General Motors gives progress report on hydrogen fuel technology

[Ming]

Is this another "Engineering by Press Release" bit, well timed in the face of rising oil prices, to soothe the souls of GM buyers wondering where their hybrid passenger car is, and why it will take until 2007, for instance, for a mild-hybrid Malibu? You be the judge.

General Motors gives progress report on hydrogen fuel technology
Detroit Free Press
March 7, 2005, 7:52 PM

LIVERMORE, Calif. (AP) -- General Motors Corp. gave a progress report Monday on the company's efforts to create automobiles of tomorrow by promoting hydrogen fuel cell technology, a goal that continues to be fraught with problems.

The world's largest automaker is working with government scientists at Sandia National Laboratory in Livermore to develop new methods for storing hydrogen fuel -- one of the biggest challenges to bringing hydrogen-powered vehicles to the market.

"We're looking to literally reinvent the automobile," said Larry Burns, GM's vice president for research, development and planning.

Burns spoke with journalists during a tour of Sandia's research facility in Livermore, about 50 miles east of San Francisco. The national lab, which develops nuclear weapons and military technology for the federal government, has several decades of experience working on hydrogen storage.

Widespread use of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles could reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil and cut greenhouse gas emissions, backers say. But the technology faces many challenges, including high costs and the lack of infrastructure such as a network of hydrogen fueling stations.

In recent years, GM has been one of the auto industry's most vocal champions of hydrogen fuel cells, which generate electricity from a chemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen and release only water as waste.

But environmentalists have criticized the automaker for putting so much emphasis on fuel cell vehicles, which are still years away from the marketplace. They say GM should instead focus more on increasing the fuel efficiency of their cars and trucks to cut petroleum consumption and reduce air pollution.

"Hydrogen fuel cells are wonderful technology for the future, but they're not going to do anything in the next 20 to 30 years," said David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmentally oriented group.

By sharing its latest research efforts, GM officials hope to demonstrate that the company is making progress on the key technological challenge of storing hydrogen, a low-density gas that must be converted into a denser form to be stored on-board a vehicle.

"Hydrogen storage is one of the key hurdles in creating a hydrogen-based transportation system," said James Spearot, director of GM's chemical and environmental sciences laboratory.

GM and Sandia scientists are developing a method to store hydrogen in a fuel tank by using compounds known as complex metal hydrides that can absorb and release hydrogen.

"We really think we've made great progress," Burns said. "But there are still a lot of great challenges, technological and engineering wise, ahead of us."

Full Article Here: http://www.freep.com/news/statewire/...0_20050307.htm

[sncrducrx]

Now here's something from Larry Burns that actually seems worthwhile
http://www.hydrogenforecast.com/July...rns071204.html

The next plateau with gasoline engines will be direct injection and what we call direct stop start, where you shut off the engine at idle. And then ultimately what we call variable valve actuation.

“You begin to lay this out and it looks like you can gain something on the order of another 15 to 20 percent improvement in the efficiency of internal combustion engine for relatively low cost.

However this Quote on Diesel is no longer true

“The challenges are particulates and NOx. We don’t know how to meet the US regulations in 2007 without NOx traps and particulate filters, which have estimated costs in excess of $8000. As such we need to find much more cost effective solutions in order to continue to bring those products to market.
Also those emissions systems tend to degrade the inherent efficiency of diesel engine by five to eight percent depending on the after treatment technology.”

The Diesel exhuast problem is 90 percent solved.

EPA's clean diesel combustion
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...uos_clean.html

EPA designed its Clean Diesel Combustion technology (earlier post) to prove the potential for a diesel engine design, using innovative air, fuel, and combustion management and conventional particulate matter aftertreatment, to achieve lower NOx levels without the need for NOx aftertreatment.

I wonder if this

The conceptual basis of EPA’s approach is to prevent NOx formation in the first place. Since NOx is formed at high temperatures as a byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion, EPA sought to keep the local temperature below critical NOx formation threshold—around 2,100°K (1,827°C or 3,320°F—yeah, it gets hot in engines).

Is what Gm calls thermal management in its OHV Direct Injection setup? Managing the Combustion Temp to reduce Nox? (Nox is a problem for gasoline Direct Injection as well as Diesel)

And Ford has jumped on the bandwagon For Clean Diesel Combustion
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...uos_clean.html

[Globalist]

Originally Posted by sncrducrx

]
I wonder if this Is what Gm calls thermal management in its OHV Direct Injection setup? Managing the Combustion Temp to reduce Nox? (Nox is a problem for gasoline Direct Injection as well as Diesel)

No doubt direct injection is the future.

The NOX problem is a lot more complex. When you design an engine, obviously you want to maximize power, torque, and minimize fuel consumption and emissions (Hydrocarbons, NOX and CO) without any compromise on engine stability, durability etc.

