Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Two Interesting FCV articles

Expand Messages
  • Paul Scott
    2 articles California Rolls out $54M Hydrogen Highway Plan (www.greencarcongress.com) The California Environmental Protection Agency formally released the
    Message 1 of 4 , May 27, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      2 articles

      California Rolls out $54M Hydrogen Highway Plan (www.greencarcongress.com)


      The California Environmental Protection Agency formally released the
      California Hydrogen Highway Network Blueprint Plan (CA H2 Net)-a blueprint
      that calls for the development of a network of hydrogen stations throughout
      California to help accelerate the transition to a sustainable hydrogen
      economy.


      The first phase of the Blueprint Plan calls for development of up to 100
      refueling stations and 2,000 hydrogen vehicles in the state by 2010. There
      are more than 40 current or planned stations throughout the state and a
      small number of vehicles provided by all major auto makers who are
      investing heavily in hydrogen vehicle technology.


      The plan calls for the state to provide $53.4 million in matching funds to
      industry to build the 100 hydrogen fueling stations in the Bay Area,
      Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego. Because 39 already exist or are
      planned soon, 61 new stations, at a cost of about $1 million each, would
      need to be built by 2010. The funding also would provide state grants to
      automakers of $10,000 per vehicle.


      Last year, Governor Schwarzenegger called for up to 200 stations 20 miles
      apart on major freeways. The planners decided that it would be best to
      group stations first where most people live. Accordingly, the blueprint
      sets a goal of 250 stations statewide linking north and south in Phase 2,
      which could occur by 2015.


      The California legislature needs to approve the funding. Should that
      happen, California will take the lead among the different state
      initiatives.


      Resources:
      Volume I: Summary of Findings and Recommendations for the CA H2Net.
      Prepared by CalEPA, this final document summarizes the major findings
      and recommendations regarding implementation of the CA H2 Net, which
      are based upon Volume II.
      Volume II: Consultant Report, Blueprint Plan for the CA H2 Net. This
      document contains the complete and detailed CA H2 Net Blueprint Plan,
      which was prepared by Tiax as the consultant and was based upon
      findings and recommendations from the individual Topic Team reports.




      http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v4/sub/MarketingPage?
      user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2FArticleNews%2FTPStory%
      2FLAC%2F20050527%2FROILYOUNG27%2FTPBusiness%2FColumnists&ord=1117203890102
      &brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true



      Fuel Cell Fatigue Dries Up Investor Funding

      Source: Globe and Mail/Canada
      [May 27, 2005]

      SYNOPSIS: After pumping so much money into the fuel cell sector,
      investors have realized no financial return of late, and determined
      that the area poses too much risk, impacting research funding.

      Fuel cell fatigue causes research funds to dry up
      By MARY LYNN YOUNG
      Friday, May 27, 2005, Page B2


      VANCOUVER -- British Columbia investors have a new disease called FCF,
      or fuel cell fatigue. The mantra that "commercialization is around the
      corner" is now a negative for investors who supported the Canadian
      fuel cell industry based in the province.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • murdoch
      ... Who is going to own and control these stations? If taxpayers are partly or wholly funding these stations (and these articles do not tend to delve into
      Message 2 of 4 , May 27, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        >The plan calls for the state to provide $53.4 million in matching funds to
        >industry to build the 100 hydrogen fueling stations in the Bay Area,
        >Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego. Because 39 already exist or are
        >planned soon, 61 new stations, at a cost of about $1 million each, would
        >need to be built by 2010. The funding also would provide state grants to
        >automakers of $10,000 per vehicle.
        >

        Who is going to own and control these stations?

        If taxpayers are partly or wholly funding these stations (and these
        articles do not tend to delve into whether taxpayers and their state
        agencies are granting other items, worth substantial sums money, such
        as permitting or zoning allowing for such stations) then will they
        also reap the benefits of ownership, such as rent or monies from the
        sales of fuel?

        Or are they, instead, granting a new form of monopoly to an
        oil-as-fuel production and distribution industry which already has a
        de facto state-protected monopoly, or near-monopoly, over a previous
        generation's fuel choice, and which now may seek to attain a new
        state-funded and state-protected monopoly for the next 100 year or
        more, over the next generation's fuel?

        I don't know, but it's worth nailing down whether taxpayers' interests
        are being protected... and California is not the only State being
        pushed headlong into this sort of thing.








