Diesel Better Choice Than Hydrogen Cells

President George W. Bush wants to drive the auto industry into the future by spending $1.7 billion on developing hydrogen-powered fuel cells for automobiles. But the country would get more fuel efficiency faster if it invested the money instead in clean diesel fuel technology.

The president wants to concentrate research money on fuel-cell vehicles, which the federal government already funds through the FreedomCAR program. Government and industry also would research ways to safely and economically store hydrogen, as well as build a new infrastructure to deliver it to consumers.

Fuel cells combine hydrogen with oxygen in a chemical reaction that creates electricity, which powers a vehicle and creates nothing more harmful than water vapor. But most experts agree that these futuristic vehicles are decades away.

Fuel cells have a lot of obstacles to overcome. A fuel-cell powertrain is 10 times more expensive to make than a conventional powertrain. At best, hydrogen is four times as expensive to produce as gasoline, according to the Department of Energy. Fuel-cell vehicles require an expensive new infrastructure to supply hydrogen to motorists.

And it is unlikely that the most viable fuel-cell vehicles will be pollution-free. Coal, natural gas and even gasoline are likely sources of producing the electricity needed to create hydrogen. They all contribute to pollution.

By contrast, diesel vehicles are a proven technology. Diesel cars in the United States get 48 to 75 percent better mileage than their gasoline counterparts.

New technologies, such as electric-gasoline hybrid engines, may seem more glamorous. But a European clean diesel vehicle gets far better mileage than the current Japanese hybrids produce.

Diesels don’t require a new infrastructure for delivering fuel. Existing refineries could be adapted to produce more diesel fuel. And in two years, new government rules will require refiners to produce low-sulfur diesel fuel, which promises to make high-tech diesel vehicles as clean or cleaner than their gasoline-powered counterparts.

The sticking point for diesels is emissions. Stricter emissions rules scheduled to take effect in the next few years threaten to drive current diesel vehicles off the road. But if European air standards allow clean-diesel vehicles, why can’t U.S. rules?

The Bush Energy Department agrees clean diesel vehicles hold promise as a way to improve fuel efficiency in the next few years. It spends $40 million to $50 million on research to improve diesel engines, among other spending. But Assistant Energy Secretary David Garman argues fuel-cell vehicles are more efficient than diesels and deserve more money.

General Motors, Ford and the Chrysler Group already spend as much or more each year on fuel-cell research than what the president proposes to spend over five years. These private research efforts are much more likely to produce a fuel cell technology that makes sense for the market.

The federal government would get more mileage — and buy time to develop a realistic fuel-cell technology — by focusing its efforts on encouraging clean diesel vehicles.