Ford Fusion Hydrogen 999 breaks 200 miles-per-hour

Looks like minuscule RC cars aren't the only alternatively powered vehicles trying to break 200 miles-per-hour, as Ford just became the "world's first automaker to set a land speed record for a production-based fuel cell powered car." The whip used to set the bar, of course, is none other than the Fusion Hydrogen 999, and it reportedly reached over 207 miles-per-hour at the Bonneville Salt Flats in Wendover, Utah without using a drop of gas. Apparently, Ford is hoping that this showcase of speed will somehow translate into advancements that will help us common folk get to work and back sans gasoline, and while we've no idea when a fuel cell propelled Cobra will roll off the line, it did note that a number of fuel cell propelled Focus vehicles were still burning down the roads as part of an ongoing study.

[Via AutoblogGreen]

[Ignatius @ Aug 16th 2007 6:50PM]

Not a drop of gas, but a ton of hydrogen... which was most likely derived from fossil fuels. Electrolysis isn't a main producer of hydrogen so far...

Besides, what's the point in hydrogen cars? First, electricity must be harnessed via solar cells, then converted into hydrogen via electrolysis, then put into the vehicle. Then, the vehicle uses hydrolysis, to convert it to water and electricity. Electricity is then stored inside BATTERIES and used to power the vehicle.

Electric cars (if built well) can be recharged at any 120v outlet, then will simply store the electricity in the battery until it needs to be used by the vehicle.

Hydrogen cars just add an extra step... paying for hydrogen from Shell, Chevron or some other current gasoline company.

[michas_pi @ Aug 16th 2007 7:16PM]

True, but the only substance coming out of the tailpipe is water vapor, not nitrous oxide and carbon monoxide.

[Gman @ Aug 16th 2007 7:24PM]

The difference is that you can drive to a refueling station and instantly fill up your tank, not wait 8 hours for your batteries to recharge.

[Crayola @ Aug 16th 2007 7:34PM]

Agree, this fuel cell technology is not even out of the labs, not to mention zero installed infrastructure, not as remotely reliable as a plug in electric vehicle. When are you going to get one? Probably 10 years from now or even never... It the oil companies stalling for time, continue to get us hooked on fossil fuel.

Telsa is the one to watch, their technology is highly innovative and highly scalable (using induction motor and common stock lithium cell with individual monitoring circuit), they need not invent the wheel (they got Lotus behind that), once pass the developmental stage, with shrinking electronics, it is just going to get better.

[Ignatius @ Aug 16th 2007 7:37PM]

Electric cars produce no emissions. Water can have harmful side effects. All the oil spilled on the road due to leaking gasoline vehicles (both hydrogen and electric cars do not need oil, as they do not reach such high temperatures, they use water-lubrication and cooling systems) would be exposed with the water.

However, in a perfect world, there is no real difference between the two, but it's still much better to pay $1-2 than $10-20 for the same mileage, eh?

Not to mention hydrogen cars simply cost more because you're paying for batteries and a fuel cell. The engine is electric.

[joel @ Aug 16th 2007 7:35PM]

electric cars also have that awesome economic battery that runs for the low price of $2000, that must be changed every 3 yrs......YAY!!!!

[Ignatius @ Aug 16th 2007 7:37PM]

Okay, well, you forgot to think about the new technology of Lithium-ion polymer batteries. For lower capacities (in 1kWh and so), recharges can be completed in 10-15 minutes. For higher capacities, perhaps 4-5 hours. Thing is, these are meant for low-ish use, rather than long trips.

Hydrogen would be even worse on a long trip, you'd have to actually plan your trip around either A) finding more hydrogen fuel stations or B) bringing extra hydrogen tanks along with you.

[sgosteve @ Aug 16th 2007 9:10PM]

Ignatius...the game HAS changed. Your statement "Electrolysis isn't a main producer of hydrogen so far..." is no longer true. I am aware of a company that has surpassed the DOE 2011 goal for hydrogen generation efficiency via electrolysis. Their technology can and one day will be used for on-board hydrogen generation. Solar is an example of an electric source used in electrolysis but by no means is solar required.

Shell, Chevron, etc. are not in the game unless you stop in to fill up with water or need to use their restrooms.

Go blue oval!

[Alex @ Aug 16th 2007 9:20PM]

Hydrogen cars might be more feasible because fuel suppliers would not go out of business. They would be able to distribute hydrogen the same way gas is provided by a gas station.

[Ignatius @ Aug 16th 2007 10:09PM]

I'd like to reply to that wonderful comment about batteries in electric cars...

I stated that both HYDROGEN AND ELECTRIC cars both use batteries. When the hydrogen is 'burned' to create electricity, the excess energy is stored into batteries until needed. So, if your fuel cell busts and your battery busts... say hello to several tens of thousands of dollars in repairs!!

Electric cars at least have one less thing to fail. Skip the hydrogen car, electric cars are much better than hydrogen cars will ever be.

[Slvrgun @ Aug 16th 2007 7:13PM]

I'll care when our aging (fossil fuel) energy infrastructure is completely replaced by alternative technologies that will power our green cars, until then its just like those flying cars from the Jetsons that seem like they'll never escape the realm of imagination.

[Fuzz @ Aug 16th 2007 7:16PM]

Looks like they broke the ugly meter, too.

[FordGTGuy @ Aug 16th 2007 7:33PM]

Its called Aerodynamics get used to it.

