Good luck to them.

I remain convinced that personal transport via fuel cells powered by hydrogen is still a long way down a dead end road.

Lucas,

That dead end feeling is probably because of the lack of signifigant existing infrastructure or maybe the amazing price tag of composite fuel tanks and fuel cells, etc

Beautiful design, neat layout and impressive fuel efficiency, speed, and range performance.
Too optimistic projected production date...but we shall see...perhaps the auto mfg's have under their sleeve some magical ways to reduce the cost of FC stack, but that still remains a secret to the public?

I'm not saying that things like the fuel stack, on-board hydrogen storage, distribution, etc., aren't serious issues, as they clearly are. But I think that scaling up hydrogen production without adding to our CO2 emissions is quite a bit tougher.

At 12% efficiency and insolation value of 5, one would need around 63 1 m^2 panels to electrolyze enough hydrogen to fuel a 2nd Gen FCX for the average vehicle miles in a given household . That's about $36K for the panels for 30-40 years of use, or around $1,000/yr. [This doesn't count the power requirement for compression, but it also doesn't factor in any useful heat from electrolysis for site energy.]

By contrast, at average fuel economy and vehicle-miles, the average US household spends about $3,000/yr for gasoline.

From a fuel perspective, it's clearly doable, even with the large amount of driving we do in the US. The question comes down to the other costs and how that may stack up with BEVs.

Ben,
There is no need for many people to shell out $36K to buy solar panels. Energy companies, aka Big Utilities, have the money to do it just fine. Just before oil will be depleted, you can count on Big Oil with very deep pocket to get in on the renewable-energy-to-synthetic-fuels business as well. Average motorists just have to pay at the pump the way they are doing now. Competition among the giant players will ensure the future Hydrogen at the pump will be priced reasonably, UNLESS our anti-trust mechanism breaks down, but that will spell the end of our democracy. So, instead of Shell oil, Exxon-Mobile oil, you'll have Shell hydrogen, or BP hydrogen, or ammonia, or synthetic methane, etc..

I would rather advance battery technology and have solar panels on the roof of the house. Most drives around town and commutes could be done that way. If you want to go out of town on a long trip, go rent a hybrid.

sjc,

Another alternative would be to rent an extra battery pack (or two) for longer trips or weekends.

At 200 to 300 Wh/Kg future high power density battery packs will weight around 50 to 60 Kg for 100 to 120 Km. A plug-in second pack could serve as a range extender.

Secondly, since future battery packs will be 'quick charge' with an acceptable 300 Km driving range between quick charges, the need for an on board range extender (extra batteries, fuel cell or ICE generator) would no longer be justified.

Cost
Range
Refueling time
Environmental impact

Too much is speculative at this point to see how these technology trajectories will end up.

I'm sure big oil would pony up very quickly to build the necessary hydrogen infrastructure ... they'll just make us pay for it later.

All the more reason to produce it oneself.

I hope they don't need too much lithium to make the batteries. If they do, there will hardly be enough lithium available to build a few million cars. Building the hundreds of millions of cars we need will be completely impossible.
In that case, fuel cells will certainly win.

Roger Pham,

Source: Solar Panel Electricity (assume DC-AC conversion for both):
Electrolysis (60-80%) => PEM fuel cell (50%) -> total: 30-40% (compressor loss not included)
Li-I BEV charging (~95%) => Li-I BEV discharging (~95%) -> total: 90%

Oh, please do tell.