At 07:53 PM 1/29/03 +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: >Don't get it: onboard fuel reforming with methanol is almost done, fuel
>cells with polymer proton membranes are already good enough (though still >being optimized rapidly, particularly in terms of energy density and >platinum group metal content) and GM's on the right track with their >recent designs. Don't see why it shouldn't hit the markets by 2005. >It's interesting that political science has witheld one of the oldest >technologies (Grove started it 1838, Mond and Langer in 1889 attained 6 >A/square foot energy density; Bockris publicized it in mid-70s again) from >the general public. The interesting part is that we didn't use fuel cell >technology on noticeable scale by 1980... Oh come on. Its all economics. (With tech changing the params) Fuel cells for cars are too expensive today. There is not enough methanol production/distrib infrastructure, which costs to create. [insert Metcalfe's law (aka fax or network effect) blurb here] And where do you get to strip-mine the coal for the methanol? The economics will make battery + capacitor + constant-rate Otto engine (aka 'hybrid') keep petrol cheaper than alternative energy carriers and sufficiently clean for a while. You'll see 42 volt cars (soon) before you see fuel cells in cars. ------- There are about 50 microcomputers controlling about 70 electric motors in a high end car --ca 2002