        >Last year, Governor Schwarzenegger called for up to 200 stations 20 miles
        >apart on major freeways. The planners decided that it would be best to
        >group stations first where most people live. Accordingly, the blueprint
        >sets a goal of 250 stations statewide linking north and south in Phase 2,
        >which could occur by 2015.
        >
        >
        >The California legislature needs to approve the funding. Should that
        >happen, California will take the lead among the different state
        >initiatives.
        >
        >
        >Resources:
        > Volume I: Summary of Findings and Recommendations for the CA H2Net.
        > Prepared by CalEPA, this final document summarizes the major findings
        > and recommendations regarding implementation of the CA H2 Net, which
        > are based upon Volume II.
        > Volume II: Consultant Report, Blueprint Plan for the CA H2 Net. This
        > document contains the complete and detailed CA H2 Net Blueprint Plan,
        > which was prepared by Tiax as the consultant and was based upon
        > findings and recommendations from the individual Topic Team reports.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v4/sub/MarketingPage?
        > user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2FArticleNews%2FTPStory%
        > 2FLAC%2F20050527%2FROILYOUNG27%2FTPBusiness%2FColumnists&ord=1117203890102
        > &brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true
        >
        >
        >
        > Fuel Cell Fatigue Dries Up Investor Funding
        >
        > Source: Globe and Mail/Canada
        > [May 27, 2005]
        >
        > SYNOPSIS: After pumping so much money into the fuel cell sector,
        > investors have realized no financial return of late, and determined
        > that the area poses too much risk, impacting research funding.
        >
        > Fuel cell fatigue causes research funds to dry up
        > By MARY LYNN YOUNG
        > Friday, May 27, 2005, Page B2
        >
        >
        > VANCOUVER -- British Columbia investors have a new disease called FCF,
        > or fuel cell fatigue. The mantra that "commercialization is around the
        > corner" is now a negative for investors who supported the Canadian
        > fuel cell industry based in the province.
        >
        >
        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Lee Dekker
        Its more then likely, that all but the smallest fraction of the hydrogen will come from natural gas. It’s also almost a certainty that these stations will be
        Message 3 of 4 , May 27, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Its more then likely, that all but the smallest fraction of the hydrogen will come from
          natural gas. It�s also almost a certainty that these stations will be massive net money
          losers for the foreseeable future. If Gov. does own and operate them, you can bet tax
          money will disappear faster then loose hydrogen into thin air.

          How about 50 million for battery research? Even if nothing came of it, at least it
          wouldn�t continue to drain the coffers after the first 50 was burned. How about the 50+
          million and all the other likely perks, you mention, for battery exchange stations and
          vehicles. Building a battery exchange technology system would be child�s play compared to
          the hydrogen hype way. Battery exchange would simply combine a set of well established,
          existing technologies. It�s vastly cheaper, safer and much more compatible with the
          existing infrastructure. And if, by chance, a totally capable BEV battery were ever
          allowed to see the light of day, the transfer to a fast recharging BEV system would be a
          synch.

          There is the possibility of one very serious downside to the battery swapping or BEV
          ideas though. There is always the chance that some BEVs will be recharged �at home�. Even
          worse, some may use home PV systems and thereby deprive some large consumable fuels
          supplier of what is rightfully theirs.

          ENRON lives on in the hydrogen hypeway. Come to think of it, the same faces that enabled
          ENRON to rape CA are in this deal too. Lets see if we can get Ken and Jeff there to help
          cut the ribbon along with Arnold and W.



          --- murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:

          > >The plan calls for the state to provide $53.4 million in matching funds to
          > >industry to build the 100 hydrogen fueling stations in the Bay Area,
          > >Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego. Because 39 already exist or are
          > >planned soon, 61 new stations, at a cost of about $1 million each, would
          > >need to be built by 2010. The funding also would provide state grants to
          > >automakers of $10,000 per vehicle.
          > >
          >
          > Who is going to own and control these stations?
          >
          > If taxpayers are partly or wholly funding these stations (and these
          > articles do not tend to delve into whether taxpayers and their state
          > agencies are granting other items, worth substantial sums money, such
          > as permitting or zoning allowing for such stations) then will they
          > also reap the benefits of ownership, such as rent or monies from the
          > sales of fuel?
          >
          > Or are they, instead, granting a new form of monopoly to an
          > oil-as-fuel production and distribution industry which already has a
          > de facto state-protected monopoly, or near-monopoly, over a previous
          > generation's fuel choice, and which now may seek to attain a new
          > state-funded and state-protected monopoly for the next 100 year or
          > more, over the next generation's fuel?
          >
          > I don't know, but it's worth nailing down whether taxpayers' interests
          > are being protected... and California is not the only State being
          > pushed headlong into this sort of thing.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > >Last year, Governor Schwarzenegger called for up to 200 stations 20 miles
          > >apart on major freeways. The planners decided that it would be best to
          > >group stations first where most people live. Accordingly, the blueprint
          > >sets a goal of 250 stations statewide linking north and south in Phase 2,
          > >which could occur by 2015.
          > >
          > >
          > >The California legislature needs to approve the funding. Should that
          > >happen, California will take the lead among the different state
          > >initiatives.
          > >
          > >
          > >Resources:
          > > Volume I: Summary of Findings and Recommendations for the CA H2Net.
          > > Prepared by CalEPA, this final document summarizes the major findings
          > > and recommendations regarding implementation of the CA H2 Net, which
          > > are based upon Volume II.
          > > Volume II: Consultant Report, Blueprint Plan for the CA H2 Net. This
          > > document contains the complete and detailed CA H2 Net Blueprint Plan,
          > > which was prepared by Tiax as the consultant and was based upon
          > > findings and recommendations from the individual Topic Team reports.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v4/sub/MarketingPage?
          > > user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2FArticleNews%2FTPStory%
          > > 2FLAC%2F20050527%2FROILYOUNG27%2FTPBusiness%2FColumnists&ord=1117203890102
          > > &brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Fuel Cell Fatigue Dries Up Investor Funding
          > >
          > > Source: Globe and Mail/Canada
          > > [May 27, 2005]
          > >
          > > SYNOPSIS: After pumping so much money into the fuel cell sector,
          > > investors have realized no financial return of late, and determined
          > > that the area poses too much risk, impacting research funding.
          > >
          > > Fuel cell fatigue causes research funds to dry up
          > > By MARY LYNN YOUNG
          > > Friday, May 27, 2005, Page B2
          > >
          > >
          > > VANCOUVER -- British Columbia investors have a new disease called FCF,
          > > or fuel cell fatigue. The mantra that "commercialization is around the
          > > corner" is now a negative for investors who supported the Canadian
          > > fuel cell industry based in the province.
          > >
          > >
          > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >

