Nissan's X-Trail highlights hydrogen fuel cell development
by John Neff on Apr 19th 2006 at 5:58PM 
Nissan’s hydrogen fuel cell laboratory-on-wheels is the FCV X-Trail, and the vehicle’s latest iteration highlights the company’s 10-year-long commitment to the hail mary pass of automotive emissions technology. Nissan developed the fuel stack for the newest X-Trail inhouse. It’s smaller, lighter and develops 120 hp, which is a significant 35 hp more than the 2003 FCV X-Trail.
AutoWeek had the opportunity to drive the new X-Trail and notes that it passes itself off as a capable commuter better than ever. The extra oomph allows the 4,100 lb. SUV to merge with adequate authority and a tougher carbon fiber tank that allows an increase in gas pressure bumps the vehicle’s range to 312 miles. Nissan has the Japanese government’s approval to test the FCV X-Trail on public roads and begin leasing it. The automaker’s made no commitment to when hydrogen fuel cell technology might make it into its lineup, but this latest showcase of technology reveals how close we are to the day when tailpipes emit nothing but water vapor. Now if only there were a BP around with a hydrogen pump…
[Source: AutoWeek]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
David 6:37PM (4/19/2006)
120 horsepower, 4100 pounds, 300 miles cruising, mmm...
If Toyota actually can approach 100mpg on the next Prius; if plug-in hybrids are on the way and if diesel and diese/hybrid technology keeps advancing, fuel cells for cars may be much further out than we think. We could end up with fuel cells at our homes, where weight isn't an issue, using wind and solar to make hydrogen, powering the house, selling electricity back into the grid and recharging a mix of electric and hybrid vehicles. I'd love to know what the tech stock people are betting on.
Reply
Leo 6:53PM (4/19/2006)
Somebody actually compared fuel cell technology with hybrid technology and was serious! LOL That's like comparing airplanes with automobiles in 1903.
Dumber yet, hybrids, diesels, all use fossil fuels and the whole long-term goal of fuel cells is to get to a hydrgen supply that gets us independant of oil.
Smell the coffee, man!
Reply
Brian 7:01PM (4/19/2006)
All I can say is, "Go Nissan!"
With the looney tunes, goathearder president of the world's #4 oil producer claiming that $72.40 per barrel of crude is "a good deal," I personally don't want to see where this is going.
We MUST get this monkey off our collective backs or we will continue to give these middle eastern tails enough leverage to wag our dog.
Reply
David 7:08PM (4/19/2006)
#2, since we still have both airplanes and automobiles (I drive to the airport to get on a plane for example), I'm not sure what the point of your 1903 analogy is.
My point is that we are likely to have a mix of hybrids and electrics BEFORE we get to hydrogen. And given the problems of weight and range with fuel cell vehicles, not to mention the infrastructure issues of switching to hydrogen as fuel for cars and trucks, we may actually take a different path; driving rechargable electrics (recharged with fuel cells in case you missed that part of my post) and using hybrids until we get there. Besides, the issue with fossil fuels is sharply reducing their use in absolute terms even as economies continue to develop and grow, not necessarily eliminating them altogether. This is particulalry true given that some of the most common things being considered as sources of hydrogen are what? fossil fuels, exactly.
Reply
Tom Design 7:47PM (4/19/2006)
Saturn is calling and they want the VUE back.
Reply
Bogey 8:01PM (4/19/2006)
One thing that I never see mentioned in any article on fuel cell or hydrogen vehicles is the amount of [fossil fuel generated] engery it takes to produce the hydrogen fuel these vehicles use. Not exactly zero emissions really, is it?
Reply
Leo 8:09PM (4/19/2006)
The spokesperson for the cassette tape manufacturers of America made the same speech in 1983.
Reply
Alistair 8:28PM (4/19/2006)
Hybrid cars don't have to run on fossil fuels, as it would be easy enough to make a biodiesel, ethanol, or hydrogen hybrid. The main issue with fuel cells is that they don't confer any advantage over a pure electric, other than relatively quick fueling. They're expensive, range is generally poor, the infrastructure is nonexistant, and production of hydrogen is an inefficient use of energy. All that, for no improvement in emissions over an electric. Am I missing something important? What is the fuel cell advantage?
