That's the question Toyota is asking, announcing plans to release such a thing in that year for that price. That's more than twice as expensive as the company's current eco-chic offering, the
Prius, but for greenies the advantages here are considerable: zero carbon emissions and a renewable fuel source. Toyota has been showing off its hydrogen-powered FCHV (pictured above) for quite some time now, but the initial model to hit dealers will instead be a sedan (presumably a luxury one at that price point) that would have a range comparable to gasoline models. Toyota hopes to actually make a profit on the car thanks to ever-decreasing fuel cell costs, a goal that the company did not achieve when the Prius initially hit the road and was sold at a loss. Of course, if the hydrogen distribution system in the US doesn't improve over the next five years then this thing will surely be a loser too.
posted May 9th 2010 12:04PM
No, they take forever to refill and there aren't enough stations. Also for 50k I could get a nice new truck with a large V8 or diesel V10 that's capable of towing my boat, quicker to refill, and doesn't advance the communist green movement and wealth redistribution agenda.
Yes if its a little cheaper, and no if it looks like a modded 2004 toytota highlander!
Driving a Highlander, the only "green" option that would tempt me is something that have AWD.
Only AWD green cars are experimental @ best like the electric modded Evo that Mitsubishi came up with a couple years ago. Going green still have some growing to do and even then we'd need to refuel/recharge these things.
I would absolutely consider this sedan if it was resistant to most types of physical damage (bullets, bombs, gas).. so as it stands, no.
Hydrogen is the worse of possible (current) replacements for gasoline.
At least the electric vehicles have an in-built infrastructure (though woefully under-prepared for a stampede). Hydrogen has nothing. Refuel once, at your expensive home station, then you're screwed. At least you can run an extension cord from the local Qwik-E-Mart if your Tesla runs out of juice. Or just prop up your portable solar panel, if you're smartly industrious.
-bZj
Drop a couple of zero's off that and maybe.
Hydrogen has no future. Plug-in electric cars already have an infrastructure. You simply need to plug them in. Re-charging costs $0.50. YES 50 F** cents!
Of course not. Hydrogen is not the only contender in the generation of automobiles. The general public and as a result, the planet won't see the benefits of any of these systems until a solid infrastructure of refill stations are in place. The massive, widespread investment required for said infrastructure just won't make any sense until there is a standard amongst technologies and following that, a standard version of the technology itself. If the first production hydrogen vehicles are available in 2015, I predict these standards and the resulting infrastructure won't be in place before 2020. As the oh-so-adequate price suggests, these models will be rich people's toys that are rendered obsolete before they're able to become realistic as a daily driver much like the (totally awesome) Tesla Roadster.
This is all irrelevant of course as the world ends well before 2015.
i think i should go into opening a chain of hydrogen gas stations
2015 Im sure Hydrogen will be thing of the past replaced by O2 powered engines...
Oh hell no.
Two things: First, anyone here know how to spell Hindenburg?
Second, as others have pointed out, it takes power to generate hydrogen in quantity, and power generated by such means as to obliterate any savings in terms of pollutants, etc.
Besides, who in their right minds really wants to reduce carbon emissions? When last I checked, carbon was a part of the photosynthesis process. Even if it were possible to eliminate all carbon emissions, there would still be carbon in the air. And if it were somehow possible to eliminate all carbon in the air, you'd harm plant life!
@ScifiSurfer 1. Hydrogen tanks nowadays are better concealed, and in most cases safer than gasoline, so why do you even mention a blimp, really? 2. Sure it takes power to make Hydrogen, but it takes power to drill for oil, and mine for coal your point? 3. I'm in my right mind halfway through my B.S. in Computer Science, and I want to reduce emissions, not carbon. There's a difference between the carbon in the atmosphere, and the carbon I put into the atmosphere. So yeah, I want to reduce emissions.
If you have any other issues, or concerns direct them to my middle finger.
@gigarath Why, hello middle finger! How are you doing today?
