Very smart way to approach this--good thinking in getting real world feed back on these vehicles. Maybe this sort of thing wouldn't be a bad idea for the Volt either? (hint hint). I would volunteer---anybody else?

Nice to see GM getting fuel cells closer to real customers, but they aren't kidding that this test isn't about the technology. It looks like its about the publicity, a recurring theme with GM lately: get back on top in the green image department. I suspect most customers will complain about the 150 mile range of this giant SUV which cannot be refueled or recharged at home. Fuel cells? Good luck with that. Let us know how it turns out for you...

Some of you think an Equinox is huge??? You are kidding, right?

At any rate, Honda is already performing a similar program with a family in California that drives a Honda Fuel Cell car as a daily driver to give them feedback data. In their case, that is only one family and one car being tested in one area of the U.S. GM has a much broader test program here.

Let's welcome the Project Driveway, leading to real life testing of THE 21th century mobility technology from the worlds 2nd automaker.

Light components and the batteries are also welcome, but the disruptive innovation is the fuel cell, while hydrogen act as a bridge to renewable energy system (saving land and water from biocrops too).

Not to forget, (for all the folks preaching the all-electric option) fuel cell vehicles do are plug-in vehicles, the difference is made by the prime mover, no loncer an internal combustion engine, but an electrochemical one.

City driving, where ICE performs a 10% efficiency, will benefit the most, as well as historical cities in Europe.

90$/barrel oil now matches higher per-kg H2 costs. Logical outcome: mobility is about to change heavily; rail-based public transportation and non motorized (bicycles), ligh electric urban one will make the post-peak and the Kyoto protocol era smoother.
Ciao
GC

I like the elimination of a tach and instead a meter showing how many kW are being used. Then you could drive down the highway with windows open or a/c on and see what the actual difference is...you coule put a "nose bra" on your vehicle and immediately find out how detrimental to aerodynamics it is. You would have instant feedback of how much of an impact removing the roof rack makes in power consumption when driving on the highway.

One of the lies forth by hydrogen pushers is that electric cars can't have good performance, and can't be recharged just as quickly as a hydrogen vehicle.

Which electric car gets recharged to full capacity in 5 minutes? Oh right - ones on paper.

The project's very name is only too revealing. "Project Driveway", so named, will surely emphasize the competitive profitability of maintaining the automobile's severe impediment upon other modes of urban/suburban travel, its competition, safe walking and bicycling, and practical mass transit. The automobile is a transportation monopoly and thus a constitutional inequity.

I will continue to argue that automobile-related business interests view hydrogen is a proprietary fuel best suited to maintain the status quo, the worsening rush hour traffic gridlock, a bedlam of maniacal or otherwise clueless motorists terrorizing neighborhoods and commercial districts with life-threatening masses of moving vehicles.

The automobile has too long, wrongfully been a means of directing urban/suburban growth that effectively disempowers local and regional economies, making them subservient to the corporate global economy and the longest-distance shipping of all goods, no matter the gargantuan quantity of whatever fuels and energy that requires.

We don't need a better car as much as we need future urban development plans that significantly reduce dependence upon driving and long-distance transport. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicle technology does not have that potential. It is technically impractical and inapplicable to future energy structures most likely to be decentralized.

About as meaningless as Chrysler testing the turbine cars over 40 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Turbine_Car

I think this is a lot like the Ford Nucleon concept car. You only have to "Filler Up" once.

"Why are so many here so down on Hydrogen? I can never understand that."

I don't think anyone dislikes hydrogen. But H2 would be the most complete change among the many initiatives for new fuels, vehicles, production methods, and energy distribution. There are simply a lot of technical and economic problems with H2 now.

(Mostly economic since an unlimited amount of money can bring change very quickly. Unlimited funding is seldom available on this planet).

At this site you encounter people looking twenty years ahead and many more focused on what to do now. I suspect any scoffers are more interested in how to improve matters for the next decade.

Gee whiz, how can you get more GREEN than Hydrogen?

Uh oh. Here comes the torrent of abuse. Take cover, Schmeltz.

"Single minded adherent of Hydrogen"---oh well, I've been called worse. :)

"Single minded adherent of Hydrogen"---oh well, I've been called worse. :)

Schmeltz, have you ever encountered this mythical creature known as the "single minded adherent of hydrogen"? I've never spotted such a thing in all my days.

muddied the waters

Yes, without people talking about the pros and cons of various of technologies and their paths things would be crystal clear.

I would continue to comment, but I fear that I would further muddy the waters with this mindless Hydrogen drivvle. We should really make way for REAL ideas such Razor foot scooters for everyone!

Dude, like what I want is like a sustainably harvested algae biodiesel plug-in hybrid with optional full EV conversion that jacks into clean and inexpensive and non-toxic nuclear energy (which of course is redundant!). The batteries will recharge completely before you even put in the plug and it will get 10 zillion mpg and be 110% carbon-negative. How's that for clear thinking?