Reply
AES 11:00PM (4/19/2006)
#6 - you can use photovoltaic film to produce solar electricity even on a cloudy day. that can drive electrolysis. all of which can be done at one's own home.
it can also be grown from algae
and it can also be extracted from gaseous ammonia. which as i've stated before is essentially fish urine
Reply
Jimbo 11:14PM (4/19/2006)
I understand and agree with the argument that fossil fuels will be needed to produce hydrogen, but there are also other alternatives to limit the pollution such as: Solar, Wind, hydroelectric, wave, and "futuregen". The combination of these hydrogen producing methods and zero emission vehicles will certainly be beneficial to the environment and decrease our dependency on foreign oil. I find it odd that there is no middle ground in the hydrogen fuel cell universe. Either you support them 100%, or you try to find every possibility that will prevent them from becoming a reality. Of course the infrastructure will be a major hurdle, yes the hydrogen cars still need better range and fuel economy, and although it wont happen overnight, its feasible. Why not embrace the incredible engineering that we are privileged to witness and perhaps support them 50% and maybe live to see the day when all the cars on the road get 200mpg with water coming out of the tailpipe. Even if hybrids get 1000mpg, petroleum will still run out eventually, so why not try to find a way to prepare for that as soon as possible? There are working models of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in California (leased to select families), and in Europe (3 buses in 9 cities). Although the technology needs work, its there and its up to consumers to decide whether it will be here in the future.
Reply
PJ 12:53AM (4/20/2006)
Oh, I don't think it's so hard to find a middle ground. Obviously hydrogen fuel-cell engines are the best hope yet for the future of the automobile. But comments like #2, in response to #1, totally take for granted the enormous infastructure that already exists to support diesel hybrids and other stopgap measures. It'll take decades for a similar support network to be build for hydrogen cars. So while hydrogen is probably where the automobile will eventually end up, plug-in and/or diesel hybrids are probably what we'll actually be driving in the near future. Either way, though, I just hope they keep manual transmissions alive. No one seems to be interested in a stick-shift hybrid, sadly (Honda dropped it for the current-gen Civic hybrid)...
Sorry to nitpick, Tom, but what does the X-trail have in common with the VUE, other than the fact that it's a compact SUV? By that reasoning, it's Willys that should be calling to protest a half-century of GP rip-offs.
Reply
Tom Boston 8:06AM (4/20/2006)
PJ => Other than all of its styling cues, and 5 star reliability, you have a point. Sorry, I meant to say 2000-2004 VUE. The entire front nose clip, the slab side and wheel arch accent, and even the wheel rims. The VUE has a nicely swept line along the side, so you're right...the Nissan did something unique by leaving this line off.
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2004&make=Saturn&model=VUE
Reply
Mike 9:49AM (4/20/2006)
I have to say that the engineering that is being displayed in the creation of a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is nothing short of amazing. Look at how form has dictated function. Engineers were able to take the space shuttle (our first hydrogen powered vehicle) and distill it down to a functional CUV.
Even the most ardent gearheads on this site have to admit that this is an outstanding feat.
There is one point that was raised here that I'd like some clarification on: Weight vs Crusing Range (Assume Highway).
As an example, lets take the Toyota Highlander.
Gas: Curb Weight = 3748 lbs Range = 516 mi Ratio = 7.26:1
Hybrid: Curb Weight = 4070 lbs Range = 482 mi Ratio = 8.44:1
Or the Lexus RX350:
Gas: Curb Weight = 3870 lbs Range = 480 mi Ratio = 8.06:1
Hybrid: Curb Weight = 4190 Range = 482 mi Ratio = 8.69:1
Xtrail:
Curb Weight = 4100 lbs Range = 312 mi Ratio = 13.14:1
Yes, the Xtrail gets "worse" gas mileage than some of the current Hybrid vehicles (and I know that City performance is much better than Highway performance) but it certainly is within the realm of cars on the highway today. Traditional SUV's with their HO V-6 and V-8 gas powered engines get much much much worse weight to cruising range figures than this Xtrail.
My point is that this is new technology and already it is *well* within the ballpark of the average vehicle on the road today.