[Fuzz @ Aug 16th 2007 7:48PM]

I was referring to the color scheme. Or is lime green more aerodynamic than other colours? Hold on. . let me go check my color-aerodynamic cross plot. . . Nope, not faster.

[Andir3.0 @ Aug 17th 2007 7:59AM]

Everyone knows red is the fastest color.

[Bill Kearney @ Aug 19th 2007 5:02PM]

WTF are you talking about with spilled water? Have you ever heard of RAIN? That's a lot more water than any of these vehicles are going to be producing. That and how about the disastrous effects to water systems caused by all that oil leaking? Of course then there's also the run-off caused by the rubber compounds worn off the tires. Hydrogen fuel cells may have their issues, but water isn't one of them.

Have you ever driven a fuel cell vehicle? I have and they're indistinguishable from a regular vehicle. Even a full-size Silverado pickup truck drove the same.

I'll trade instant refueling and less weight from batteries as a much better option over electric-only vehicles. As for refueling options, once up on a time you didn't have gasoline stations everywhere either.

And the Hindenburg only went up in such a blaze because it had highly FLAMMABLE paint on it, not because of the hydrogen.

The upside to fuel cells is definitely serviceability. They're designed to be FAR more interchangeable than anything in a gasoline engine. And they weigh a heck of a lot less than batteries.

[Ignatius @ Aug 19th 2007 10:17PM]

Do you even listen? I'm going to say this once.

HYDROGEN CARS USE BATTERIES.

They use HYDROLYSIS to CREATE ELECTRICITY. The ENGINE is ELECTRIC. The only difference is that you're using a different fuel to POWER THE BATTERIES. THE BATTERIES PROVIDE A BACKUP.

Christ almighty, does anyone listen?

[Reader @ Aug 16th 2007 8:05PM]

Hydrogen is never going to be put into practice most likely. When ultra capacitors are perfected they'll be chargeable in just a few minutes.

[wako @ Aug 16th 2007 8:10PM]

with Hydrogen being easily flammable, Im not too sure if I want my car powered by it...


Have we all forgotten the Hindenburg incident?

[Chris @ Aug 16th 2007 8:30PM]

gasoline (and gasoline vapor) is flammable too ya know...

[Fuzz @ Aug 16th 2007 8:31PM]

Ya, that is a good point. I'm just happy we have a safe stable non-flamable alternative in gasoline, that can never catch on fire.

[wako @ Aug 16th 2007 8:38PM]

Hydrogen is a lot more flammable than gasoline...

[wako @ Aug 16th 2007 8:41PM]

LOL!


Actually it wouldnt burn in the air, the proper word would probably EXPLODE.


Explosion > Burn

[Drew @ Aug 16th 2007 8:59PM]

Wako, do your research. High-pressure hydrogen tanks (ie in a fuel cell car) don't explode, they emit an intense stream of flame. (Google it) Unless you were to stick your arm in that stream, you would suffer little ill effect stepping from a flaming hydrogen vehicle. All bad movies and their explosions aside, gasoline is orders of magnitude more dangerous when ignited in/on/around a vehicle.

As for hydrogen, it is an energy transfer medium, with a relatively high mass/volume to energy ratio. It allows you to easily transfer energy from solar/bio/geo/fossil/whatever energy source to your vehicle in a relatively quick and easy manner, not 4-5 hours, and it doesn't "wear out".

And while hydrogen fueling stations are hard to find, so are electric ones. The point isn't that one is better than the other, but rather that both have strengths and weaknesses, and both are far more appealing than the current transportation solution. Only oil-company executives should be so quick to condemn.

[dude @ Aug 16th 2007 8:47PM]

Well it doesn't seem like the car was made of, well, production car materials and without all the trimmings (headlights, full seating, etc), it's like saying the Thrust SSC's top speed is reasonable for road cars to attain

[RAD Moose @ Aug 16th 2007 9:07PM]

But how well does it stop? :-P j/k

[Hardcore @ Aug 16th 2007 9:15PM]

When will they release a new Hummer that runs on baby seals? After all the polar ice caps are melting and the seals have no where to go, they might as well go into my fuel tank.

[xc7x @ Aug 16th 2007 11:11PM]

so that was a production car,racing wheels,racing cabin with modified chasis and all ermmm ok

[mastershake916 @ Aug 17th 2007 2:41AM]

Hydrogen is not the answer, research electric.

[Chas @ Aug 20th 2007 5:34PM]

I hope someday soon over 80% of autos are fueled by either Hydrogen or Electricity, so I can buy premium unleaded for about $0.10 a gallon and drive a 10,000 lb. 400 HP V-10 Suburban with a 200-gallon tank.

OK not really, but I'm illustrating simple cyclical economics here folks. The more fossil fuel demand that is displaced at Time 1 (by hydrogen, electricity, tree sap or whatever), the cheaper the dirty stuff becomes until fossil fuel demand increases back to its original levels at Time 2. Good old crude is here to stay until it's all burned up.

[Len Chapman @ Aug 20th 2007 11:45PM]

After reading some of the comments I can tell you when it comes to Electric Vehicles and Hybrid Vehicles we have the answer - we are talking about a fully Independent Self Contained no STOPPING for Gas or a Re-charge. This Technology is the answer to the World's problem.

CA08X

[check @ Aug 21st 2007 6:44PM]

http://freeenergy.ca/news/117/ARTICLE/1370/2007-05-21.html

No need to worry about the tank exploding, just pump in the water and have it pass over the aluminum as needed. Then recycle.