Hydrogen-Powered Lifecar Set to be Unveiled at Geneva Motor Show : TreeHugger — Anyone familiar with the funky and perpetually retro Morgan sportscar should be amused by this upgrade.
Another day, another sleek new hydrogen-fueled concept car unveiled: this one, the Lifecar, is a £1.9m joint project between the British government and Morgan Motor Company – we first reported on it here – that promises to be the ultimate “green” sports car. It will be officially rolled out at the upcoming Geneva Motor Show, which will be held from March 6 – 16.
I can’t wait to see how it performs in rear end crash tests. It will probably raise the Pinto from the abyss and make it look absolutely safe.
But imagine how cool you will look being the biggest Roman Candle on your block! Sign me up!!
Ah Yea–as in your politcal and other science based views, you are about 10 years behind the technology.
All hydrogen vehicles are designed with hydrogen absorbing solid materials so that the volume of free hydrogen available for an explosion is quite small. Less risk of explosions than with the current gas in the tank.
Good fear mongering or just abysmal ignorance?
Sorry Bobbo, I have to call you out on this one.
You’re dead wrong.
Metal Hydride storage isn’t used in Automotive applications because they can only store upwards of 5% hydrogen by weight. Using these hydrogen absorbing metals will give you, if you’re lucky, a 20 mile range. Since this car has a 250 mile range, it’s not using hydrogen absorbing metals.
It’s that simple.
Reading http://tinyurl.com/2g8m5g will help you remedy your absence of information.
Also read http://tinyurl.com/2jj8x7 to further enlighten yourself on the difference between hydrogen storage and hydrogen fuel cells.
(Hint, think gas tank and engine).
Additionally, you will learn that those tanks on the Lifecar are at least 5,000 PSI and probably 10,000.
You give up yet? Or are you thirsty for more?
Ah Yea–before I posted, I knew I was coasting from our previous threads and that the odds were 50/50 you would slam me back.
You sir are too polite. Guess I’ll have to go find a religious thread to get insulted!
So this car could blow up huh? That sounds dangerous. We better stick with oil then.
It’s good to test all these technologies. Once they get one perfected, they can use it to power full size trucks and SUVs and be useful. Hell, if you get a better power source, you could actually build bigger trucks and SUVs.
New fuel cell tech looks good, we’ll see…
“But what really makes Acumentrics different is that they aren’t waiting around for the mythical hydrogen economy. The fuel cells run on natural gas, propane, ethanol, diesel, biogas, and biodiesel.
They produce the same amount of electricity, while consuming half as much fuel, and producing half as much CO2.”
Having hydrogen behind the rear seat does seem more dangerous than 20 gallons of gasoline.
I wonder what the safety measures are in the event you get plowed in the back by some lady occupied with her cellphone driving a Humvee?
Still , I like where this is going.
Are Morgans still made of wood?
Wood + hydrogen = “Oh, the humanity!”
#7, Dallas,
Nope. There is far more energy in gasoline and diesel fuel than in plain hydrogen. That is the key. While 20 gallons of hydrogen might give a 250 mile range, gasoline could probably double that with a high efficiency reciprocating engine.
Gasoline has the same advantage over ethanol. I forget the numbers off the top of my head but it will take about 20% more ethanol, by volume, to go the same distance as you could using straight gasoline. So if you see fuel alcohol selling for less than gasoline, the difference had better be significant before it become economical.
This is why Bubba’s post (#6) for using other forms of energy become more important. Provided those other forms are used for more than their hydrogen content. Even though, say propane, has roughly 90% the energy of gasoline, it is still considerably more than hydrogen.
Next, these tanks very rarely explode. A rupture or line break would potentially release hydrogen. Unless it meets a flame, it will rise quickly and disperse in the air. The escaping hydrogen would need to be trapped and mixed with air within its flammable limits before it would even burn.
Heavier vapors, such as those from gasoline, will collect near the ground and would be far more likely to present an explosion hazard. Very few auto accident that puncture the tank or break a line cause fires. Any fires usually start after the accident when the gasoline has left the tank and is vaporizing.
Great looking chassis, Dave, now let’s see where we can put that tank…
That Acumentrics technology is interesting. Schwan’s entire truck fleet is diesel engines converted to run on propane. That fuel cell tech could probably use propane also.
You could create a truck that had two motor systems running off the same fuel source – kind of a reverse hybrid. I don’t know why you’d want to, but you could.
Just thinking out loud, I suppose you pit the motors against each other and massively increase your carbon footprint without have to ride the brakes and burn them up.