Part 3: Zero Emission Hydrogen Future?

  • Underneath the hood of a hydrogen powered car. (Photo courtesy of US Department of Energy)

You’ve probably heard that the auto industry is looking into hydrogen as a possible fuel for future cars and trucks. Hydrogen offers the potential for cars with close to zero harmful emissions, but those cars won’t be on the roads in big numbers anytime soon. Dustin Dwyer has this look at what’s being done now to get ready for a hydrogen future:

Transcript

You’ve probably heard that the auto industry is looking into Hydrogen as a possible fuel for future cars and trucks. Hydrogen offers the potential for cars with close to zero harmful emissions, but those cars won’t be on the roads in big numbers anytime soon. Dustin Dwyer has this look at what’s being done now to get ready for a hydrogen future:


To many people, hydrogen-powered cars might sound about as legitimate as flying cars. They both seem like really good ideas. Hydrogen could lead to cars that have basically no harmful emissions. Flying cars are just cool. For flying cars, the technology hasn’t come through. That’s despite all the promises of countless sci-fi movies.


But people in the auto industry insist hydrogen cars are the real deal, and they’re backing it up with real investment money. General Motors, the world’s biggest car company, has spent more than $1 billion already to develop hydrogen fuel cells.


Julie Beamer is GM’s director of fuel cell commercialization. She says things such as biofuels and gas-electric hybrid technology are important in the short term.


“But ultimately, you are back to what is the long-term sustainable solution? We believe very strongly, it is hydrogen and fuel cell technology.”


At GM, hydrogen fuel cells represent a complete reinvention of the automobile. The internal combustion engine, which has powered nearly every car for the past century, is out. And there’s a lot of other high-tech gadgetry in GM’s prototype hydrogen vehicles.


But Hydrogen doesn’t have to be a revolution. You can actually use existing engines.


Jeff Schmidt is an engineer with Ovonic Hydrogen Systems in Michigan. He’s hooking a hydrogen pump up to a modified Toyota Prius.


“You can hear the fuel is pushing through the nozzle, there are orifices and it just whistles as it’s fueling up.”


This is a pump that looks like any other gas pump you see. It has a few extra tubes and wires, but basically it works the same as gas pumps you use all the time. As Schmidt jumps behind the wheel, he says that was the idea with the prototype car, as well.


“The car is very similar to standard Prius in function and drivability. Simply a matter of getting in the car, seat belt, push the power button to start.”


Essentially, Ovonics just pulled out the standard gas tank, and put in a tank that could safely store Hydrogen. That tank is a little bit heavier than a normal gas tank, and you lose some horsepower from an engine that was originally built for gasoline. But Schmidt says for the most part, this hydrogen powered car works the same as your car does. It just uses a cleaner fuel.


And the technology is pretty much ready to go. Schmidt says the car could be mass produced and put on the roads right away. The problem is nobody would know where to fill up.


“That has to be worked out. I mean, we see a gas station on every corner right now.”


Gary Vasilash is editor of Automotive Design and Production magazine. He points out there are already problems with just getting biofuels such as ethanol into gas stations, and he says getting Hydrogen to filling stations will be much worse.


“People are talking about, ‘Well, gee it’s so difficult to get ethanol,’ you know, and ethanol’s from corn, right? Well, where is there free hydrogen? Nowhere.”


The most talked about way of getting hydrogen at least in the short term, is from a process involving fossil fuels, but that process would create heavy CO2 emissions on the production side. So the total measure of pollution from cars, what’s called the well-to-wheel impact, might only be cut in half compared to current levels.


So GM’s Julie Beamer says the ultimate goal is using renewable wind or solar electricity to pull Hydrogen out of water through electrolysis.


“Those sources obviously, while they’re near term not as economically attractive as what natural gas would be, but the renewable-based options do represent to completely eliminate greenhouse gas emissions through the total well-to-wheel basis.”


That could be a big, big improvement for the environment. But no one can really say how long it might take. In the meantime, auto companies and researchers continue to work on the incremental steps, while the rest of us wait for the era of truly clean automobiles to take flight.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

New Air Standards Tough on Particulates

Environmental and health groups from around the country are criticizing the Environmental Protection Agency for its new air quality rules. Dustin Dwyer has more:

Transcript

Environmental and health groups from around the country are criticizing the
Environmental Protection Agency for its new air quality rules. Dustin Dwyer has more:


The new standard for short-term exposure to particulate matter, or soot, has been cut in
half. The standard on long-term exposure was left unchanged. EPA administrator
Stephen Johnson says it’s the most health-protective standard in the nation’s history:


“These are significant, significant steps to improve the quality of our air.”


Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club have criticized the new rules, and Paul
Billings of the American Lung Association also says the new soot standards do not go far
enough:


“They quite simply fail to protect public health.”


Huge areas of the country already failed to meet the previous standards on soot. Now,
another 32 counties are out of compliance. It’s up to the states to force smokestack
industries to reduce soot pollution within the next 10 years.


For the Environment Report, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

E.U. To Bolster Emission Regs?

The European Union is threatening to impose new emissions rules on auto companies. They want the automakers to work harder to reduce green house gas emissions. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has the story:

Transcript

The European Union is threatening to impose new emissions rules on auto companies.
They want the automakers to work harder to reduce green house gas emissions. The
GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has the story:


The EU says automakers in Europe already cut carbon dioxide emissions about 12
percent between 1995 and 2004, but the union’s Commissioner for Enterprise and
Industry, Gunter Verheugen, says 12 percent is not enough.


The goal is to reach 25 percent reduction no later than 2009. That’s part of the European
Union’s obligations under the Kyoto Protocol.


So far, emissions reductions have been voluntary, but Verheugen says the cuts could
become mandatory if progress doesn’t speed up. That means carmakers will have to make
3 percent cut in CO2 emissions each year between now and 2009. In recent years, the
reductions were only about 1 percent per year.


If the increased reductions become mandatory, it would also have an impact on vehicles
that are built in the U.S., but sold in Europe.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Green Auto Plants Going Main-Stream?

  • GM will build three new crossover SUVs at the Lansing plant. Production will start this fall. (Photo by Dustin Dwyer)

A new assembly plant from one of Detroit’s Big Three car companies is getting attention for its “green” qualities. Big Three automakers may not rank at the top of most environmentalists’ list for companies of the year. But some say the new auto plant is a sign that environmentally-sensitive manufacturing has finally gone main-stream. It’s not just because building green plants is the right thing to do. Really, it comes down to a different kind of green. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has the story:

Transcript

A new assembly plant from one of Detroit’s Big Three car companies is getting attention
for its “green” qualities. Big Three automakers may not rank at the top of most
environmentalists’ list for companies of the year. But some say the new auto plant is a
sign that environmentally-sensitive manufacturing has finally gone main-stream. It’s not
just because building green plants is the right thing to do. Really, it comes down to a
different kind of green. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has the story:


The first thing you notice about the smell of General Motors’ newest plant is how much
you don’t notice it. The plant smells like nothing at all. Not paint, grease or even that
new car smell. GM says it specifically selected materials for its new Lansing Delta Township
Plant in Michigan to limit indoor air pollution. And there’s a lot more to not notice about the plant.
Like how much space it doesn’t use.


On a tour with reporters, GM Environmental Engineer Bridget Bernal points out that less
than half of the plant’s 1,100-acre lot has been developed. The rest is left green, including
75 acres for habitat preservation:


“And basically in that 75 acres, we have a couple of pretty large wetlands, along with
some smaller wetlands. We have a rather large wood lot. And we’ve got a significant area
that’s being developed as native prairie.”


GM says it only planted native species on the site. And it planned ditches and culverts to
help filter water as it drains into other areas. A quarter of the materials used to build the
facility was recycled. The plant uses 45 percent less total energy than a traditional plant.
And, on the day GM gave reporter tours, it rained. Even that gets used. The water is
collected in cisterns, and used for flushing. GM says the plant saves a total of more than 4
million gallons of water per year.


Put together, all these elements were enough to win GM a LEED Gold Certification from
the U.S. Green Building Council.


Kimberly Hoskin is director of the council’s new construction program. She says she’d
been traveling a lot for work when one of her colleagues asked if she’d be willing to take
a trip to an event Lansing, Michigan.


“And I said, ‘Well, who’s it for? And she said, well, General Motors.’ General Motors, a
factory, is getting a LEED Gold Certification? Yes, I’ll go. Of course I’ll go. This is really
exciting.”


GM is not the first auto company to use green elements in an auto plant design. Ford’s
Rouge Plant in Dearborn, Michigan was built earlier this decade with a 10-acre “living”
roof that helped manage storm water runoff.


