I ran across this awhile ago:
Technology in
Action: Fuel Cells
While the Dodge Charger features CNG storage advancements, the Jeep� Commander offers fuel cell technology that produces electricity using gasoline. The technology takes advantage of the existing infrastructure for gassing up cars, but with far less impact on the environment.
Using gasoline to make electricity is a tricky process still being refined by DaimlerChrysler engineers, who are working to create a gas-powered fuel cell. Hydrogen is extracted from gasoline and mixed with oxygen to create electricity and water. The major emission is water, making the car essentially pollution free.
As the world's only four-wheel-drive electric vehicle, the Jeep� Commander offers 50 percent greater fuel efficiency and 90 percent lower emissions than the cleanest internal combustion engine available today.
The Commander's fuel cell powertrain is 1,000 pounds heavier than a typical sport-utility vehicle's powertrain, and is offset by a lightweight injection-molded plastic body. The body plastic is nearly 100 percent recyclable.
The Commander's fuel cell technology is flexible, meaning it can use fuels other than gasoline. Engineers believe methanol may be the best bet for making fuel cells available for general use, possibly as early as 2004. For now, Commander uses gasoline.
While the Dodge Charger features CNG storage advancements, the Jeep� Commander offers fuel cell technology that produces electricity using gasoline. The technology takes advantage of the existing infrastructure for gassing up cars, but with far less impact on the environment.
Using gasoline to make electricity is a tricky process still being refined by DaimlerChrysler engineers, who are working to create a gas-powered fuel cell. Hydrogen is extracted from gasoline and mixed with oxygen to create electricity and water. The major emission is water, making the car essentially pollution free.
As the world's only four-wheel-drive electric vehicle, the Jeep� Commander offers 50 percent greater fuel efficiency and 90 percent lower emissions than the cleanest internal combustion engine available today.
The Commander's fuel cell powertrain is 1,000 pounds heavier than a typical sport-utility vehicle's powertrain, and is offset by a lightweight injection-molded plastic body. The body plastic is nearly 100 percent recyclable.
The Commander's fuel cell technology is flexible, meaning it can use fuels other than gasoline. Engineers believe methanol may be the best bet for making fuel cells available for general use, possibly as early as 2004. For now, Commander uses gasoline.
"Typically,
high fuel economy concepts are mid-sized or smaller cars,"
Robertson said. "But we asked, 'Why not put the fuel cell in a
larger vehicle that, frankly, could use a boost in fuel
economy?'"
How about this for a hybrid car? This vehicle weighs more
than 5000 lbs and that the drive-train alone is 2500 lbs; but it will
return 32-36 mpg and has emission levels that exceed SLEV (super-low
emission vehicle) requirements? Sounds like a winner to
me.
Cars and trucks that are more expensive are excellent ways of
getting consumers used to new technology. Features that were
only possible on luxury cars are now commonplace on entry-level
models. Examples include airbags and anti-lock brakes. The
plan is to get the rich to subsidize the technology; and in the long
run it available to everybody.
Kristin writes:
SUVs are not inherently safer than
passenger cars - they're just BIGGGER.
It's nothing but muscle and bullying. Inf some ways SUVS may be less safe
(for instance they are top heavy and there is the risk of rollover.) The
main reason statistically fewer people are killed in SUVS is that they are
driven by adults with good driving records and not rambunctious kids
trying to drag race - it's the drivers, not the vehicles. And even then
IMO it is important if you are driving a truck type vehicle to get used to
the handling and recognize that it does NOT handle like a passenger car!
It's nothing but muscle and bullying. Inf some ways SUVS may be less safe
(for instance they are top heavy and there is the risk of rollover.) The
main reason statistically fewer people are killed in SUVS is that they are
driven by adults with good driving records and not rambunctious kids
trying to drag race - it's the drivers, not the vehicles. And even then
IMO it is important if you are driving a truck type vehicle to get used to
the handling and recognize that it does NOT handle like a passenger car!
Many SUV owners are treating them way too
much like cars.
Much truth in here, Kristin. My truck does not like to be
driven like a car. I drive it nice and slow and I am always
aware that inertia is not my friend. Keeping your mind on the
task at hand is something all drivers must do. In the _Compleat
Idiots' Guide to Keeping Your Volkswagen Alive_ John Muir contemplates
the following about seat belts "why exactly do you need seatbelts
if you drive in a fashion that you would never need to use them?"
I chose my truck because I like to tow things and its ability to
drive down every mud encrusted road I can find. It also
makes a fine rally sweep vehicle. Safety, the way it has been
used in this thread was not a primary buying criteria. I really
wanted a Land Rover 110 Defender with the turbodiesel, but that is a
unsafe, unclean truck for the US market (according to our government).
And Charlie, if I lived in a city, I would have not bought the
Disco, it is a pain in the ass when I drive to Chicago. Maybe
the Freelander is the better choice for that application. Is
that a SUV?
A Unimog? I would love it, but I couldn't use its full
potential. If I was going to drive from Michigan to Tierra del
Fuego...yes, in a heartbeat.
I guess I am enchanted by all vehicles...from the M-B A-class to
the Freightliner Coronado.
Matthew Bos