I'm waiting on that compressed air car. 50g is waaay out of my league
I will buy a vehicle when there is a good alternative to fossil fuel power vehicles. Electric may be good and everything, but if electricity is from coal, then what are we replacing really? Hydrogen, yeah I'll do it.
Yes,
If it had the power that such a price would imply and if the support network was present in Australia . . . wait, noooooo. Maybe in another 20 years
A guy from GM brought one of these to my tech class. Its awesome, you can power your house for several days off of it or just use it as a mobile work station. He said the Chevy Equinox fuel cell would come out in 2015, but it would be less than $50,000.
It depends on if that seat does more then warm my ass. There better be a BJ option when in park, because for that kind of money.....
Hey, car makers, get a clue!
Henry Ford 101: Mass production makes things affordable for the public. What you lose from a premium price you more than make up for in numbers of units sold.
Yes, actually I would if it's a nice sedan.
Yes I would ... and over an electric too
Firstly with a hydrogen car if I start running out of juice I can just fill up, like a petrol car and not wait 4 hours for the car to re-charge and also with electric .. I live in a small flat with no garage, how am I going to charge an electric car, jump leads out in to the street?
On the green topic too yes its not totally green to produce hydrogen ... but how green is it to produce electricity for electric cars? ... and then lug around that heavy dirty battery ... and then also to build that battery ... then dispose of it? Battery power doesn't equal green, it's the opposite in my opinion
Why do we need a fuel. Just keep everything all electricity and pray someone comes up with a breakthrough in batteries.
If its a replacement for the Supra, has heavy-hitter performance and range from its fuel cells, corners like a Lotus Exige, yet seats 4 like an M3, and looks like the love child between a Lexus LFA and the Durango 95 from "A Clockwork Orange" then yes.
$50K in future dollars will be like $15K in today's dollars. So it will be a bargain.
I would consider one. Most of the plants that would produce Hydrogen to be shipped to local stations would burn coal. I believe they have a clean burning coal solution that is better than oil based works. This is still dependent on fossil "fuels" but it would be local to the states so dependence on foreign enegry would drop dramatically.
On the other hand I would rather see Natural Gas first since the US produces more and has more resources than any other country in the world. You'd keep most of the power able to be produced with regular gasoline but burn much cleaner and would be a great in between compared to gas/electric.
I would have to start saving now for a down payment.
Only if it doesn't move forward when i don't want it to.
The price of hydrogen and it's availablility will be the determining factors. I doubt your average gas station will be putting up the money for a hydrogen pump and proper storage if only one model car is available in mass to the US Market. Also I'm sure Big Oil will be trying its hardest to stall any progress on this energy source. The only way those people would be for it is if their oil producing facilities were magically transformed into hydrogen producing facilities.
Most people here have no idea what they're talking about. Let me make this clear: if you're scared of someone controlling your source of energy, be scared of USING ONLY ELECTRIC BATTERIES. Where do you think these precious materials come from that are used to make the batteries used in EV and hybrid cars today? They're a VERY limited resource (unlike water), and China currently controls the high 90's of percentage of availability. You're only trading one limited resource for another even more limited resource controlled by yet another foreign country.
Thinking electric is the future is INSANE. Oil companies will NOT control your source of hydrogen (how the heck are they going to control THAT?). Don't pay attention to the other FUD and hydrogen myths. If there are negatives to hydrogen, they're only temporary and will eventually go away once more green sources of electricity for the grid are used. As a plus, it will eventually completely remove foreign control of our power sources, as far as personal vehicles go (not the case with pure EV cars).
Last point is: hydrogen still needs some research, mostly for refueling methods and extracting hydrogen from water (to get away from extracting it from natural gas). We're finding better and more abundant catalysts to aid with the electrolysis every day, not to mention that even as inefficient it is to use electricity to accomplish acquiring hydrogen from water, it doesn't make much of a difference if the source is the sun or wind. The point is we're storing a viable form of energy with zero emissions and water as a byproduct with high potential for completely green methods of acquiring this form of energy. What can beat that?