          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
          http://mail.yahoo.com
        • James Wilson
          I d put my betting money on Business as usual,or Big Oil having the upper hand on controll of the stations. James Wilson ...
          Message 4 of 4 , May 31, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            I'd put my betting money on Business as usual,or Big
            Oil having the upper hand on controll of the stations.
            James Wilson

            --- murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:

            > >The plan calls for the state to provide $53.4
            > million in matching funds to
            > >industry to build the 100 hydrogen fueling stations
            > in the Bay Area,
            > >Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego. Because 39
            > already exist or are
            > >planned soon, 61 new stations, at a cost of about
            > $1 million each, would
            > >need to be built by 2010. The funding also would
            > provide state grants to
            > >automakers of $10,000 per vehicle.
            > >
            >
            > Who is going to own and control these stations?
            >
            > If taxpayers are partly or wholly funding these
            > stations (and these
            > articles do not tend to delve into whether taxpayers
            > and their state
            > agencies are granting other items, worth substantial
            > sums money, such
            > as permitting or zoning allowing for such stations)
            > then will they
            > also reap the benefits of ownership, such as rent or
            > monies from the
            > sales of fuel?
            >
            > Or are they, instead, granting a new form of
            > monopoly to an
            > oil-as-fuel production and distribution industry
            > which already has a
            > de facto state-protected monopoly, or near-monopoly,
            > over a previous
            > generation's fuel choice, and which now may seek to
            > attain a new
            > state-funded and state-protected monopoly for the
            > next 100 year or
            > more, over the next generation's fuel?
            >
            > I don't know, but it's worth nailing down whether
            > taxpayers' interests
            > are being protected... and California is not the
            > only State being
            > pushed headlong into this sort of thing.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > >Last year, Governor Schwarzenegger called for up to
            > 200 stations 20 miles
            > >apart on major freeways. The planners decided that
            > it would be best to
            > >group stations first where most people live.
            > Accordingly, the blueprint
            > >sets a goal of 250 stations statewide linking north
            > and south in Phase 2,
            > >which could occur by 2015.
            > >
            > >
            > >The California legislature needs to approve the
            > funding. Should that
            > >happen, California will take the lead among the
            > different state
            > >initiatives.
            > >
            > >
            > >Resources:
            > > Volume I: Summary of Findings and
            > Recommendations for the CA H2Net.
            > > Prepared by CalEPA, this final document
            > summarizes the major findings
            > > and recommendations regarding implementation
            > of the CA H2 Net, which
            > > are based upon Volume II.
            > > Volume II: Consultant Report, Blueprint Plan
            > for the CA H2 Net. This
            > > document contains the complete and detailed
            > CA H2 Net Blueprint Plan,
            > > which was prepared by Tiax as the consultant
            > and was based upon
            > > findings and recommendations from the
            > individual Topic Team reports.
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v4/sub/MarketingPage?
            >
            > >
            >
            user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2FArticleNews%2FTPStory%
            >
            > >
            >
            2FLAC%2F20050527%2FROILYOUNG27%2FTPBusiness%2FColumnists&ord=1117203890102
            >
            > > &brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Fuel Cell Fatigue Dries Up Investor Funding
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Source: Globe and Mail/Canada
            >
            > > [May 27, 2005]
            >
            > >
            >
            > > SYNOPSIS: After pumping so much money into
            > the fuel cell sector,
            > > investors have realized no financial return
            > of late, and determined
            > > that the area poses too much risk, impacting
            > research funding.
            > >
            > > Fuel cell fatigue causes research funds to dry
            > up
            > > By MARY LYNN YOUNG
            >
            > > Friday, May 27, 2005, Page B2
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            > > VANCOUVER -- British Columbia investors have a
            > new disease called FCF,
            > > or fuel cell fatigue. The mantra that
            > "commercialization is around the
            > > corner" is now a negative for investors who
            > supported the Canadian
            > > fuel cell industry based in the province.
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            > >[Non-text portions of this message have been
            > removed]
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >


            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.