According to American Honda VP Dan Bonawitz, Honda is the BMOC when it comes to automotive innovation, and that includes hybrids, clean diesels and fuel cells. As EV World reports, just don't put an E in front of Honda (either automotive or pharmaceutical). The Japanese automaker's investigating various electric drive technologies and may still introduce a hybrid-electric CR-Z sports car, BUT Honda isn't impressed enough with current battery technology enough to pursue a true electric vehicle. Bonawitz would rather talk about the new, improved FCX Clarity, in which the fuel cell system and battery pack take-up no more space than a gasoline-electric hybrid power plant. Bonawitz estimates that Honda's hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is three times more efficient than an equivalent conventional gas burner and 2.5 times more efficient than a compact hybrid. He rates the Clarity's EPA combined cycle at 68 mpg with a 60 percent reduction in CO2 emissions. Bonawitz also claims that the Clarity's tank-to-wheel efficiency has been improved to 60 percent. For some reason, he glosses over the hydrogen production inefficiencies. Until that process stops being a net energy loser, the fool cell label sticks.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Clarius would be a better name.
Being as the simplest and most efficient way of producing hydrogen is through electrolysis, and I work in the electricity generation industry I say:
BRING ON THE FUEL CELLS!
No sure that they are suited to a wide variety of applications tho.
Maybe they should use some of that “automotive innovation” to reverse their plummeting fuel economy. Take a look at the Civic over the past 22 years. The Fit is included for better perspective, as it is now their smallest car, as the Civic once was. Numbers are on the old EPA standard.
1985 Honda Civic HF
49 City
51 Combined
54 Highway
1995 Honda Civic VX
44 City
47 Combined
51 Highway
2005 Honda Civic HX
36 City
39 Combined
44 Highway
2007 Honda Civic
30 City
33 Combined
38 Highway
2007 Honda Fit
33 City
35 Combined
38 Highway
Actually, I think they should use electricity to extract hydrogen from water, then super cool the hydrogen and run it through fuel cells to create electricity, then use that electricity to charge li-ion batteries in a full electric car.
@Nemphre
You’ll have to factor in the increased weight of the Honda Civic, or? Safety regulations have contributed heftily to our cars over that time period.
It all depends on the power source to creating hydrogen. Since electrolysis is currently the most efficient way – but requires electricity which can be from solar power (the savings and reduction in carbon emissions as a variable is insignificant – unless you consider the fixed import of creating said solar panels and their expected lifetime).
For the solar panels Honda now has a manufacturing facility that has significantly reduced the production costs and rare elements in order to create solar panels. But as people want there is no quick fix.
Stein,
According to Edmunds:
1985 Civic – 1750 lbs (From Car and Driver)
1995 Civic – 2100
2005 Civic – 2440
2007 Civic – 2586
2007 Fit – 2432
The weight is certainly a big difference with the older vehicles. It would be nice if they could counter some of this with their alleged ingenuity. They could even trim some weight. The new Mazda 2 weighs less than the car it replaces. The drop from 05-07 is the biggest concern to me. There’s no reason why the Fit shouldn’t be able to match the 05 Civic; it even has a smaller engine.
Actually, I think they should use electricity to extract hydrogen from water, then super cool the hydrogen and run it through fuel cells to create electricity, then use that electricity to charge li-ion batteries in a full electric car.
Don’t laugh, a while ago, you could buy a candle that burns a small flame using the hydrogen from water in the base. The catch is that it required a 220V outlet (I forget the amperage).
In Iceland, they use geothermal energy to separate the hydrogen. Others extract it from natural gas, but, so far, it always takes more energy than they get back. There may be organic processes that are more efficient.
The advantages of hydrogen fuel cells is that you’ve got a vehicle with very good range and hardly any emissions. The disadvantages to be overcome are the cost of an energy-losing process, the high cost of the fuel cells themselves, the difficulty of storing hydrogen, the lack of infrastructure, etc.
A 48% increase in weight will mess up your mpg’s, I guess. And that’s before factoring in the increased weight of the passengers, who have also grown in the intervening period …
Nemphre, are the more recent numbers calculated using the new federal measuring system?
Nemphre :
and of course you forgot to mention the 1995 VX was a low production “high efficiency” model only available as a hatch (and didn’t sell well) and the 2005 HX was low production “high efficiency” model only available as a 2dr coupe with CVT that didn’t sell well.
Honda displaced these models with the Civic Hybrid as their hi-efficiency “banner” car.