To maximize power you need higher pressures (high compression ratio) which also means high temperatures. But the problem with high temperature is that you start forming NOX. One solution is EGR (dilution by recirculating exhaust gases) which will lowers temperature and NOX formation, but very low temperature are not good for CO and combustion stability.

So you need a tradeoff between performance, emissions, good engine stability (at any load) and cost.

[GM_Guy81]

/me faints

[pupp1]

I hope this task is done very soon

[DmitryKo]

Originally Posted by Globalist

No doubt direct injection is the future.

The NOX problem is a lot more complex. When you design an engine, obviously you want to maximize power, torque, and minimize fuel consumption and emissions (Hydrocarbons, NOX and CO) without any compromise on engine stability, durability etc.

To maximize power you need higher pressures (high compression ratio) which also means high temperatures. But the problem with high temperature is that you start forming NOX. One solution is EGR (dilution by recirculating exhaust gases) which will lowers temperature and NOX formation, but very low temperature are not good for CO and combustion stability.

BTW, there's a presentation video on Honda i-VTEC I DOHC 2.0L direct injection engine (transcript), it also talks about dealing with nitrogen oxide in lean burn mixtures...

[Globalist]

Honda combines lean burn, direct injection and strong swirl at low load (by closing one intake valve) with high EGR for NOX control.

[gmsickofan]

GM, stop talking about the future and produce results. Honda is what percent of the size of GM? And it is no doubt also pursuing Hydrongen *while it makes hybrids*.

But environmentalists have criticized the automaker for putting so much emphasis on fuel cell vehicles, which are still years away from the marketplace. They say GM should instead focus more on increasing the fuel efficiency of their cars and trucks to cut petroleum consumption and reduce air pollution.

"Hydrogen fuel cells are wonderful technology for the future, but they're not going to do anything in the next 20 to 30 years," said David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmentally oriented group.

[Driveshaft]

"We're looking to literally reinvent the automobile," said Larry Burns, GM's vice president for research, development and planning.

While I applaud GM's efforts to change the infrastructure of the automobile, I'm getting sick of hearing that same quote. I've heard it for years now, and honestly it was effective probably the first 50 times.

I won't argue that their idea is unique with the AUTOnomy and Sequel, and their whole philosophy of reinventing the automobile, but honestly, just SAYING they're going to do it doesn't say anything.

[Globalist]

Originally Posted by DmitryKo

BTW, there's a presentation video on Honda i-VTEC I DOHC 2.0L direct injection engine (transcript), it also talks about dealing with nitrogen oxide in lean burn mixtures...

According to the article, looks like Honda can achieve air/fuel ratio of 65:1 which is roughly an equivalence ratio of about 0.3 assuming that 15:1 is the stoic ratio for gasoline. That's nearly at the lean flammability limit. But this is the overall air/fuel ratio.

Closing only one intake valve at low load is very clever, it allows the engine to keep the velocities needed for good air/fuel mixing (swirl). Add to that variable valve actuation, and EGR and you get a great engine.

These are not huge technological improvements, like they seem to be, but just common sense and a deep understanding of combustion processes and control. And GM should and could lead in engine technology and not let others show the path.

Anyone in GM Powertrain listening?

[vdoh182]

is nox really a problem for gas engines, i got emissioned the other day and my 93 civic was 1/10tht the limit, as was my friends 95 C280, isnt it only a real problme for diesel, os iguess the honda 2.0 is kinda irrelevant.

[DmitryKo]

Originally Posted by Globalist

Closing only one intake valve at low load is very clever, it allows the engine to keep the velocities needed for good air/fuel mixing (swirl).

The same trick is employed by Opel's Ecotec TwinPort - it has a choke in the valve port. No VVT or EGR though.

BTW, GM was to introduce a range of 1.6L to 2.2L direct injection engines by 2003, but only 2.2L was released...

[sncrducrx]

Originally Posted by vdoh182

is nox really a problem for gas engines, i got emissioned the other day and my 93 civic was 1/10tht the limit, as was my friends 95 C280, isnt it only a real problme for diesel, os iguess the honda 2.0 is kinda irrelevant.

For Standard gasoline engines Nox is'nt a problem. But If you want to take the next step to Direct injection then nox becomes a problem. If you go to GM powetrains technology page thier standard excuse for not having Diesel, or Direct injection gasoline engines in North america is exhuast standards.

[free_energy0]

Sell excuses and Pie in the Skie technolgy to distract people from lack of hybrids aand ancient CAFE standards

[AndrewGS]

Originally Posted by free_energy0

Sell excuses and Pie in the Skie technolgy to distract people from lack of hybrids aand ancient CAFE standards

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..... Pie