Amazing. Simply awesome. I can only hope that the hydrogen infra-structure keeps growing in the US. I'd buy one of these tomorrow if I could...

It remains to be seen if hydrogen fuel cells are a good idea or not. If hydrogen is produced by renewable means then it may be the earth saving idea it's proponents claim it to be. On the other hand if it is manufactured the way George Bush has suggested, using natural gas or coal, then it makes about as much sense as producing bio-fuel from corn that uses more energy to produce then it delivers.

Few understand the R&D effort that GM has put into this. They are the only one I know of that have made it to work well when it is below zero.

Cars are a joke.

It's hilarious that people, esp. some Americans, actually think building more effecient cars is a environmental solution. Cars still need roads, still need high ways, still enable sprawl.

Sure, the lesser of the 2 evils (hydrogen vs EV) is definitely EV. This hydrogen shitte is just a pipe dream. However, EVs are not the long term solution, they are short term goals to the long term goal of phasing out cars completely from the dense mixed use urban centers where humanity will find it's last refuge of sustainability.

I'm glad I don't live in the US any more. It's time you people look to Asia and the E.U., or even Cuba, for inspiration on how to clean up the mess that is suburbia.

My issue with all hydrogen suggestions revolves around the issue of a hydrogen gas leak. The result of which is water lost from the Earth's atmosphere.

Water is the last thing I would sacrifice. I consider it the most important resource by leaps and bounds. The fresh water supply already is a critical issue. The last thing the world needs is water permanently being lost from the Earth's atmosphere.

GM has a history of buying up promising technology then sitting on it so oil profits will be top. The Volt, and Hydrogen cars look to be in the same plan, and I expect that GM will make only a few for special customers so long as they don't interfere with oil demand.

I would love to think that GM has changed, but 100 fuel cells isn't an ongoing production model, it's a test run.

What GM has failed to even consider putting into it's line up is a BEV. The future is Battery Electric Vehicles. We see zero effort from GM to even consider this, or to make any sort of public recharge facilities available.

GM has a history of buying up promising technology then sitting on it so oil profits will be top. The Volt, and Hydrogen cars look to be in the same plan, and I expect that GM will make only a few for special customers so long as they don't interfere with oil demand.

I would love to think that GM has changed, but 100 fuel cells isn't an ongoing production model, it's a test run.

What GM has failed to even consider putting into it's line up is a BEV. The future is Battery Electric Vehicles. We see zero effort from GM to even consider this, or to make any sort of public recharge facilities available.

@Hann: "Cars are a joke."
That's a pretty foolish statement. Cars have enabled humanity to do many of the great things we do. After someone rushes their loved-one to the hospital in a car, then tell me cars are a joke.

And as far as your other ridiculous comment about roads. The roads are already built.

Asia? The EU? They have ridiculous pollution problems. It would seem that electric cars would solve those problems and you would be supporting this...

@tapsevarg:
Um, what? If we gather hydrogen from industry then we are actually creating more fresh water. Hydrogen fuel cells output water vapor.

GM can't find their ass with both hands. One engineer's genuine enthusiasm doesn't change the fact that for hydrogen to work in cars in a sustainable way there has to be a non-polluting source of electricity. We already DON"T have surplus electricity, depending on how it's figured, the efficiency of electrolysing hydrogen from water is as low as 24% and the supporting infrastructure would have to go from virtually 0 to virtually ubiquitous in, what, 10 years? 50? What GM is really saying is: Don't buy far more efficient Foreign cars, don't invest in mass transit infrastructure, don't drive less because if we just keep doing the self-destructive stuff that got us into this mess, GM will pull a magical new technology out of their hat. GM won't even be solvent long enough to see hydrogen become minimally practical and their protectors in the US government will be shown the door for their selfish inaction. While GM is putting on a meaningless show with hydrogen, the world is changing around them and they won't even be a bit player.

They are using water and through electrolysis converting it to create hydrogen. Then using the hydrogen in the tank and gathering air (oxygen) into the fuel cell that is creating energy and expelling water vapor. That sounds like a recyclable method to me.

Improvement in battery technology will help this solution by providing storage for power from braking and excess power production from the fuel cell. Perhaps one day the battery could assist in the hydrogen collection. GM maybe onto something here...

Actually, most of the hydrogen that is used in these cars is produced by steam methane reformation (SMR).

Natural gas and water are reacted to produce hydrogen gas and CO2...

For everyone that says "but what if we used carbon-free energy from the sun or hydro or whatever and made electricity, then used that electricity to crack water and make hydrogen"; yes, that is possible, but does it make sense? Right now our energy grid (national average) is only 25% carbon-free and is almost 50% coal, the most carbon intense fuel there is.

It has been shown time and time again that if you want to reduce carbon emissions from this country, you need to turn off coal plants.

Drawing a funny boundary around just automobiles and saying "but the CAR doesn't make CO2" is a silly way of thinking about things. Yes, based on our present and forseeable infrastructure this car still contributes to CO2 production. Depending on who you ask, it might even make more (per mile). Regardless, there are better, more important ways to reduce aggregate carbon emissions than mobile fuel cells.

To John Taylor: "What GM has failed to even consider putting into it's line up is a BEV. The future is Battery Electric Vehicles. We see zero effort from GM to even consider this, or to make any sort of public recharge facilities available."

GM is devoting billions to next gen personal transportation alternatives--the Volt being on the front lines, capable of getting 40 miles all electric and an extended range of 400 miles. They have even discussed an-all battery version of the car for urban commuters. As to your claim about making any public recharging facilities available--is that GM's responsibility??????? So they have to make the car, develop the battery technology AND build the nationwide infrastructure of recharging facilities? Should they make the tires the cars run on too? And build the highways they drive on? And build garages for people to house the car in? Let's get real here. No automaker can go it alone when it comes to buliding an infrastructure for this new emissions-free transportation system we all seek. There has to be a partnership with government as well. Here in the US-the Fed gives massive subsidies to Big Oil with no caveat to produce alt fuels (as I understand it) and spent trillions building our Interstate Highway system to speed the growth of the nation's economy and for national security. So whether it be a mandate of alt fuel pumps at filling stations-ethanol, bio-diesel, hydrogen, or a charging infrastructure--Gov't needs to step up to the plate here with assistance and help insure it arrives sooner rather than later. Automakers can't do it alone, especially not in today's economy.

One company can not do it all. GM has shown that there are alternatives.
How we produce the hydrogen is very important. There are green ways to produce the hydorgen. Electrolysis. Someone said "we already don't have a surplus of electricity" But we do, the electric company produces eccess electricity, every day, every hour, so that when you flip the switch there's light. Electrolysis would be a way to use this eccess, other wise wasted, while waiting for your demand.
As far as the infrastructure, it will develope, when the american people demands it. Companys won't develope what it cant' sell.
This is almost the chicken or the egg situation which will step out first the car company or the hydrogen industry. Both are poised waiting and ready. The american people have to show that they are ready for it to happen.