EPA #’s for Civic LX 4dr sedan A/T’s…
1995 29/36
2005 29/38
2007 30/40
all are “old standard” EPA numbers
Not bad considering weights have gone up with each generation (primarily because of increased crash-worthiness) and HP ratings have gone up in each generation.
mocktard,
No, they’re all on the old EPA standard.
poltergeist,
The low production and lack of availability of other body styles doesn’t mean that they aren’t relevant though. Honda could have easily made those cars as sedans and such. They didn’t sell well because they were only sold as stripper models and I believe cost a little more than the DX. The 05 HX was competing with the hybrid as well. By the way, that 05 HX could be had with a manual. All the numbers I took were for manual tranny models.
You brought up the hybrid, which is an important point. There is an argument to be made that Honda used their ingenuity to create the hybrid models and counteract the economy drop. My problem is that I don’t consider hybrids to be comparable to a normal vehicle. They’re worthless for highway driving, they command a significant price premium, they drive differently, no one sells them with a manual tranny, and there are concerns about the long term viability of the batteries and worth of the vehicle.
Nemphre,
I’m not sure what you mean by hybrids being “worthless” for highway driving. I drove mine from Memphis to Seattle averaging over 40 mpg. I drive it in I-5 traffic on a daily basis and have no problems merging or keeping up with traffic. Additionally, Honda’s hybrids don’t have that much of a premium over their EX models. Save for the lower power output of the hybrid powerplant, you get the same equipment. I’ve had mine since winter of 2004 and I haven’t had any issues related to the hybrid drivetrain.
I cannot see how you can discount hybrid tech out of hand just because you haven’t experienced one.
schhim,
They get good economy on the highway but it has nothing to do with the hybrid technology. The engine is smaller and more fuel efficient, it comes with low resistant tires, and there are some aerodynamic tricks employed. The hybrid components add more weight and make it theoretically worse for cruising.
The premium isn’t too much more than the EX, but it’s still there and not everyone wants an EX. To someone who wants a DX or LX, it’s a very big difference in price.
On the third point, I’m not saying that that the hybrid system isn’t reliable, what I’m saying is that when these cars get to be over 10 years old are they going to have any worth? All cars start needing to have components replaced when the get old. The hybrid stuff complicates things considerably, and adds just one more thing(actually several things, how about the stop start system putting all that stress on the starter[s]) to go wrong. Plus the batteries need to be replaced. Honda and Toyota currently pay for replacements for… 8 years I think? What happens after that?
We need to remember that increasingly strict EPA regs makes it harder to increase or maintain good mileage ratings. The stricter NOX rules means engines can’t run as lean so the lean-burn modes in some Honda engines is a thing of the past. The VW diesel engines are a victim of this as well. I think they have done pretty well keeping class leading mileage while increasing HP and weight.
It’s very foolish to claim that hybrids are useless on the highway – you simply wouldn’t be able to sell a car with as small a gas engine as the Prius has, for instance, if it was the only source of horsepower – it’d take 30 seconds to accelerate up to cruising speed.
Of course, all of the mileage at highway speed comes from that little engine – and if it could be magically started at speed, it could maintain it without the battery at a similar MPG. But it can’t; even subcompacts come with a bigger gas engine than that.
M1EK,
I don’t think that’s necessarily true. Honda’s site says that the current Civic hybrid uses a 1.3L engine that makes 110hp. I think that’s combined though; so it would be 90hp without the electric motor. That’s acceptable for normal use. Strip all the hybrid stuff out, and it would weigh less and make the acceleration even better. Sometimes, the Civic Hybrid is only accelerating on that engine anyway, as there is no guarantee that you’ll have a charge at any given time, such as when you’re accelerating through an on-ramp.
fendesj,
Thanks for the info. I guess there’s no hope for them bringing that type of engine back.
There’s a simple solution to falling mpg here:
DIY AeroCivic: It’s Ugly, But it Gets 95 Miles Per Gallon
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/02/diy_aerocivic_ecomodder_gets_95_mpg.php
and FWIW the Honda Hybrid system does not use the starter motor to restart from idle stop, it uses the electric assist motor/generator thats sandwiched between the engine/trans.
Batteries “not good enough” huh? How about back in the late 1990’s, in a heavy truck with lead acid batteries getting 120 mile range on the freeway and 150 mile range in the city?
http://www.evalbum.com/037
You all forget at one point in time, Toyota built a full blown electric vehicle that got decent range considering the batteries used and the small amount of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV
Ford and GM each did some electric Rangers and S10’s. Honda had a little known vehicle too.
http://www.evworld.com/archives/testdrives/honda-evplus.html
All the OEM’s pretend they can’t do it, or it’s too hard, or it’s new and they’ve never done it before.
