The Race for a Clean Car
Email Ten years ago I interviewed an engaging young engineer named Chris Borroni-Bird, then at Chrysler, whose area of expertise was fuel cells. He said to me, “There’s every reason to expect that this technology could be affordable and competitive with today’s internal combustion engine in ten years’ time.” Ten years have gone by, and while hydrogen cars still seem a long way off, car companies are tripping over each other trying to show them off. Borroni-Bird is now at GM, which is showing off a prototype fuel-cell car called the Chevy Sequel. A quote from Larry Burns, GM’s VP for R&D and Borroni-Bird’s boss: “General Motors is proving that advanced technology can remove the automobile from the environmental debate and reduce our dependence on petroleum." On Tuesday GM is showing the Sequel off to east-coast media. Honda, meanwhile, has announced it will maket a limited number of its FCX fuel cell cars, and have a select audience driving them on regular roads. The company says, with a straight face, that the car gets the equivalent of 68 miles per gallon. Toyota is in the game too; they’ve put out word that by 2020, every car they make will be a hybrid (except, presumably, for fuel cell cars). And you can be confident that all the other major automakers are at work as well; they just haven’t been public about it in the last few days. The game has changed. Car companies have historically complained about government imposing environmental restrictions on them; this week GM joined the U.S. Climate Action Partnership–the coalition of large businesses and environmental groups that are actually asking Washington to impose limits on greenhouse gases, so they can make plans, and presumably money as well, from climate protection.
(Above: Honda’s FCX concept car, in a company picture.)
Space Station Flies Over Eastern U.S. at Night 
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
I have an odd question about junking the entire existing fleet of automobiles in a mad rush to hybrids, etc; how does saving a few pounds of CO2 stack up against the massive environmental destruction perpetrated by the demand for metals, plastics, energy and transportation necessary to manufacture and distribute this new generation of vehicles? I contend that making cars last twice as long, and thereby reducing the need to build more by half, would save a lot more of the environment than just focussing on what comes out of their tailpipes. What about the strip mines, oilfields, smelting plants and the like that are already running at full capacity to serve the ‘need’ to switch? This smacks suspiciously of just another excuse to sell more cars… and how is that environmentally sound?
Posted by: TyroniousMaximus | May 12, 2007, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
Mr. T has a good point. I have never thought about the fact that to produce the cars its probably just as bad for the environment.
I’m thinking that everything needs to hop on the green laws.
Sounds hippie to say that the environment is important, , but lets be realistic no? We need to band together to improve it in this generation and the future ones.
Posted by: Xeo | May 12, 2007, 9:35 pm 9:35 pm
If America and the world really want to do everything it can to curb global warming why dont we look at racing? Silly races like nascar where dozens of cars drives in circles for hours. Doesnt that waste gas? The road driven on takes oil to make also..
Posted by: NMSoldier | May 13, 2007, 9:09 am 9:09 am
It also sounds like a clarion call for a massive rapid transit development program Of course, if we keep on expanding the population base, our troubles will multiply exponentially.
Posted by: Andy | May 13, 2007, 12:53 pm 12:53 pm
Whoever can make the cleanest care will get my money. Stopping global warming is what I’m all about.
Posted by: Stephanie | May 13, 2007, 5:04 pm 5:04 pm
.
of course, the most clean cars are those with ONLY electrical motors and batteries
Posted by: Gaetano Marano - Italy | May 13, 2007, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
Major oil is waiting for our fossil fuels to run out, at which time present-day cars would be obsolete. Then, they’ll offer fuel-cell/hybrid/electric/etc. cars, because they’ll be able to charge more for them. Environmental concerns? Those are for the PR and Ad departments. They’re used to draw us suckers in.
Posted by: RPBonomo | May 14, 2007, 2:31 am 2:31 am
The Chevrolet Sequel fuel-cell prototype reminds me a lot of the turbine engine program Chrysler Corporation developed in the late 1950′s to mid-1960′s. That company built fifty cars with turbine engines and had the public test them in real-life situations for about a year. It seems that this is another instance where car manufacturers, most notably the American companies, have to be dragged into adopting new technologies to replace the internal combustion engine.
Posted by: chuck | May 14, 2007, 7:55 am 7:55 am
The auto manufacturing industry might be able to drum up some excitement for the new “green” cars, but like most people, I’m not going to go buy one just to replace my existing “dirty” car. When it wears out I’ll consider buying a “green” car if I can afford it. “Green” cars will just replace the “dirty” ones as the old ones break down. Most of those “dirty” cars will be melted down to make the new “green” cars. Regarding durability, electrical motors have less moving parts and are much more reliable than combustion engines. It wouldn’t be a suprise if they run for several times as long… Unfortunately, we don’t have a good infrastructure set up yet for recycling batteries. Dealing with the large quantity of batteries that will require replacement every so often will be a hurdle… Cars will still result in production pollution regardless of what we drive. I would love to see a study showing an estimate of manufacturing pollutants if we switched entirely to an electric car infrastructure. That and life estimates on electric vehicles.
Posted by: Shaun | May 14, 2007, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
There’s just too many cars on the road now. Take a look at major cities like NYC and LA (and their surrounding ‘burbs) where everyday, thousands (tens of thousands?) of cars — most of them with JUST one drive in them — and they’re just sitting on the highway stuck in traffic…
Why?
You would think that with modern technology, we’d be “telecommuting” more and using less fuel.
Posted by: redtech5 | May 15, 2007, 9:33 am 9:33 am