That is quite amazing.
Great design, great technology, great for the environment and convenient with fewer pit stops.
I would say it’s too good to be true if you didn’t just drive 300 miles in it.
Yes, the technology is that amazing and my dream for you is that one day you will be the first to drive that very vehicle to a dealership and deliver it to the first of thousands of waiting customers.
Another concept for electric cars…
You buy the electric car without the battery. You then lease the battery. (a revenue stream) In this lease arrangement the buyer could either charge his own battery or change it out at a battery exchange location for another fully charged battery. You could have a fixed cost for unlimited exchanges or charge for each exchange. Just think, fixed driving costs!
The car would need to be designed for a battery that could be easily changed out in around one minute. Preferably under the passenger compartment.
Then you set-up battery exchange stations. These could be set-up for eco-friendly charging. Solar, wind mill, and even Niagara falls energy!
Also you could sell eco-friendly home charging systems.
The vehicle buyer would be made aware at purchase of the exchange locations. GPS – OnStar could help as more exchange stations are brought on board.
These batteries could even be charged by a local central means and distributed to existing gas stations set-up to handle the exchange of the batteries.
better get cracking on hydrogen turbines for turboprop planes and hydrogen jets. because aviation is about the only transportation segment where hydrogen will be used. the future of the automobile is (battery-)electric
While GM is “all excited” Hindenburg Part-2, it simply fails to make a nice, smooth 4 cyliner gas engine, not to mention smaller diesel options in all their current vehicles. GM: Can you make a lawn mower to compete with Honda????
This is really cool stuff, but my concern is what do you do in the meantime until this becomes a viable commercial proposition?
This must be several years away, even if only because of the fuel infrastructure.
I have a Chevrolet truck which will run on E85, in the most polluted air basin in the country. The closest station which sells it is 25 miles away. The next closest is 100 miles away. Not a very viable proposition, even assuming that E85 is any better environmentally than gasoline.
So when will we see a viable network of hydrogen stations?
Meanwhile, if you believe the stories in the papers every day, demand for SUVs and light trucks falls, and demand for fuel efficient small cars grows.
You (we) need a Prius, Civic Hybrid, Yaris, Fit fighter to sell in the meantime, so the cash doesn’t run out before the magic Sequel (or Volt) finds its feet. Otherwise, beware of the 3-headed dog.
If you could get an Aveo and/or Cobalt up into the Yaris/Fit mileage range it would be a huge step forward. Come on, you can do that.
Posted by Trayler: GM: Can you make a lawn mower to compete with Honda????
Trayler, you haven’t kept up. Honda sells only single cylinder walk-behinds of appr 6 hp here anymore.
——————————
Exchangable batteries as suggested will happen about the time that Hitachi, DeWalt, and others sell interchangable battery packs for hand power tools, unless a higher authority intervenes.
What we do need is a breakthrough in hydrogen generation from tapwater that will take up no more room in the garage or basement than a water softener, and be just as safe.
Steve K,
There you go thinking you can defy physics. They know how to make an ICE run cleaner and it costs money (not free). However, the fuel cell achieves 0, zero, nadda emissions at the tailpipe. So you can spend endless time and money on diminishing returns or you can just jump to zero.
Even if the electricity for the home water-to-hyrdrogen converters came from coal, the bottom line is CO2 released versus energy produced.
So, if the amount of coal burned to create the energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline releases only 3/4, or 1/2 of the CO2 released by burning that same gallon of gasoline, then that’s a significant improvement. There may also be similar air quality advantages. What I’d like to see is, assuming all the electricity came from coal, what reduction in CO2 and smog would be, if any.
Plus, the United States (and China) have vast quantities of coal. That conveys a not insignificant strategic advantage in dealing with the Middle East.
By the way, the sequel is a nice looking hatchback (5 door?). Badge it as a Pontiac and get rid of the Vibe and G5. Offer it with a 2.4L 4 cylinder, plus a GXP model with the direct-injected turbo 4 cylinder and you’ll have a viable Mazda MX-3/Scion xB fighter.
Edvard,
We are thinking the same. I did not see your post at the time I entered mine.
The concept would work.
The first manufacturer to do it would also have an advantage of setting the battery standard. I see licencing fees here for the first in.
I can’t wait for volt and the h2 cars to hit the maket. Stop waiting and put them out there and you well be number one car company again. with gas so high you will not be able to keep them in stock. if the go for about 20 to 30 gand.
watched video of sequel tour, why, if you are touting saving fuel, did you need an armada of suburban ‘chase ‘ vehicles??
I am an open-minded person who looks forward to any alternative fuel that is clean. Hydrogen has taken a lot of flack from barking diesel dogs and EV nuts, but I welcome a hydrogen-powered future. I think the Chevy Sequel can be a great niche vehicle like the Civic GX or the RAV4-EV. If energy companies and government institutions are willing to experiment with expanding hydrogen stations–at least, in California–the Sequel can find a loyal market. Hydrogen can have a real place if the state and federal transportation services were to use hydrogen or electric vehicles.