But Hoskin says, out of about 560 buildings in the nation that have been certified by the
Green Building Council, only five are manufacturing facilities, and GM says the Lansing
facility is the first auto assembly plant to get Gold, the agency’s top rating.


But for GM, the green elements of the Lansing Delta Assembly Plant aren’t just about the
environment. They’re about cold, hard cash. The lower energy use alone will save GM a
million dollars a year. That gives people like Hoskin comfort that the plant isn’t just a
public relations move by GM and it increases the chances that we’ll see more green plants
in the future.


Sean McAlinden is Chief Economist with the Center for Automotive Research:


“As we slowly replace our old big 3 plants, many of which are very elderly, they’re all
going to look like this. They’re all going to be green plants. In fact, some of them will
keep getting greener.”


That’s good news for places where there’s a lot of auto manufacturing, but many people
are not ready to absolve GM of all of its environmental sins.


David Friedman is with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He says a green plant is nice,
but the real problem is still the product:


“Over eight times the impact on the environment when it comes to global warming is
once that vehicle leaves that plant. That’s the biggest step that we need automakers to
take and to improve the fuel economy of all of their cars and trucks.”


GM, and other automakers, say they are working to make cars cleaner. High gas prices
may force even more changes as sales of big pickups and SUVs drop off. Ultimately, car
makers’ profits could depend on building cleaner cars, just as keeping manufacturing
costs down will depend on having cleaner plants.


That could change the way auto companies think about environmental improvements
because going green will be about more than just doing the right thing, or protecting the
brand image. It will be about protecting the bottom line. What’s sustainable for the
environment will also be sustainable for the business, and both will show a lot more
green.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Cutting the Hybrid Tax Credit

When you buy a hybrid car or truck you’re eligible for a credit on your taxes, but starting in October, the tax credit for all vehicles made by Toyota and Lexus will be phased out. The GLRC’s
Dustin Dwyer explains:

Transcript

When you buy a hybrid car or truck you’re eligible for a credit on your taxes, but starting
in October, the tax credit for all vehicles made by Toyota and Lexus will be phased out.
The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer explains:


If you buy a Toyota Prius in the next two months, you can get the highest hybrid tax
credit on the market, but if you buy after October 1st, you’ll only get half the current
credit, and the credit for all hybrids made by Toyota and Lexus will be phased out
completely within a year.


That’s because Toyota reached a total hybrid sales mark of 60 thousand vehicles in June,
and, according to rules that took effect in January, carmakers that have sold more than 60
thousand hybrids can no longer offer tax credits to their customers.


Bradley Berman is editor of hybridcars.com:


“This cap creates confusion in the marketplace. And that undermines the intent to send a
clear message that consumers should try out hybrids.”


Berman says Detroit carmakers pushed for the cap in an effort to catch up with Japanese
carmakers on hybrid sales.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Epa Report: Fuel Economy Remains Stalled

Today’s cars and trucks are the heaviest, fastest and most powerful vehicles on the road in a generation, but according to a new report from the Environmental Protection Agency, these vehicles have stalled when it comes to fuel economy. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has the story:

Transcript

Today’s cars and trucks are the heaviest, fastest and most powerful vehicles on the road in
a generation, but according to a new report from the Environmental Protection Agency,
these vehicles have stalled when it comes to fuel economy. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer
has the story:


The EPA report says carmakers made big progress on fuel economy from the mid-70s to
mid-80s. But since then, average fuel economy numbers have actually gotten worse.
That’s mostly because cars and trucks are getting bigger. By 2005, the EPA says SUVs
alone made up a quarter of all vehicle sales in the U.S.


Daniel Becker of the Sierra Club says auto companies are to blame:


“Americans are being fed this diet of these vehicles with TV ads, but then they end up
paying at the gas pump, and they end up paying with more global warming, pollution and
more oil addiction.”


Auto companies say they’ve only made bigger cars because that’s what consumers
wanted to buy, but for now, high gas prices seem to have put a halt on demand.


Truck sales for the entire auto industry were down nearly 20 percent this June compared
to a year ago.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Wind Energy Sweeping Away Wildlife?

