Who is "We" that need to maintain momentum in the hydrogen fuel cell pathway??
Hydrogen can never establish itself as a dominant energy carrier. It has to be fabricated from high grade energy and it has to compete with high grade energy in the market place. Hydrogen cannot win this fight against its own energy source. Physics is eternal and cannot be charged by man. Therefore, a Hydrogen Economy has no past, no present and no future. The road to sustainability leads to an Electron Economy.

Since the 1970's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjfONpsFvyM hydrogen's been the promise that keeps promising - and they still get funding.

'They' like it - they fund it.

The same people that complain about this reduction in funding could be some of the same people that complain about the deficit. It is a world of tradeoffs and the decisions made are important. In a zero sum budget, something has to give. Either increase revenues and/or decrease spending. In a No New Taxes world, this is the choice.

The proposed budget for biofuels (with stimulus and loan guarantees) is around 2 billion, the proposed budget for batteries is around 3 billion - the 100 million for hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is a drop in that bucket and there are more fuel cell vehicles on the road today. Why kneecap a program when it is starting to bear fruit? Why not fund all pathways and see which one gets there first? We are going to need all the help we can get to fight climate change and reduce our dependence on foreign oil, so why choose now? Especially when fuel cells can be used to extend the range of batteries (plus then the fuel cell can be smaller and the battery much, much lighter).

The point is, we shouldn't choose one pathway over another when they are all needed and all have their own challenges right now. To overlook all the progress that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have made and are making today is a ridiculous strategy.

@kelly,
Dramatic improvements in H2 storage, generation and FC technology have been presented. We have fabulous FCV's like the Honda FCX and GM Equinox running around gathering valuable research data. These are capable of over 60% thermal efficiency. Numerous ways have been found to dramatically reduce platinum use or eliminate platinum altogether in FC and in H2 hydrolyzer. Research vital as these must continue!

@Roger,

H2 improvements are fine, but not if the H2 vehicle still costs a million dollars each. For half that, I could build EV's with a 500 mile range - even if I have to use 6,800 'C' cells.

The Honda FCV seems to be the best H2 fuel cell vehicle around and they didn't need our tax dollars. US firms have gotten H2 billions and are still getting hundreds of millions - perhaps too many hundreds of millions of dollars.

The companies want to do fuel cells BECAUSE they are so far off.  As long as they're not ready, the entire engine and drivetrain divisions of multiple companies still have a reason to exist.  Batteries will kill them that much sooner, so they use FCs as an argument to avoid using batteries.

That's like using the long lifespan of radial tires as a reason to stick with bias-ply.  It didn't work for Firestone and Goodyear.

"Fuel cells didnt catch on earlier simply because oil didnt run out as soon as expected. Thats the only reason. Even many years ago they COULD have mass produced fuel cells for about 300 bucks a kw. Thats JUST 18 grand for a near 90 hp car. They can now do that for less then 4500."

Please provide links to this low cost statement. Per Honda: Nov 10, 2008 ... Jamie Lee Curtis picked up her Honda FCX Clarity here, and today we did the same ... Equinox FCV, the Clarity doesn't need a communications cable); lock and go ... The FCX has serious understeer and costs over $1million. ...
wot.motortrend.com/6338308/green/honda-s-fcx-clarity-hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicle-enters-the-mt-garage/index.html

Um kelly this site covered it several times;/

The cost to make fuel cells is fairly low the main cost component is the fact they were only making a few at a time yet had a 10-20 million a year company to fund. Now that they make 2-400 a year and are something like a 30 mil company the real cost is down alot.

Also on this site the cost of the entire clarity construction program was said to be 20 million and that for 200 cars.

Also again on this site even back waaaay back using extremely old fuel cell designs the bus project this site covered had a cost of 450k per fuel cell stack. A later bus project had a cost of only 150k per stack. So you see if they realy are making alot of these fuel cell stacks they could indeed be costing less then 100k now.

But again thats mostly the cost of running the company as per data from again this site it was 273 per kw many years ago its 79 or something now and the target is 30 by 2015. Thats the cost if mass produced in 1 million or more.

Again the only thing keeping it back is the conservative nature of many of the companies behind it and the fact oil is still strong.

I found some costs in this one..

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/06/doe_2006_hydrog.html

200 per kw in 2003 110 in 2006 and a goal of 30 for 2015 based on 500k per year production.

The cost of the clarity was alot more tricky and I cant retrace my steps. Basicaly honda never said directly what it costs but they let slip in one press release that the project cost 20 million and elsewhere that it involved 200 cars. Now it IS possible that 20 million was just for one phase of the project but so far as I can tell its not.

As for the cost of the bus fuel cells the only way to get that now is to track down the pdf report they made and calc the cost of the fuel cells via the fact they goofed and tell you what percentage of thier total maintenance cost was fuel cell replacement and how many fuel cells they bought;/ They do that in two different plces tho one not in the report itself or in a second report.

You can also get an idea of current costs by googling for retrofit fuel cell thingies and findout out they cost 100k to 150k or so for the whole shebang...

And yes I was waaaay too bored when I bothered to do all that and no im not about to ever be that bored ever again... I hope.

The cost for fuel cells will soon become secondary to their intolerance of things like getting too warm or too dry.  The fussiness of proton exchange membranes is going to require costly equipment (and sometimes costly repairs) even if they get ten times cheaper.

And even if the FCs were free and lasted 100 years, you'd still have the thermodynamic inefficiencies of making hydrogen and the infrastructure costs of creating an entirely new energy system to handle it.  Either of these should be enough to kill the program.  Well, it's dead; let's keep it that way.

Well, every major auto mfg's are prototyping at least 1 or severy FCV's, so the commercial potential of these FCV's are not too far off, or else they won't bother. Honda is leading the pack, but MB, GM, Ford, Huyndai, VW, Toyota etc... are showing some marvelous hardwares that keep improving rapidly.

The potential for H2 and FCV is vast...far exceeding any old-tech ICE that has been polluting and inefficient. H2 is very clean, efficient, storable in large quantity, and can be produced anywhere using any kind of primary energy source. Let's say that one winter, the community uses up all the H2 made from renewable energy made from the summer and fall...Must all the FCV's now be stranded due to the lack of fuel? Nope, crank up the steam reformer, shove in the methane, or the biomass, or the coal...or whatever the fuel souces...and out come the H2...

The last word from MIT: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/post.aspx?bid=362&bpid=23667