How about this little car from back in the day that likely no one reading this has ever heard of or knew anything about?
http://www.corvaircorsa.com/monzapr7.html
I’m sick and tired of hearing “hybrids are useless on the highway” blah blah blah. People just eat up the negative media they hear and don’t stop to think critically at all.
How many of you have a perfectly flat highway commute with no traffic and just set the cruise to 70 and sit there? Please raise your hands!
Oh, you say you don’t drive at a constant speed and elevation? Then that argument flies out the window. Hybrids, contrary to what EPA tests show, get better mileage on the highway than in the city in real life. The regeneration is still in use, but there is no wasteful stop-and-go.
It really is amazing how no one ever points out in this. Even “knowledgeable” journalists like to jump on the bandwagon without taking a second to think about what they’re saying.
And to respond to an earlier comment, the reason the Fit has relatively poor EPA mileage is because it’s really a 2001 car. Us Americans are just getting it late because Honda didn’t think there was a market for the Fit in the US. It doesn’t utilize i-VTEC and also has poorer aerodynamics. In the real world, though, the Fit and ’06 Civic are about even. I average 32mpg (about 3/4 city) in mine and I am very leadfooted. The EPA estimates 28 city but I don’t know of any Fit drivers who get less than 30 city routinely.
Also, the thing about hybrids is the first one sold in the US, was also the best one! Unmatched fuel mileage even today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Insight
“How many of you have a perfectly flat highway commute with no traffic and just set the cruise to 70 and sit there? Please raise your hands!”
*raises hand*
Sure you still get some effect from the regeneration, but my guess is that it’s very negligible, and doesn’t counteract the penalty of the weight increase that hybrids incur. I don’t know if there have been any tests done to prove or disprove this, though. I’m not mortally opposed to the hybrid if someone can convince me that it’s really quite great. I probably wouldn’t buy one, but I might recommend it to others.
Nemphre,
lets not forget the increase in safety over the years for the Civic, an increase in size and interior room, and an increase in performance. Do you wanna know how fast a 1985 Civic was 0-60? I don’t think you want to know.
Johnson,
If one were to approximate slowness with a horsepower to weight ratio or torque to weight ratio, that old Civic does look a little slow (check out the torque though), but the 95 VX doesn’t.
1985
hp/wgt – .033
tq/wgt – .045
1995
.043
.046
2005
.047
.045
2007
.054 (But having driven one of these, it doesn’t feel nearly this fast. Feels on par with an 05 EX)
.049
2007 Fit
.044
.043
Ratios like these never tell the whole story (hell, even peak horsepower and torque don’t) but for the VX to be just shy of the current Fit in hp and better in tq is quite impressive.
I’m no Toyota fanboy, but what they did with the Prius deserves credit. They designed a practical car from the ground up as a Hybrid, and made it relatively affordable. I’ve considered one, but the goofy Corolla-like steering wheel position, and lack of a super-adjustable driver’s seat has put me off a bit. And yes, the “nerd factor” is another.
Still, if the next-gen is a plug-in, and addresses the driver’s comfort issues, I might get one (unless someone can trump their lead in the technology).
I’d love to see a “sporty” version that gives up an mpg or two (using a switch on the dash) to make it more fun to drive, but that ability might compromise the EPA rating in some way — maybe make the “econ” mode the default every time the car is started.
FWIW, these guys think they can create hydrogen efficiently:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080217170412.htm
The National Hydrogen Association is excited about the launch of the Honda FCX Clarity. The FCX Clarity marks a positive step in moving us towards a hydrogen economy.
Although the article from EV World raises some important questions about the hydrogen infrastructure, the hydrogen community is working to effectively overcome these hurdles. For instance, Honda is making progress developing a Home Energy Station to further facilitate the adoption of fuel cell applications presenting a solution to infrastructure problems by allowing the consumer to produce hydrogen at home – no need for large fueling stations. The Home Energy Station can also provide heat and electricity to a home, reducing carbon emissions by 30 percent and energy saving costs by an estimated 50 percent.
While it may appear the transition to hydrogen is complicated and far into the future, organizations such as Shell, Chevron, and BP are working with the Department of Energy to establish a hydrogen fueling infrastructure. An initial $10 to $15 billion investment, equivalent to about one month of military spending in Iraq, would establish an initial refueling infrastructure within 2 miles anywhere within the top 100 metro areas. Furthermore, more than 40 billion kg of hydrogen are produced globally each year with production plants located near or within every major metropolitan city in the US – enough to fuel 130 million fuel cell-electric vehicles annually. Since hydrogen is also used to produce gasoline, switching from gas to hydrogen is simpler than it appears.