JohnP said:
That would indeed be a breakthrough John — especially since the Laws of Thermodynamics say it ALWAYS takes more energy to make hydrogen than you get back by burning it.
You could have a unit in your garage that could crack water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen atoms so you can fill your car with the hydrogen, but unfortunately you would also need to run special, heavy-duty electrical lines into your garage capable of carrying thousands of amps. (The typical home now has 200 amp service.)
You would find it easier (especially on your electric bill) and more efficient to just use your regular electric lines to recharge the battery of an electric car.
Cordially,
Gary Dikkers
There’s one question about hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles that I have never seen answered by any hydrogen advocate — nobody representing an automaker, a government, or an environmental organization: namely, where’s the business case? The first vehicle I ever bought was a 1992 Chevy C2500 pickup powered by compressed natural gas (CNG); this was, I think, the first natural-gas vehicle (NGV) warranted by a major automaker (as opposed to an aftermarket converter). In 1998, I drove my current NGV, a 1993 Dodge B250 passenger van, from Los Angeles to Maine and back, using public refueling stations; my personal best range per refueling was 326.1 miles. So let’s compare NGVs and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles:
1) According to the U.S. Dep’t. of Energy, there are 724 CNG refueling stations nationwide (182 in California, where I live); the majority of these are publicly accessible. The DOE counts 31 hydrogen stations nationwide (23 in California); most of these are not publicly accessible.
2) To build a CNG refueling station, you plumb a 3600 PSI compressor into the existing natural-gas pipeline infrastructure. To build a hydrogen refueling station, you need a 5000 to 10,000 PSI compressor plus either a “reformer” to convert natural gas to hydrogen, an electrolysis plant to split it from water, or an entirely new hydrogen distribution infrastructure to tap into directly.
3) The incremental cost of a CNG passenger car or light-duty truck over a gasoline version of the same vehicle is similar to that of a hybrid, a few thousand to ten thousand dollars. The incremental cost of a fuel-cell vehicle at present is (at least) hundreds of thousands of dollars.
4) Almost all of an NGV drivetrain (everything but the fuel system) is identical to that of a gasoline version of the vehicle, and can be worked on by a mechanic with no unusual training. This is an advantage of NGVs not only over fuel-cell vehicles, but even over hybrids.
5) Fuel-cell vehicles have, collectively, a few million miles of on-road experience to test their durability, maintainability, etc. NGVs have literally billions of miles under their wheels in the U.S. (I’ve driven almost 100,000 of them myself), and tens of billions in other countries.
6) CNG almost always costs less than gasoline to go the same distance, usually much less; in California, which has the highest CNG prices in the nation as well as the highest gasoline prices, I pay the equivalent of a dollar per gallon less for 130-octane CNG than I would for 87-octane unleaded gasoline. With hydrogen — who knows? (As noted in (2) above, the fuel sales would have to amortize the cost of a much more complex and expensive refueling system.)
Given these advantages, you’d think that any automaker that sees a business case for fuel-cell vehicles would see one in spades for NGVs, right? Wrong. Every automaker except Honda discontinued their natural-gas (and propane) offerings as soon as they had a hybrid, even a “hollow hybrid,” to talk about, and Honda has only ever offered a single model, the Civic GX. And it’s not like automakers see anything wrong with NGVs per se; they are actively introducing new models overseas, and Argentina, Brazil, and Pakistan each have over a million NGVs on their roads. Why are these vehicles not good enough for the U.S.? (And yes, that’s the same Brazil as the one that is often touted as an example of how ethanol can be our salvation.)
Honda’s head of alternative-fuel vehicles, Steve Ellis, sees NGVs as a necessary stepping-stone to hydrogen vehicles, and indeed he describes his NGV customers as “apprentice fuel-cell vehicle drivers.” But as far as I’ve been able to find out, even Honda has never laid out any kind of argument for how they will build a sustainable market for fuel-cell vehicles, except in very qualitative terms; and no other automaker has any credibility in promising to build a market for fuel-cell vehicles when they all turned tail and ran from the much simpler task of building the market for light-duty NGVs.
Why not put solar chargers in electric cars?
The dashboard and the space behind the rear seat headrests sure seem to get lots of sun when parked out side.
I don’t know why nobody embeds solar charging panels in these spots to help charge the battery while the car is parked.
Most people probably drive to work, park their car all day, then drive home. That 8hrs or more can be used to capture solar power.
Awesome work with the alternative energy vehicles by the way. Keep it up!
Larry Burns said:
Larry,
Seriously, I’d like to hear you expand on those two statements. The reason I ask is because there are huge issues about the availability of hydrogen as a fuel. There is no question your technology is an achievement, but where do you expect the hydrogen to come from?