Back in 1903, what was the mileage on that Model A? And how many gas stations, exactly, did you have to chose from? Yet, folks still bought these new fangled horseless carriages as fast as they could! And 40-50 years later, just look at the cars that were on the road (never mind the weight to crusing range of THOSE beasts!)
In as much as I love raw horse power, I for one and pleased that someone is being a responsible manufacturer and attempting to develop tomorrow's techonlogy now rather than when it's too late. And thank goodness there are consumers out there willing to purchase Hybrids, or E85, or whatever new "futuregen" technologies we might invent to encourage further R&D.
Cheers to the engineers!
Reply
m.bowman 3:27PM (4/20/2006)
we had gasohol in the late 1970s and my standard chevrolet vehicles ran wonderful off of it. What happened to the stuff, oil company buy them out and pour it out?
Reply
jimmmy mooehouse 4:26PM (4/20/2006)
worked on alternitive fuel programs at J**/CAL - ****, EPA / dept.of energy(DOE)/DOD AND MOST OTHER U.S.AGENCIES & EVEN THE SOlAR POWER & fuel cell,& battery entities from the GOVT.> said get rid of them they will never amount to a need for the good ole U.S.A.So we we closed everthing down and went on to other programs,mainly having to do with space probes A good 20 yr., effort went right out the door,what a wasted effort,worked hard and long on some of these things so I know first hand what happened, GOVT. SAID SHUT EM DOWN AND WE DID,MILLION OF $$$$ ++++ WENT FOR NAUGHT. NOW SOME COMPANIES HAVE SAME IDEAS AND BASICALLY USING PRETTY MUCH THE SAME PROCESSES & CONCEPTS THAT WERE EXPLORED WHERE I WORKED THEY WERE TESTED FROM THE EARLY '70'S TO THE MID '80'S THEN ALL, WENT BYE-BYE.Also in the 60's and up until the early '80's,people worked on space shuttle, APOLLO AND MOON LANDING programs they spent money like pouring PI** out of a boot,they worked but the cost was huge,then some of the programs probably got so expensive NASA said they gotta go,We need the money for KENNEDY SPACE CENTER(space shuttle).fOR EVERY WORKING TECH. THERE WAS ABOUT 5 LEVELS OF BOSSES WHO DIDN'T KNOW S*** some times I spent 20 hours on the clock and never lifted a finger let alone a wrench. one guy at Mississippi test facility spent an average of 80 + hours a week on the clock and all I ever seen him do is sit at his desk with feet up and eyes glued to a play boy magazine that's our tax money used to it's finest...that was 40 hrs. straight time & 40 hours overtime,they didn't call him JESSE JAMES FOR NOTHING now did they ??? been there seen all & done some of all that,I have all kinds os plaques and kudo letters, and in the 45 years I spent in the aero space enviroment overall I'd say my time was well spent. I cannot say that for everyone elsehowever,most people see all this taking place with the gasoline 3.00$$ a gallon and I say things to reduce oil dependancy could have been solved years ago,GOVT. BIG OIL COMPANIES weren't about to lose the goose that laid the golden egg(black crude) even the tucker aoto in about 1945 era was probably laughed and run out of business by you know who the BIG O** co.s' and all the money grubbing lobbyists,can you imagine a recent CEO getting a 400 million retirement package, while us poor schmucks get an average of 1,000$$$$ or less on social security, go figure that one out.....I know I paid my taxes so about 12 million illegals can free load on our tax money I under stand but cannot say for certain that they can even collect a minimum social security benefit when they reach 65 at least that's what I've heard( might have the wrong facts on that issue )then again I paid into social sec. for 45 years so I do feel some entitlement,but for all the illegals, I say send them packing, business'es wouldn't like that now would they ????but what do Iknow I never even graduated from high school !!
Reply
Joe Castiner 7:41PM (4/20/2006)
Go to Hydro-gen web site for conversion kit for gas & diesel powered vehicles. Hydrogen generator kit improves mileage fro21% to over 50%
Reply
Lou 10:30AM (4/26/2006)
I'd highly recomend hydrogen-boost.com vs the 'other guys'. Been at it longer and better results with more realistic claims than any other I've seen. 100 mpg in a Saturn, confirmed in 2005 Tour De Sol.
Research hydrogen boosting and other mileage improving technologies at mpgresearch.com , and fueleconomytips.com
Reply