6 Cars That Signal the Future of Driving

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Where will all the hydrogen and electricity to power these vehicles come from?
As Tom of CA points out, hydrogen power is incredibly inefficient when hydrogen production is considered in the equation.
Electric cars are not as green as they seem either. The electricity to charge them comes from generating plants, it's then transmitted over the grid to a charging device which puts it into a battery which powers an electric motor. There are energy losses in each step of the process. The majority of our electric energy comes from burning coal and other fossil fuels, supplemented by a small fraction generated in nuclear plants. Alternative energy sources simply aren't capable of producing electricity on the scale required without major breakthroughs in technology which will take decades to bring on-line.
Electric cars are quite inefficient when you consider the whole process. Electric power production is relatively inefficient...energy is lost due to incomplete combustion, thermal inefficiency, transmission losses due to resistance etc.
With electric cars you simply exchange tailpipe emission for smokestack emission.

don Marco 8:58AM May 21, 2010

Tom must work in the electric car industry. He goes on and on about the energy cost of hydrogen, but completely ignores the energy cost and environmental damage associate with manufacturing and disposing of batteries. Toxic chemicals, strip mining and deep mining, transportation of materials from the western hemisphere (where they're mined) to the eastern (where most batteries are manufactured). It's not clear that battery technology isn't more polluting than IC engines.

Bob of VA 3:44PM December 19, 2009

Why are there such perceptions being pursued by so many?
The DOE is guilty of pursuing Hydrogen as a clean fuel of the future spending billions on a dead end. Its so simple, why doesn't anyone get it! The idea Hydrogen is clean & produces water as a byproduct is silly. Hydrogen is an energy carrier because it can't be found in its natural form easily and must be produced from water via electrolysis or reforming a fossil fuel such as natural gas. Both of these require substantial energy to produce hydrogen but using a fossil fuel creates CO2 as a byproduct so is even worse than gasoline engines when compared CO2 per mile. Only electrolysis is clean and when the energy analysis is done, hydrogen requires over twice the total energy per mile than an electric car using Lithium batteries of TODAY and wins in every category of cost, weight etc..
And then there is no hydrogen infrastructure! But it doesn't matter if its 2-3X less efficient than EVs.
Lithium and variant batteries have at least 10X more advancement before running into physical laws. Stanford and MITs nanotechnology alone represent a 2-5X improvement in Lithium batteries while no such gain is possible with hydrogen production.
Its rather obvious that any vehicle fuel or energy carrier system (source energy to wheels) will need to be GHG clean, renewable, low cost and practical.
Fossil fuels produce GHGs so are out
BioFuels are not Carbon neutral as advertised ( better than FF)
Hydrogen is inefficient/expensive and no infrastructure - so is out
Only Electric Vehicles are close to sensible and in 10 years dynamite.
Nearly all renewable energy sources use electricity as the carrier whether it be hydro, Nuclear, Wind, Solar PV, Solar Thermal, Geo etc..
Electricity already has a complete infrastructure that is needed anyway and just needs an upgrade. Its already about 90% efficient at delivery today.
Once a renewable generates electric power, storing it in battery technology is practical today from a 240 outlet like your dryer. A 50KWHr Lithium LiFePO4 battery stack can be bought today for less than $15K in modest volumes. This is LiFePO4 which is a few years old and doesn't take advantage of Stanford or MIT nanotechnology or any of the improvements in the pipeline. This is the same KWHr that is in the Tesla Roadster (54KWH) which has driven over 300 miles on one charge. The Tesla Roadster is light at under 3000lbs but any of the small economy cars would be capable of 150+miles or more using today's batteries and electric motors like Tesla. Check out BYD.
China is planning on dominating the US auto market because they understand these things and can see how the US is being held back by the Fossil Fuel power. If the US doesn't get smart and design and build the best Electric Vehicles in the world and stop the hydrogen foolishness, the Chinese will eat our lunch with their E6 from BYD.
http://www.byd.com/showroom.php?car=e6

Tom of CA 6:00PM November 15, 2009

With the domestic car builders on the ropes again we see the consequences of buying foreign. Sure we can't find a T. V. or a coat or a pair of shoes made in america but where do we stop sending our hard earned money to other countries to make their companies stronger and workers more prosperous? Sure we have foreign companies here making products but at what cost? Free land, tax abatements, no benefits lower wages for their employees etc. etc. The motto used to be "whats good for Chevrolet is ;good for America" now the mantra is the lowest price and the winner take all. The hell with my neighbor, his job and America. What's good for Wal-Mart and Japan is good for me and to hell with everything else. True capitalism. Just be careful the next downsizing may be your job.