  • A single wind turbine can change air currents, creating dangerous winds for birds and other airborne wildlife. (Photo by Michael Tyas)

Wind energy is one of the fastest growing sources of new electricity in the United States. For some environmentalists, that’s
good news. Wind turbines don’t spew smoke into the air. There’s no nuclear by-product. But there is an environmental risk. To see it, you have to view the wind turbines through the eyes of a bird.
The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has more:

Transcript

Wind energy is one of the fastest growing sources of new electricity in the United States.
For some environmentalists, that’s good news. Wind turbines don’t spew smoke into the
air. There’s no nuclear byproduct. But there is an environmental risk. To see it, you
have to view the wind turbines through the eyes of a bird. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer
has more:


Chandler Robbins has spent a lot of time studying how birds kill themselves. He says he
would go out on windy nights to the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C. He’d
stand at the bottom of the 555 foot tall obelisk and watch the birds at the top:


“Just as they get to the tower, they just go around the edge of it and bang, the turbulence
from the winds going around the tower, sweeps those birds against the tower, and they’re
killed.”


Speaking at a conference, Robbins tells the crowd he once watched more than 500 birds
slam into the monument in one night, and that monument is standing still. Now imagine
wind turbines, some of them about as tall as the Washington Monument, with spinning
blades that reach nearly a football field in diameter.


Alex Hoar is with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He says a single turbine can now
change air currents for three acres around the turbine itself:


“So, if you put up a hundred turbines, the blades are sweeping 300 acres. So, that’s a large
space. And what we don’t know is when are birds and bats at risk.”


We don’t know because no one has really studied it. Both Alex Hoar and Chandler
Robbins say scientists know a lot about where birds take off and where they land. They
know about migration patterns, but they don’t know about what birds do, or where they
go while they’re in the air.


So, with more wind farms being built across the country, it’s not clear what affect they
might have on bird populations, but some suspect it won’t be good. Peter Kailing works
with an environmental consulting company. He recently did an environmental impact
study for a new 47 hundred acre commercial wind farm in Michigan. He says scientists
can learn a lot from the wind farms that have already been built. He says the ones that
have done the most damage to wildlife have a few things in common:


“The turbine was in a narrow valley, or a mountain-pass, or on the edge of a large
water body with steep wooded cover that was used by migrating songbirds, there’s almost
always a topographical association.”


Weather also plays a role. Peter Kailing and others say that birds tend to avoid cloud
banks by flying under them. That could put them in the path of turbine blades. So, one
way to limit damage would be to shut the turbines down on cloudy days.


Chandler Robbins says better technology could also limit damage. He says turbine blades
could be equipped with sensors:


“If a bird or a bat collided with that blade, it would set up enough vibration so that the
blade could be feathered temporarily to avoid other birds striking until the immediate
problem is over.”


Feathering essentially means that you twist the angle of the blade so that wind passes
over it, rather than pushing the blade into a spin. That way, birds aren’t sucked into it.
It’s basically the turbine’s braking system. Some say you don’t even need a sensor on the
turbine. They say engineers could monitor radar and thermal imaging. That would tell
them if any migrating birds are in the area, and if they are, feather the blades.


Of course, the absolute safest solution in the short term might be just to stop building
wind farms, but you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who thinks that’s a good idea.
Most seem to realize that any way of making electricity will have some impact on the
environment. The question is what can be done with each of them to minimize the risk.
With wind energy, that work is just getting started.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

WIND ENERGY SWEEPING AWAY WILDLIFE? (Short Version)

Wind energy is among the fastest growing sources of new electricity generation. Now, scientists are looking at ways to make
wind turbines safer for birds and bats. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has more:

Transcript

Wind energy is among the fastest growing sources of new electricity generation. Now,
scientists are looking at ways to make wind turbines safer for birds and bats. The
GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has more:


A study published last year by the Government Accountability Office says wind farms
have had little impact so far on birds and bats, but the study says that could change as
more wind farms go up. The question is how to minimize the risk.


Alex Hoar is with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service:


“Not all turbines cause a problem. There are turbines around that had bird
problems. There are lots of turbines that don’t. And we’re trying to learn why.”


Hoar says scientists know a lot about migration patterns for both birds and bats. But they
haven’t tracked the animals’ behavior while they’re in the air. Scientists are now using
thermal imaging and radar to study flight patterns in detail, and Bowling Green State
University in Ohio recently won a one million dollar grant to study the impact of smaller
turbines on wildlife.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Big Three Pump Up Ethanol

Leaders from Detroit’s Big Three automakers say they’ll
double the number of vehicles that run on renewable fuels by 2010.
The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has more:

Transcript

Leaders from Detroit’s Big Three automakers say they’ll double the number of vehicles
that run on renewable fuels by 2010. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has more:


General Motors, Ford and the Chrysler group have lagged behind their foreign rivals in
producing fuel-saving hybrid technology. But they’ve been out front when it comes to
producing cars and trucks that can run on ethanol-based E85.


