Take the Brakes off Hydrogen

Recs

1

Disney Buys Marvel!

...And David Gardner called it. He's up 1,334%! See what David's recommending that you buy NEXT!

Click here now to find out!

Will car companies' sales slide completely off the road before promising new technology ever gets into the showroom? Whether fuel-efficient cars can save the automakers is quickly becoming a key question for their survival.

While August isn't yet into the history books, J.D. Power recently released a preliminary sales report for the automakers based on the first 17 days of the month. The report indicates that vehicle sales for that period were about 1.21 million units, or some 13.4 million units on an annually adjusted basis. While those figures would be up about 6% from July, they're nevertheless 17% below the same period for 2007.

But all might not be lost for the group. Nine of the world's car companies have just completed a 13-day coast-to-coast trek in hydrogen fuel-cell cars. Participants in the journey, which spanned the nation from Portland, Maine, to the Los Angeles Coliseum, included General Motors (NYSE: GM), Toyota (NYSE: TM), Ford (NYSE: F), and Daimler (NYSE: DAI), and Honda (NYSE: HMC). While the companies' vehicles made it most of the way on their own power, there were long stretches where, due to a lack of hydrogen fueling stations, they had to be transported on flatbed trucks.

What we have, then, is a pair of contradictory lessons. On the one hand, while automobile sales are clearly going downhill fast, the technology is almost there for a repair. Yet I've heard only minimal talk about the institution of tax or other incentives to push the likes of hydrogen and plug-in vehicles toward becoming the order of the day sooner rather than later. And neither we nor the automakers can afford to wait 15 or 20 more years while fuel-efficient power plants remain merely pie-in-the-sky experimental concepts.

It seems to me that both the car companies and the citizenry would be well-served by having more incentives to develop and use new automobile technology. That would be far better than the current approach of unleashing a steady stream of useless invective against ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM) or Chevron (NYSE: CVX) because of higher gasoline prices.

In the meantime, however, and until new technology gets further down the road, the car companies will remain unsafe places to park your investment dollars.

Ford, GM, and Daimler are all rated one-star stocks by Motley Fool CAPS players, while Toyota and Honda have garnered four stars. Why not drive home your opinion?

For related Foolishness:

Closed for 15 months – opening 10 days only! Get notified ahead of time as our expert portfolio manager invests $1 MILLION in the best opportunities from across The Motley Fool’s premium investment services. This is the first open since August 2008, by invitation only. Enter email below.

Fool contributor David Lee Smith, like most of us, unfortunately, drives a car saddled with a conventional engine. He welcomes your comments. The Fool has a disclosure policy.

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On August 25, 2008, at 6:33 PM, SnapDave wrote:

    I fail to see how the lack of alt fuel vehicles has anything to do with the sad state of the domestics. It has more to do with an inability to produce good vehicles with less than eight cylinders.

    I also don’t think the author, or most people, grasp the enormous problems with building a hydrogen fueling infrastructure or the electricity generation needed for replacing most vehicles with hydrogen, electric or plug-in hybrids. The cost of hydrogen fueling stations alone would necessitate a fuel cost per mile that would make $4/gallon gas look cheap by comparison.

    Whichever way we go will likely require a massive investment in electricity generation.

  • Report this Comment On August 25, 2008, at 6:52 PM, BobMichigan wrote:

    You do understand that Hydrogen is like a battery. It is not an energy source, it is an energy storage device.

    Since there is no free hydrogen on earth, you have to seperate it from something, usually water using electricity. before you can build all those refueling stations first you need to build the plants to produce the hydrogen.

    OK, do you power them with the only feasible clean source, nuclear? or do you use coal or oil? maybe cover the state of Nevada completely with solar panels?

    Hydrogen does not solve any energy problems.