Sources of Hydrogen
Right now there are only two places in the Solar System where there is an abundance of free hydrogen atoms that are not already tightly bound to other atoms:
Unless GM has a really neat trick up its sleeve and knows how to fly to the Sun or Jupiter and profitably bring back huge tanks of hydrogen, neither is likely to be possible or profitable. (Since I’m pretty sure that even GM isn’t clever enough to travel to the surface of the Sun and return, I’m discounting that as a source of hydrogen.)
Hydrogen sources on the Earth
Almost all unbound, unoxidized hydrogen atoms on the Earth now come from one of two sources:
From natural gas
This is the primary method used today. But it has the big drawback of being energy intensive. It falls prey to the Second Law of Thermodynamics and will always take more energy to separate the hydrogen than you can get back by using the hydrogen as fuel. That’s OK for something like a satellite or a space shuttle where expense is no object, but it’s likely to always be too expensive for ordinary transportation.
Then there is also the issue of whether that is even a wise way to make fuel for a car. Instead of using energy to reform natural gas into hydrogen, and then having all the problems that would come with the expensive and complicated infrastructure to handle that hydrogen, wouldn’t it make more sense to just use the natural gas directly as a primary auto fuel?
Electrolysis of Water
We all know this works — most of us probably did it as a science experiment in the 5th grade. But it also falls prey to the Second Law — it will always take more energy to crack the water molecules into oxygen and hydrogen atoms than you can ever get back. In short, it’s not practical unless you have a Niagara Falls in your backyard as you did in your Honeoye Falls experiment providing a virtually unlimited supply of low cost electricity.
And as in reforming natural gas, there is always the question of whether that is a wise and efficient use of electricity: Because of the thermodynamic losses of using electricity to crack water into hydrogen and oxygen, wouldn’t it make more sense to just use the electricity directly to charge the battery in an electric car?
Your thoughts please?
Have a good Memorial Day,
Gary Dikkers
Hydrogen is a totally idiotic waste of time and money. If it weren’t for our gov’t giving you our hard earned tax money for this “research” you would not even waste another thought on it.
I think Gary has been too nice here– hydrogen is a net energy loser, period. Electrolysis is not like pumping a barrel of oil out of the ground, and it will never scale in a manner to allow us to continue driving as we’ve grown accustomed when oil becomes more expensive.
How about that Torano? I’d like to see that parked next to my Volt.
If I buy a G8, can I order an Commadore front facia and hood?
I know everyone is awaiting the new Camaro, but I think a better platform would have been the smaller TT36 would have been a better choice. The current Camaro concept is just too big, a criticism of the last generation coupe. That concept Riveria shown in China would also be a hit if it were built on Zeta rather than the Camaro. I hope to see a new small Caddy on the TT36 platform.
Larry,
You wrote about South American market. ¬øAre you planning to build new products in Brazil or Argentina? Wich ones?
Congrats! Didn’t see this in many reports in the news.
May I suggest, after seeing the Flickr photos that you have a Toyota Prius killer right there. The body style and size seems perfect and ripe for a hybrid drive train.
So…
Take the body and style of the hybrid vehicle, add a unique hybrid drive train and place it on the market. Seems simple doesn’t it?
Actually and seriously I think it would be a successful alterative to the Toyota Prius… don’t WAIT as long as you did with the Chevy HHR vs PT Cruiser. You miss the timing again.
2 hybrid cents,
Eric
why not put a water tank in the car and have part of the electric energy go to a small, water to hydrogen and oxegen conveter then have the oxegen meet up with the exhaust ang excape out the tail pipe and presurize the hydrogen so refuling is used less for hydrogen and more for water witch is easyer to get than haveing all this energy to make hydrogen power plants waste energy unless the power plant has fule cell tech also i mean come on im only 12 and a half and im telling you how to save energy
” In addition, the hydrogen used to power the Sequel, was derived from hydropower at Niagara Falls — a clean, renewable resource. This means that the entire process — from the creation of the hydrogen to the use of the fuel in the vehicle — was virtually carbon dioxide free.”
LOL. The leftie hippies are going to go crazy over that statement. I think you left out the part where you had to tow the car home because there were no hydrogen refueling stations in Westchester county. I also think you’ve found your market for the Sequel! The 150 mile radius around Niagara falls… because if you go anywhere else you’re stranded. Hopefully, Niagara falls can produce enough hydrogen for the entire planet otherwise you’ll be using good old coal to split those oxygen atoms.
“…the hydrogen used to power the Sequel, was derived from hydropower at Niagara Falls — a clean, renewable resource.”
That’s wonderful — now just figure out how to put an equivalent of Niagara Falls in each of the other 50 states. That will be tough though considering Niagara Falls is formed by the water that passes through Lakes Superior, Huron, Michigan, and Erie, and the that watershed covers parts of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, and the provinces of Ontario and Quebec.