Lee Hansen of MI 6:52AM September 02, 2009

Change will come and I think the first steps are ok (Volt, Prius). Let's hope that new clean and good enough wehicles are built soon.

Todor Bradov 2:26AM August 30, 2009

It seems as though the ultimate energy source of the future will be hydrogen to power
fuel cells in vehicles such as the Honda Clarity. What also comes to my mind is that cars
such as the BMW 7 Series which also uses hydrogen but in internal combustion as opposed to
fuel cells, will be instrumental in helping the hydrogen infrastructure along.
But before the so-called hydrogen economy totally blooms, it appears that other sources
of energy must fill the gap, and those will be natural gas, battery-electric, plug-in,
as well as hybrids and clean diesel. Both the near future and the long range future of the
automobile are a show to sit back and enjoy.

Cesar M. Gonzalez of FL 5:09PM August 25, 2009

They should stop all this crap, Dual this and Dual that and go with a 4 cylinder turbo diesel world wide.... Mark my word, It's the ONLY practicle way to go.

Wink of NY 3:52AM August 25, 2009

First of all, methane is swamp gas. Yes, it is frequently found with deposits of crude oil, but it is not a "fossil fuel" (it probably formed first, and the oil formed afterwards. It is also found readily in swamps and other places where vegetable matter (plants) are rotting. It is extremely renewable and clean burning. Over a decade ago in Japan, they tapped the garbage dumps and started using the collected methane to operate their garbage trucks. Not only are they getting free fuel, but the engines are running twice as long as their gasoline counterparts because there are less carbon deposits and such to wear tehm out on the inside.
Secondly, many electric motors (primarily the DC motors usid in many home-converted electric and hybrid cars, but not exclusively) produce ozone when they operate. If the majority of drivers simply switch from gasoline cars to electric cars we may simply go from spewing one type of pollution to spewing another and not really solve anything. No, it's not a big issue right now because there aren't a lot of electric cars and hybrids running around. When that starts to change significantly, we WILL start hearing about how bad ground level ozone is, and then there will possibly be a crusade from the evnironmentalists to kill the evil hybrids and electrics. I live in Milwaukee,WI and we have ozone action days here, and it IS dangerous stuff.
On a side note, I would suggest that anyone who has an ozone generator "air cleaner" consider throwing it out. It does help get particles of dust and such out of the air, but at what cost?
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/health.html

Jonathan in Milwaukee,WI of WI 12:29PM August 24, 2009

I'll believe it when I see it on sale here but, the concept is a good one. Certainly the price quoted can't be correct but even at $4,000 it would be competitive. Seems like VW is giving the MB SmartCar some good competition. Again, we'll probably never see it here due to all the safety requirements and EPA regulations. Too bad. Want more info, Google "VW single seat car". Maybe instead of the recently passed $4,500 incentive for people to trade-in their less fuel efficient cars, the government should "give" everyone one of these. It would be the best thing going.
This is not a toy, not a concept car. It is a newly developed single
seat car in highly aerodynamic tear-shape road-proven real car. It is
ready to be launched as a single-seater for sale in Shanghai in 2010 for
a mere RMB 4,000 (US$600)! [Currency exchange rate as of 6-30-09 is 1RMB=$0.15.]
Interested? Wait till you learn that it will cruise at 100-120 Km/Hr
with an unbelievable 0.99litre/100Km (258 miles/gallon)!
Impressed? Totally, after you have read all the details below about
the hi-tech and space-age material input into this car!
The Most Economic Car in the World will be on sale next year
Better than Electric Car - 258 miles/gallon: IPO 2010 in Shanghai
This is a single seated car
From conception to production: 3 years and the company is
headquartered in Hamburg , Germany .
Will be selling for 4000 yuan, equivalent to US$600..
Gas tank capacity = 1.7 gallons
Speed = 62 - 74.6 Miles/hour
Fuel efficiency = 258 miles/gallon
Travel distance with a full tank = 404 miles