  • Report this Comment On August 25, 2008, at 7:12 PM, Gasmanmt wrote:

    I fully agree with SnapDave above. The media and also apparently TMF, as evidenced in this article, have no idea how far in the future hydrogen powered vehicles may be. Hydrogen is not a realistic fuel for automobiles. It is a storer of energy but is not an energy source. The energy necessary to break the molecular bond between hydrogen and oxygen from water or hydrogen from methane or from any other hydrocarbon is greater than the energy available from the free hydrogen. Get it? Hydrogen won't work now and not likely ever. The tremendous infrastructure that would be needed if hydrogen was economically available, which it isn't, creates the additional barrier that will keep it from powering vehicles.

  • Report this Comment On August 25, 2008, at 10:40 PM, rh33 wrote:

    Journalists who assume they know more than they do do a lot of damage. Here, for example, is one who advocates hydrogen as a solution to the energy problem. Hydrogen has so many problems associated with it that it makes an informed person's hair stand on end. The biggest problem, perhaps, is that it takes more energy to produce than burning it yields. Other problems are that it is quite dangerous, it is leak prone, it is a greenhouse gas, and it has a very unfavorable energy to volume ratio. I do not see any way it can help the energy problem, and I never met anybody who could explain how it could.

  • Report this Comment On August 26, 2008, at 9:10 AM, Symms wrote:

    Yes, Hydrogen takes more energy to produce than it yields under current manufacturing processes - no one denies that. BUT, that doesn't change that it is as you said a VERY effective method for storing energy. It's an efficient container, that allows consumers to fill up in a matter of minutes (rather than charging for hours) and continue on their way. There is no magic energy source out there available today to replace petroleum (other than bio fuels that remain petroleum based through fertilizer). Hydrogen is a solution for energy storage here, available now, that meets consumer demands. Lets use it, and be free to produce our domestic energy needs how we chose, rather than be tied to petroleum powered cars.

  • Report this Comment On August 26, 2008, at 9:47 AM, G27 wrote:

    There is a small start-up company called Tesla Motors (teslamotors.com) who have an amazing electric car that gets 220 miles per charge or approximately 225mpg. It beats the pants off the soon to be released Chevy Volt. Oh, did I mention it does 0-60 in 3.9 seconds? The only problem is the $100K price tag, but that can easily be resolved with mass production. As far as electricity, it can be recharged in less then 2 hours. While I'm just an amateur fan of the car and can't speak to it's demands off the national grid, i'm sure the CEO and founder could. He's always open to e-mails.

  • Report this Comment On August 28, 2008, at 1:07 PM, cindylm009 wrote:

    Our company, Limnia, Inc. (http://www.limnia.com) has resolved almost all of the issues associated with hydrogen infrastructure. We store hydrogen in patented, solid-state, non-pressurized canisters that are safe, efficient, better than many battery solutions, use common carriers already built out globally and can recharge a car in seconds via hot-swap. Our many hydrogen generation partners have shown methods, this year, to make hydrogen from water or organic waste for highly efficiency energy ratios.

    Cindy Lewis

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

TD AMERITRADE
more info
ShareBuilder
more info
Power E*Trade

more info
Scottrade
more info
Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 713831, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 11/9/2009 3:12:04 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

The Must-Read Story on Fool.com
Which Companies Can Buy It Like Buffett?

Related Tickers

11/6/2009 4:03 PM
TM $78.16 Down -2.42 -3.00%
Toyota Motor Corp… CAPS Rating: ***
F $7.75 Up +0.30 +4.03%
Ford Motor Company CAPS Rating: **
CVX $77.53 Up +0.29 +0.38%
Chevron Corp CAPS Rating: ****
XOM $72.58 Up +0.08 +0.11%
ExxonMobil Corp CAPS Rating: ****
GM $0.75 Down +0.00 +0.00%
General Motors Cor… CAPS Rating: *
HMC $31.16 Down -0.16 -0.51%
Honda Motor Co., L… CAPS Rating: *****
DAI $49.45 Up +0.90 +1.85%
Daimler AG (USA) CAPS Rating: *

Community: Investing Wiki

Term Of The Hour

Rule of 72: The rule of 72 is a nifty, short-hand way of estimating how many years it will take a given amount of money to double at a specific interest rate. Simply take 72 and divide by the interest rate.

Want to learn more or edit this definition?
Click here to read more!