Industry Opinion

« back to blog listings

Fuel cell future

A recent opinion piece penned by Matt Davis in the January 2010 issue of Electric & Hybrid Technology caught my eye.

While insightful on almost every point, columnist Davis was, in my opinion, off base when he mistakenly commented that Honda was abandoning hydrogen propulsion. I suspect the line caused eyebrows to arch around many R&D labs, so let's set the record straight: Honda has been – and continues to be – one of the strongest advocates and among the top innovators in hydrogen and fuel cell propulsion. New Honda president, Takanobu Ito, recently confirmed his view that hydrogen fuel cells are still the best long-term strategy for vehicles, and his predecessor, Takeo Fukui, has gone on record saying: “I would say there’s no future for the auto industry without fuel cell cars”.

And Honda is not alone in this respect. Daimler, Ford, Toyota, GM, Nissan, Volkswagen, Hyundai and Shanghai Automotive Industries Corp all have fuel cell vehicle development programs with a 2015 date for a commercially competitive product. Recently, the majors signed a joint letter outlining this very commitment. So let’s be clear: this is not a few emerging tech companies talking and it’s not wacky, Back To The Future scientists with far fetched notions. These automotive OEMs represent 80% of the global car market and they have collectively outlined their view on one of the best pathways to near-zero emission, electric vehicles.

However, one needs to emphasize “one of the pathways” when discussing zero emission vehicles. Cautious planners and sensible stewards of shareholder capital ensure that each car maker has a range of powertrain innovations under development to help realize true sustainable transportation. No electric powertrain strategy would be sensible without battery technology.

As president and CEO of the Canadian Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association, I unequivocally support battery vehicle technology and would take the liberty to expand on Fukui’s comments. There is no future for the auto industry without battery electric powertrains. I’ve heard both retired GM vice president Larry Burns and AFCC (Daimler and Ford’s fuel cell JV in Vancouver, BC) president Andreas Truckenbrodt emphasize that it’s not a case of it being fuel cells or batteries, but fuel cells and batteries. Developing and deploying both leads to faster and wider adoption of electric vehicles. Fuel cells are not taking business away from batteries, they’re providing a way for batteries to get into many more vehicles, much faster than they would alone.

The consumer is king, but the king likely wants an electric car that can travel more than 500kms on one fill/charge and can refuel/charge in less than five minutes. And in general, consumers usually want more from new cars: more range, more performance, more luxury, more fuel efficiency and more features. The ability to charge at home, if you have a garage and a second car, will appeal to some. For the rest, why not sell them more batteries with that fuel cell car?

Davis also wrote that everyone pontificates that hydrogen is 20 years off. Well, it isn’t. For instance, Canada produces three million tons of hydrogen every year, thus proving hydrogen is a gas of today, not tomorrow. The transition to using hydrogen as a fuel simply requires the same policy approach that government is bringing to biofuels. A clear policy signal backed up by regulatory and funding incentives is all that’s needed.

The Germans are jumping out ahead in this regard. In October of last year, Germany announced its plan, together with industry partners, to roll out 1,000 hydrogen fueling stations across the nation by 2015. Japan or Korea will likely be next given their dependency on imported oil, commitment to tackling climate change, and the imperative that compels them to succeed in automotive innovation because they have nothing else to fall back on.

Finally a word about the tax expenditures required to incentivize alternative fueling infrastructure. Clearly, it’s a significant figure - in the billions of dollars range. But when you consider that government paid for almost all the roads and highways in North America, then an overdue investment in a clean, fueling infrastructure seems proper, reasonable, and necessary. Factor in the creation of a major economic boom and the opportunity seems rather inviting.
 

There are currently no comments.