What's the story with Bush and Hydrogen Cars?

[BaliBabyDoc]

Per norm Corn is almost right. The energy initiative/supercar program was shredded long before Bush came to office. It was basically deep-sixed by legislators like Dingle (D-MI) that have no vision beyond the next election or the interests of their largest donors. The first faux pas in the program was shutting out import automakers that wanted to participate . . . fortunately they weren't dissuaded by the cold shoulder. The hard 80mpg goal was whittled down to 40-50mg soft target.

You can't argue with the basic facts. The government spent more than a billion dollars of taxpayer money (or debt if you like) on an enterprise that essentially produced nothing. In the meantime, Japanese and European carmakers have multiple vehicles that exceed the soft target with advanced concepts on the verge of the hard goal.

Corn is right. The government wasted our money. Grudgingly I have to support Bush's FreedomCar initiative b/c the infrastructure will ultimately come from public investment NOT industry. Regardless, Bush has a responsibility to tell the truth . . . buying more fuel efficient vehicles today will have a compounding benefit in the long term.

 

[flavio]

Wow, it looks like PNGV program was merely a waste of $1.7 billion dollars. Money well spent, you're right, what was Bush thinking?

I'm right? What did I claim that I could be right or wrong about? Were you under the impression I wrote the article still or something?

 

[Corn]

It was basically deep-sixed by legislators like Dingle (D-MI) that have no vision beyond the next election or the interests of their largest donors.

Dingle's vision is just fine: He's smart enough to realize (even though he's a Democrat 😉 ) that forcing automakers to build cars that people don't want to buy (especially at even just break even prices) is nothing more than "feel good" legislation that will ultimately severly damage the american automobile industry.

High MPG cars are a reality in Europe and Asia because there is a demand for them there. That demand doesn't exist here, as evidenced by the absence on our roads of the most fuel efficient cars from European and Asian automakers. The cost to make these cars crashworthy is prohibitive given the limited sales and prices they would command here.

I'm not going to debate why Americans don't want these cars (that's another discussion entirely), however; the reality is that Americans do not want them in sufficient quantities to make them worthwhile to produce.

 

[Corn]

So do you guys think scrapping a $1.5 billion fuel efficiency program in order to throw $125 million at hydrogen was an environmentally sound decision?

Sure you didn't "claim" anything per se, but the obvious implication in the above quote was loud and clear.

Were you under the impression I wrote the article still or something?

Ummm, no.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Roger
Another point that needs to be made, Hydrogen powered vehicles emit pollution as well, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Our atmosphere contains large amounts of nitrogen, when this nitrogen is exposed to high pressures and temperatures it breaks down and combines with other elelments to form nitrogen oxides which is a major pollutant.

As any good automechanic should say! 🙂 Fuel cells use neither high temperatures nor high pressures. They chemically react hydrogen and oxygen using palladium and platinum proton exchange membranes. Current fuel cells output almost pure steam. (Fuel cells run at about 170^)

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Dingle's vision is just fine: He's smart enough to realize (even though he's a Democrat ) that forcing automakers to build cars that people don't want to buy (especially at even just break even prices) is nothing more than "feel good" legislation that will ultimately severly damage the american automobile industry.

Here's a word I guess you just don't have in your lexicon . . . compromise. Domestic automakers rarely make them b/c their congressional guard dogs are always at the heel. Domestic automakers are at a competitive disadvantage b/c the American public has been forced to subsidize inefficient vehicles. Ford, GM, and Chrysler/Dodge have gone through a myriad of iterations of the compact car. How many from Honda . . . ONE . . . the Civic. Ford almost has a compact people want (Focus) but its built on a world platform (Mondeo) . . . unfortunately it also has Ford level quality control issues . . . I think 8+ recalls. Honda makes money selling Civics b/c they don't have to give discounts galore to get a customer to buy it. I think its called supply side . . . if you build it they will come . . . unless of course you build crap (Escort, Chevette, Topaz, Cavalier).

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: flavio
What do you suppose the story is with the Bush hydrogen car plan? Hydrogen cars sound like a great idea, but do you suppose this is better technology than electric cars?

Here's an excerpt from a Wired article:

In January, the Bush administration scrapped a $1.5 billion Clinton-era program to develop an 80-mpg car by 2004. Instead, the White House launched FreedomCAR (the "CAR" stands for cooperative automotive research), promising $125 million next year plus more later to help automakers in pre-competitive hydrogen power research. The initiative set no hard goal or deadline for producing an H2-powered car, so environmentalists see it as a Big Oil/Big Three/GOP plot to distract the public from the need to mandate immediate, radical increases in fuel efficiency. The New York Times wrote that the only freedom that FreedomCAR will bestow is on "the manufacturers, now relieved of the obligation (absent strong new fuel economy standards) to produce serious breakthroughs in the next few years."

From here.

They just want to steal Canadian technology (Ballard fuel cell) to teach us a lesson for not falling behind Bush and his empire building schemes.