Now, the heads of the three companies say they’ll have 10 million E85 capable vehicles
on the road by the end of the decade. And they’re asking Congress to help gas stations
pay for installing more E85 pumps.


Sue Cischke is Ford’s Vice President of Environmental and Safety Engineering. She says
E85 cuts down on the use of fossil fuels:


“And there really is a net benefit from a CO2 standpoint from ethanol produced by corn.”


Some critics argue that if you include the energy needed to grow and refine the corn,
ethanol doesn’t provide much of an environmental benefit.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links

Musicians Tap Region’s Treasures

  • The Great Lakes Myth Society's songs cover all aspects of living in the Great Lakes region. (Photo courtesy of the Great Lakes Myth Society)

The Great Lakes Myth Society is a rock band with a clear sense of place. As
you might expect from their name, the band’s debut album is full of songs
about Great Lakes folklore. But their music is also infused with a subtle
appreciation for Great Lakes nature as well. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Dustin Dwyer has more:

Transcript

The Great Lakes Myth Society is a rock band with a clear sense of place. As you might expect from their name, the band’s debut album is full of songs about Great Lakes folklore. But their music is also infused with a subtle appreciation for Great Lakes nature as well. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dustin Dwyer has more:


James and Timothy Monger grew up in what they call the “former small town of Brighton, Michigan.” While strip malls and fast-food joints sprung up around them, the brothers held on to a sense of respect for the natural world.


“We were taught when you drive down the road with your parents, and you see a bunch of cranes, you stop, and you look at them until they leave.”


“…And when you see a lilac bush in someone’s yard, you stop and cut off several and you drive away quickly.”


On their debut album with the five-man group, The Great Lakes Myth Society, James and Timothy turn their stolen moments of Great Lakes beauty into songs about the region’s culture, history and nature.


(Sound of song)


“When the cold stars work overtime to impress you, and the Northern Lights rise up from the coral, And your bed is on your back…”


But while many of James and Timothy’s songs for the Great Lakes Myth Society are full of awe for Great Lakes nature, the songs don’t include any overt environmental messages. James says that’s intentional.


“I’m not a big fan of musical political statements. I think it’s extremely narcissistic to me to use your music as a platform unless you’re out there doing something behind it.”


James and Timothy say they prefer a more subtle approach.


“It’s always good to come up from behind people and imply.”


“We whisper in their ears.”


“Yes we do.”


So he and his brother often use personal experiences to draw the environmental connections. Like this song James wrote about his college days at Central Michigan University. It’s called “Isabella County, 1992” On the surface, the song has nothing to do with the environment.


“And it’s an Indian summer, and the tap water’s brown sand ‘cause the lamprey are crammed ‘neath the Chippewa dam.”


But in a song that’s essentially about the drinking scene at a state university, James includes a line about how sea lamprey affect the tributaries that drain into the Great Lakes.


“I think I may be the only person who ever used a sea lamprey dramatically in a piece.”


“I think you’re right.”


James says he worked for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for a summer cleaning fish traps at the Chippewa dam in central Michigan.


“We would just get up early, get some donuts, pull up the traps, pull out three hundred crawdads, count weird riverfish like chubs. I liked the horny head chub a lot. That was my – and the Texas hogsucker. You learn a lot about your state when you know all the names of the fish that come through.”


And if James is about the gritty, sometimes overlooked details of Great Lakes nature, Timothy is more about the beauty of the area. He’s more likely to write songs about the northern night sky.


“‘Neath a radio of stars, on every band unravel cars. In the distance, Old St. Ignace, beneath a radio of stars.”


“Across the Bridge” is Timothy’s love song to Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.


“We played a Chicago show directly after 9/11, like a couple days after. Like so many people, we were almost frightened going into a large city. I’d been writing about the U.P. and it kind of occurred to me that that was about the safest place, you know. Sort of in the event of a hurricane, you’d go to your cellar, I’d go to the U.P. in case anything bad was going down.”


Timothy says he just felt safer up north, where society and sprawl have yet to take over. He says it’s one of the few places he and his brother can still go to simply appreciate the Great Lakes – not to be advocates or fight for a cause, but to recognize and appreciate the nature that surrounds them. A place where the only intrusion from the civilized world is the music playing in their headphones.


For the GLRC, I’m Dustin Dwyer.

Related Links