Battery powered cars?

I have long thought that hydrogen powered cars was the answer to all our problems for many years. Loads of people on Youtube show DIY movies of themselves making the stuff and using it to power things (not just cars) I was almost hoping that by now we would all be driving in hydrogen powered cars. Huge amounts of power can be harnessed, it's cheap to produce and hydrogen production could even be incorporated in the vehicle itself, though electricity (in some form) is still reqd to produce the hydrogen. As 2/3 of the planet is covered with H2O, there is no shortage of the stuff. It is definitely the way forward, and we can now make safe engines and safe production and use of hydrogen.

The water fuel cell could be the answer. The water powered car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ3juM6vHwg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBm8ogwnpG0

Its 'utter rubbish' - they can't even invent a battery for our Laptops that will bo the job.

The figures they quote on time and distance are also 'rubbish. As soon as the person starts useing the 'battery car' - the battery will straight away start to deteriorate and the recharging will get less and less (just like our LT batterys) so whats the point in having a car like that. Another waste of time bothering to 'research' the project in the 1st place. The 'Hydrogen' car will 'cost a fortune' and the engine repair will hit the roof and the water in the tank (its not household water) will cost 'more' than the petrol/gas we all use now- so again - whats the point.

These companys that have come up with these 'hair brained' ideas - are getting 'millions' from these govenments for there research. Anything they come up with will cost far to much for people to buy and the product would not be worth the money. All these re - cycleing programs are 'costing more' then the original items they are replacing - so now thats seen as a 'waste of time' - (the penny finally dropped).

We are stuck with the mode of transport we have now for the next 150yrs +. Nothing esle will do the job. In 250yrs time they will all be back to the horse and cart - which we should have stuck with in the 1st place - and a lot cheaper than what we have now.

In the UK, they are facing brown outs and black outs in 10 years unless they build more power stations quickly. That is without the extra burden of electric powered cars.

The green priority is political power and a two tier world. Those that are high up in the green movement and the rich can have what they want, and the rest of the world can revert to caveman status.

How are all these electric cars going to work in rural India, Africa and Latin America?

Even in California, they have power supply problems without the burden of demand for electric cars.

So far, I have not even commented on the pollution and CO2 cost of making and commissioning the batteries themselves. Add on the same problems of dealing with decommissioning and disposing of the batteries and you have an ecological disaster of biblical proportions.

Look at the ecological mess caused by 'green' lighting over incandescent lights. Mercury in the new bulbs, other pollutants such as plastics in their construction and the fact that they only provide savings when compared on a 24/7 usage, not on normal daily usage. Add in the environmental costs of safe disposal and you have another 'green' fad that is more harmful than what has gone before.

I think that hydrogen vehicles may well have a future, and you could certainly have quick refill and long range using existing gas stations as a distribution network.

However, raising the moisture levels of the atmosphere could well increase the 'green house effect', with water vapour trapping even more heat.

The Law of Unintended consequences comes into play quite often with 'green' issues.

I do not have the answer, but nuclear frightens people, and so cannot be discussed rationally.

However, if all the coal and gas and oil power stations in just China, India, Europe and the US were replaced with nuclear stations, we would have - on greenpeace accepted figures - a good 150-200 years to solve the problem in a proper and orderly manner, instead of running around in circles chasing our tails and looking for quick fixes that inevitably do more harm than good.

Hydrogen still requires energy in it's manufacture. It doesn't exist in a pure state naturally on earth. The only "green" way that I can see is by using renewable energy to create the hydrogen. It would likely be nuclear power that would used to create enough hydrogen to supply our cars at the moment.

I once saw an article about genetically modified tomatoes that could grow in sea water. If they applied that to sugar cane, then they could create crops in barren desert lands that could be used to make ethanol fuel. It just depends on whether that sort of thing would be viewed as green.

The hydrogen cell is a great alternative to battery power. I think it does have a future.

Edit. Yes it is easy, but it still requires power.

Electric cars have come and gone before. You're right there is a long time required to charge the batteries for a limited distance at low speed. You must consider how the electricity is generated to compare the real cost with fuel. One comparison, is it takes 145 L of water to produce 1 L of ethanol from corn or wheat. This is a tremendous waste of water and farmland that previously would have produced food. A secondary cost is the rising prices of food as more land is politically used for fuel and wasting more water.

Hydrogen is good but cost to much to produce . Takes more energy to produce then wheat you get out of it . You wouldn't gain a thing that way . Battery is good but takes to much energy to charge batteries not gaining a thing unless we set high powered solar chargers all over the place and solar cells are expensive and takes allot of energy to make but once you have them there good for years and years and will pay for themselves in time . Guess we should take everything we have time and money for research of a new technology beside having wars and killing each other . But we all know with the governments of the world that will never happen

Fuel cells are they way but batteries are not good for the environment. They have a limited lifetime and will need replacing and the leccy has to come from somewhere to charge it. I do not think that in the long run they are as green as the backers say. Plus I can do 400 odd miles on a tank of fuel in one go. More if I am frugal about it.

This is just the first of many battery powered cars. As the technology matures with batteries then the range will get farther and charge times shorter.

Fuel Cells are a viable option. But one problem I see with that is can you imagine the roads if everyone was a fuel cell vehicle? It would be wet all the time.

batteries disposable are they? so much for a green environment.

More likely the solar powered cars will be all the rage when the oil runs out. As to developing technology its an image thing, we have become too reliant on gas guzzlers, that an the current car manufacturers aren't too keen on changing anything.

also remember, the battery powered cars will need electricity to charge.

Hardly Green is it