 

[Freejack2]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Dingle's vision is just fine: He's smart enough to realize (even though he's a Democrat ) that forcing automakers to build cars that people don't want to buy (especially at even just break even prices) is nothing more than "feel good" legislation that will ultimately severly damage the american automobile industry.

Here's a word I guess you just don't have in your lexicon . . . compromise. Domestic automakers rarely make them b/c their congressional guard dogs are always at the heel. Domestic automakers are at a competitive disadvantage b/c the American public has been forced to subsidize inefficient vehicles. Ford, GM, and Chrysler/Dodge have gone through a myriad of iterations of the compact car. How many from Honda . . . ONE . . . the Civic. Ford almost has a compact people want (Focus) but its built on a world platform (Mondeo) . . . unfortunately it also has Ford level quality control issues . . . I think 8+ recalls. Honda makes money selling Civics b/c they don't have to give discounts galore to get a customer to buy it. I think its called supply side . . . if you build it they will come . . . unless of course you build crap (Escort, Chevette, Topaz, Cavalier).

Don't be so quick to praise the Civic. Honda has done a fine job of screwing them up too. I had the misfortune of owning an 89 civic. The repairs on that car probably exceeded the cost of that car. While a number of things were covered under warranty, there were a number of repairs in and out of warranty. Air conditioning, head gasket, seat fabric, engine cylinder, fuel pump, etc...

All this proves is Civics are no better or worse than comparable domestic vehicles. My wife, and brothers in-law all have domestics with over 100,000 miles on them and no major problems. I've owned domestic cars since I had the Honda Civic and I've had far less problems with them than I had with that Civic.
Kindly stop preaching how great imports are. They are no better or worse than domestics.

 

[flavio]

All this proves is Civics are no better or worse than comparable domestic vehicles.

You got a lemon and that proves something about all Civics? I would suggest if you want to prove something you use statistics with a great number of cars involved. Honda cars have proved for years to be far more reliable than domestics. I'm not sure what the current numbers are, but it has certainly been true in the past.

 

[Corn]

I think its called supply side . . . if you build it they will come . . .

Really, so then why don't I see the following cars on the roads here in the US?

Mercedes A Class
Audi A3
Smart City-Coupe'
Honda Jazz
Ford Fiesta and Puma
Toyota Yaris

They are all being built and are offered for sale in Europe and Asia, so where are they? I thought you said they will come?

I'm not going to dispute that the cavalier was a pile of garbage, but that's what you get in that price range. Honda's latest version of the Civic is no wonder to behold either. Reliable? Maybe, but what used to make the Civic a gem in the rough (it's suspension) has been dumbed down to reflect what the market will tolerate in their competition.

People buy the Civic, Elantra, Focus, etc, not becuase of their efficiency, but because of the price. If the public were demaning high MPG cars, you would find the above list on the roads here today.

 

[Corn]

They just want to steal Canadian technology (Ballard fuel cell) to teach us a lesson for not falling behind Bush and his empire building schemes.

Had to meet you daily "look at me, I'm an idiot" quota, eh Hagbard?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

JD Power 2002

JD Power 2001

initial quality 2002

initial quality 2001

People have a right to choose their vehicles based on their personal preferences . . . even if those biases defy the facts. Corn drives an Audi . . . I almost purchased one but those damn reliability issues . . .

 

[BigJelly]

Wait if gas is $1.50 and water's $1 for a 20 ounces were're screwed. Just pointing out the hypocricary of the people who complain about gas pricesa nd pay almost tens times as much for the MOST ABUNDANT MOLECULE in the world. 😀

 

[Freejack2]

Originally posted by: flavio

All this proves is Civics are no better or worse than comparable domestic vehicles.

You got a lemon and that proves something about all Civics? I would suggest if you want to prove something you use statistics with a great number of cars involved. Honda cars have proved for years to be far more reliable than domestics. I'm not sure what the current numbers are, but it has certainly been true in the past.

Lets look at consumer reviews on MSN Autos.
Honda Civic 8.1 overall rating.
Chevrolet Cavalier 8.5
Dodge Neon 7.4
Saturn Ion 9.3
Ford Focus 5.8
Nissan Sentra 9.3
Mazda Protege 8.8

Even I'll admit the Focus sucks. However taking the rest of the numbers, guess what...imports are no better or worse than domestics.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: BigJelly
Wait if gas is $1.50 and water's $1 for a 20 ounces were're screwed. Just pointing out the hypocricary of the people who complain about gas pricesa nd pay almost tens times as much for the MOST ABUNDANT MOLECULE in the world. 😀

I don't pay that much for water. You're getting ripped off.

 

[Corn]

Corn drives an Audi . . . I almost purchased one but those damn reliability issues . . .

Yeah, my S4 is a piece of sh1t. Its been to the dealership 8 times in the 3 years I've owned it.

Oh wait, that was all for regularly scheduled maintenance paid for on Audi's dime. I guess I just got lucky.