Forget electric cars and stuff hybrids -- fuel cell vehicles are the future. We've just spent some time behind the wheel of a Honda FCX Clarity and we're convinced this is the car your kids will be driving when you go bald.
With that in mind, we've put together a little Q&A to show you what the FCX Clarity is like, help demystify fuel cell vehicles, and shed some light on how this type of car compares to more convensional rivals.
If you're ready, we'll proceed.
It's electric isn't it?
Yes, the Honda FCX Clarity uses electric energy and is driven by a 129bhp electric motor. It even has a lithium-ion battery pack. However, unlike traditional electric cars, it doesn't get its charge from the national power grid. All its electrical energy is created within the car itself when a tiny power station known as a fuel cell stack mixes chemicals to create a reaction.
How does it work?
By mixing hydrogen and oxygen. The fuel cell stack is a rectangular box that sits below the centre console. This draws hydrogen gas from a tank in the car's boot. It then mixes the hydrogen with oxygen sucked in from the front of the vehicle. When the hydrogen meets the oxygen, a chemical reaction takes place and an instant supply of electricity is created. This energy is used to drive the electric motor, which turns the front wheels.
So what's the battery for?
Sometimes, during the chemical reaction, surplus energy is created. Instead of wasting this electricity, the FCX Clarity can store it in its lithium-ion battery pack for later use -- particularly during brisk acceleration. The battery is also crucial when driving in very cold weather, as water vapour inside the fuel cell could freeze if the vehicle is used in conditions below 0 Celcius.
Once up and running, however, the Fuel Cell will work fine in cold conditions as heat is a by-product of the fuel cell process. The FCX Clarity also has a regenerative braking system, which creates electrical energy and stores it in the battery for later use.
What's it like to drive?
The FCX Clarity is eerily quiet, mostly, as there's no internal combustion engine exploding globs of petrol under the bonnet. Hit the accelerator, though, and the car leaps forward with a futuristic whine that's a bit like a plane raising or lowering its wing flaps. It's nippy, too. Honda reckons the 100kW (129hp) motor delivers performance that is in line with the grunt offered by one of its 2.4-litre engines. We didn't get the chance to really open the car up, but around town, the FCX Clarity felt sprightly enough.
What happens when I run out of hydrogen?
The car has a pretty decent 270-mile range, which should keep most of us going for quite a while. However, when you run out of hydrogen gas, you're up the creek without a paddle because there are a just two refuelling stations in the UK -- one in Loughborough and one in Birmingham.
Why isn't hydrogen readily available?
Hydrogen exists everywhere -- it's the most common element in the world and there are numerous ways to produce it. It's created (and often wasted) as a by-product of industrial chlorine production. Ironically, hydrogen is also used to remove sulphur during the treatment of petrol, meaning people actually make the stuff for the benefit of petrol-powered cars.
Even more ironic is the fact it's possible to create hydrogen from petrol through a process known as steam reformation. By literally steaming natural gas at temperatures of between 700-1100 degrees Celsius, boffins can create Hydrogen for the FCX Clarity and cars of its ilk.
Should I steam my own petrol?
No, you'll probably kill yourself, but we wish somebody would steam the stuff. Although natural gas isn't a renewable energy source, creating hydrogen in this manner has its benefits. The process of turning natural gas into hydrogen is a fairly clean one and once you've created the hydrogen in this manner, using it in the FCX Clarity won't result in any carbon dioxide emissions.
Honda say if you were to run an FCX Clarity fuelled on hydrogen generated by steaming natural gas you would achieve a 60 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to driving a similar car on that same amount of petrol.
Why use hydrogen anyway?
Fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) have many advantages over battery electric vehicles (BEVs). Firstly, refuelling a hydrogen fuel cell car takes just 3-5 minutes, whereas recharging a BEV can take several hours. FCEVs also have a much longer range than BEVs -- the FCX Clarity can travel up to 270 miles on a single tank of hydrogen, while typical electric cars runs for less than 100 miles on a single charge. FCEVs are also far cleaner than those powered by the internal combustion engine. Hydrogen is a renewable energy source and the FCX Clarity's only emissions are water.
Can I get a Honda FCX Clarity now?
It's possible. The FCX Clarity left concept vehicle status long ago and is a certified assembly line-produced car that's in commercial use in America and Japan. There are only two of the cars in the whole of Europe, but Honda has been leasing the FCX Clarity to customers in the US and Japan for $600 per month since 2002. Apparently actress Jamie Lee Curtis drives one.
Will fuel cell cars ever be mainstream?
Currently, the world of fuel cell electric vehicles is very "chicken and egg". Honda is reluctant to create more FCX Clarity fuel cell cars for the UK until there's a large enough refuelling infrastructure in place, and the policy makers of this world are reluctant to create that infrastructure until people start buying and using fuel cell vehicles.
That said, a programme called UK-HyNet (UK Hydrogen Network) has been launched with the aim of building a hydrogen refuelling infrastructure in the UK. This will create five main regional clusters of hydrogen and fuel cell technology development (in London, Wales, Midlands, North East and Scotland) and will hopefully make the UK a leader in hydrogen infrastructure.
What's more, the London Mayor's office has recently announced plans to create six hydrogen refuelling stations in London by 2012.
Android App 
RSS Feeds 
iPhone App 
Newsletters 
Comments 8
Add your comment
Anonymous 20 September, 2010 21:22
Well, at least we don't have to revert to the horse and cart when hydrocarbons run out. But we'll still be screwed as the petrochemical industry will grind to a halt (no more plastics:( ). An amazing breakthrough nonetheless.
