Interesting development, Chuck. Any insights on whether this is unusual or if there are synergies here that make sense? I would think there would be a fundamental conflict in working together or at least a worry that you might be helping a main competitor.
Although we're going to see a few a few production vehicles by 2015, we're a long way from big volumes, Rob. By 2020, we're expecteing 3,700 fuel cell vehicles in the U.S., which is about two-hundredths of one percent.
I don't think we need to worry about anti-trust violations, Al. At least not yet. This reminds me of the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium, which was formed by GM, Ford and Chrysler in about 1990. It was never a problem, as far as I know.
I love the idea of the fuel cell concept as far superior to the battery swap discussed in this forum a couple weeks ago. However, is this not again a situation where millions of dollars will be thrown at a problem with a inheriant confound at the git-go. Why proceed with developement without solving the issue about platnum requirements?
I expect the majority of posters know more about the concepts involved than I do, but this reminds me of changing the tires and refueling a vehicle that has just pulled into the pit with a blown transmission. Solve the major road block first and then go into further developement.
Again I am reminded of the turbine car that won the Indy 500, yet since engineers could never solve the issue of exhaust heats so great they destroyed roadways, the concept was abandoned. Solve the big problems first, then start tackling the little ones.
This the second similar artile I have seen this week. I have been a fuel cell believer since the '60's, when I saw a demo of one at the New York World's Fair. My company makes machines which produce ultra pure water. When I see an article like this, I want to be able to contact the people who made the announcement so we can do business together. HELP!!! Articles without names or links are not useful.
EBarnacle -- if you want to talk to someone from GM or Honda about fuel cells, that's going to be a challenge. We normally work through their PR department, which hooks us up with the engineers. They don't ever give the engineers' contact info directly to us. Nor do they ever allow us to give out contact information for the PR department. Smaller companies work differently than automakers. Lastly, they don't always tell us who their suppliers are. If they do, we provide links to the suppliers. So I can only leave you with the obvious URLs, which appear below. Sorry.
Some cars are more reliable than others, but even the vehicles at the bottom of this year’s Consumer Reports reliability survey are vastly better than those of 20 years ago in the key areas of powertrain and hardware, experts said this week.
As it does every year, Consumers Union recently surveyed its members on the reliability of their vehicles. This year, it collected data on approximately 1.1 million cars and trucks, categorizing the members’ likes and dislikes, not only of their vehicles, but of the vehicle sub-systems, as well.
A few weeks ago, Ford Motor Co. quietly announced that it was rolling out a new wrinkle to the powerful safety feature called stability control, adding even more lifesaving potential to a technology that has already been very successful.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.