Anonymous 20 September, 2010 22:53
Yawn. Still trying to push the fuel cell, ignoring the inefficiencies and difficulties of generating, storing, and transporting hydrogen. Not to mention the cost and lifespan of the fuel cell itself. I'll take my currently available, affordable, BEV, thank you.
Anonymous 21 September, 2010 05:51
I'm very happy to see fuel cell research going on.
But it sure the heck ain't anywhere near ready for market. Way too expensive, too fragile. And there's that whole infrastructure problem--it's REALLY expensive. And even if they fix all that...it still uses 3-4 times as much power to make the hydrogen as it does to power a car directly on electricity.
The article compares the FCX (not a "typical" hydrogen car) to a "typical" BEV. But existing BEVs (not prototypes) can go 244 miles per charge, and can recharge to 80% in 25 minutes. Sure the FCX is a little better than that...but by the time they fix the problems above, BEVs will no doubt have improved too.
Anonymous 21 September, 2010 06:03
Research is great; but I sure wouldn't wait around for one.
Anonymous 22 September, 2010 20:00
Yet another article starting with the absurd claim, 'this is the future.' I'm sure fuel cell vehicles will be part of the future (not sooner than 50 years, and that's from an engineer at Honda)
I have driven the Clarity and it is spectacularly good, beautifully made, easy and quiet to drive, I did floor it on the autobahn and it really shifts. But the question remains, where does the hydrogen come from? Why are the big il companies so keen on us using hydrogen.
Two reasons, one, the obvious one, is they can sell it to us. That's fine, that's business, I have no problem with that. They can extract it from natural gas as the article states. So essentially this still is a fossil fuel car, a much better one, but that's what it is.
Second, and far more importantly, oil companies can promise, and they have been doing so for 30 years to my certain knowledge, that 'in the future we'll all drive hydrogen cars. This means we don't need to worry now and we can all just carry on buying fossil fuels to allow us to drive.
I do object to this. the nonsense promise of fuel cell technology being the panacea for all our problems has been foisted on us for decades. BEV's work now, today, I drive one every day. My great grandchildren might drive a HFCV, if they're very very lucky.
anonymous 22 September, 2010 21:53
Anon 22 September: You raise several valid points but I'm not sure exactly what the crux of your argument is. I don't think it's absurd to say FCEVs are the future. And clearly you don't either if you've driven one and were so impressed. If manufacturers can make them affordable and we can build infrastructure, then there's no reason that in the next 50 years or so (i.e. the future) FCEVs won't be mainstream. Even petrol cars faced resistance when they replaced the horse-drawn cart.
You're right in saying the FCX is a fossil fuel car (if we extract the hydrogen from natural gas) but I'm willing to bet that most BEV owners recharge their vehicles using dirty (or brown) electricity. Even so-called green electricity tariffs are topped up with 'brown' electricity bought from the wholesale market, so chances are your electric car is also running on dirty (or at least partly dirty) energy.
Anonymous 24 September, 2010 06:32
Pure electric, fuel cells, who are we kidding? We're just playing a shell game. The hype and lack of critical thinking is frustrating. Make gains today, with what we have today and use less.
Why am I frustrated? I live in the U.S. and drive my family (limited and judiciously) the most efficient vehicle available here (Jetta diesel). I won't drive a hybrid Prius or similar, because their fuel economy is worse and long term effects from battery and components is worse than the diesel car. I won't drive an electric car, until I can effectively (cost and time) recharge from wind or solar. As it stands now, 73% of US power comes from coal.
Why am I frustrated? Nobody here wants to do without. They are driving vehicles that are large enough to carry my car in, and the Jetta isn't tiny. They want their vehicles to accelerate like they are driving a motorcycle, and are too stupid to realize the diesel can be zippy (if you want to dump more of your fuel at once into the engine).
Why am I frustrated? Diesel hybrid is the next best choice, because a small diesel engine could assist in producing electricity, and then a hybrid (with regenerative ability) could exceed the pure diesel in fuel economy Why is that not the vehicle of choice today? Throw in a small wind turbine and/or solar panel at home, and we could do even better.
Why am I frustrated? Building infrastructure to charge or distribute hydrogen or swap batteries is too large of a paradigm shift for too little (if any) gain. Just use less now; lots less.
Why am I frustrated? Too few are trying. Turn of the lights in empty buildings. Turn off the lights in empty vehicle lots and everywhere they aren't needed. Turn down your heat. Turn your air off. Don't open the business doors wide, while you're cooling inside. Let your clothes sit a basket for 8 hours before putting in the dryer. You'll find they dry in a fraction of the time. (Dryers are usually the highest consuming appliance we have.). Think of real solutions you can implement today.
Why am I frustrated? People make dumb decisions, only thinking of themselves, in large vehicles only occupied by them, in underinsulated dwellings, with shiny (and inefficient) appliances, and never think of the generations which may survive and have to suffer the bad choices we are making every day.
Anonymous 19 June, 2011 17:50
why doesn't honda increase the amount of hydrogen the car can hold? 4.1kgs is roughly the same weight as a gallon of petrol. if 240 miles are possible from a single gallon equivalent weight of hydrogen why not increase capacity 4 or 5 times?
A standard family saloon has capacity for roughly 16-20 gallons of petrol. Imagine a hyrogen car with a similar capacity and a range of 3840 - 4800 miles.
is this another example of a manufacturer building into its products the necessity for customers to upgrade? like apple does with it's ipod products? or would a car with 160lbs of hydrogen be a moving bomb?