surprisingly, fuel cell technology has been around since 1839, more than 150 years. it was originally called the “gas battery.” the invention of the fuel cell vehicle (fcv) didn’t come until 1959 in the form of a tractor.

but despite many years of research, fcvs are rare in the auto industry. the first fcv to become widely available for customer leasing was honda’s fcx clarity which debuted in 2008. although toyota has been invested in the potential of fcvs for years, they have yet to actually sell one. this is likely due to the huge success of the toyota prius.

the problem with hydrogen vehicles is the issue of refilling the tank and the huge amount of energy it takes to produce the hydrogen to fill it. if the hydrogen is produced with fossil fuels and bio-ethanol, there are still emissions even if they aren’t expelled from the operation of the fcv. to solve the problem that indirect emissions pose to the spread of the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle, the hydrogen would need to be produced using renewable energy only.

right now hybrid and electric cars are rising in popularity because they are convenient for consumers. after all, every home has an electrical outlet and a car can charge in as little as 20 minutes now. there are even special parking spaces with places to plug in.

despite difficulties, it’s certainly possible for fcvs to rise in popularity, especially due to the fact that california law favors the technology. sure enough, toyota will release the toyota mirai, their first official fcv, to consumers as of 2016 — to california only. hopefully, the mirai will match the success of the prius and provide another clean option for the planet.

(image at top: the toyota mirai will be released to consumers in 2016. / mario roberto duran ortiz)

advantages of a new car classification for alternative fuel cars:
1. because the cars would not be allowed on interstates the government regulations on the new classification could be reduced. this would reduce cost barriers that make it prohibitive for new, american based companies to form.
2. less government regulations, plus a set engine size would reduce the weight of the car and improve range which is a problem for current electric vehicles that are forced to compete in the current car classification.
3. reduced cost will reduce retail price and increase market potential for the cars.
4. a “city” car classification is in line with current trends of people (especially younger professionals and many empty nesters) moving out of the suburbs and into cities.
5. will allow for greater competition, private investment and job growth and will excel the pace of innovation in the market segment.
6. will increase the awareness of the need to enforce traffic laws in our neighborhoods and commercial districts and will make it safer for other user groups (cyclist, pedestrians, user’s of public transportation) and thereby increase the number of users in these groups. also, a new car classification (and accompanying driver license classifications) would allow law enforcement the ability to reduce the license of dangerous drivers. there currently is no good system to enforce our traffic laws and this is why our roads have become so dangerous.

in short, the major automakers have always had an unfair advantage with a one car classification system and it has hurt innovation and has created a monopoly on our roads that has made our neighborhoods and commercial districts unsafe for other user groups. the government can invest in research of new technologies, but it does not have the money to fund the multitude of competing ideas that drives the innovation of new technologies.

however, through changes in laws/regulations, like creating a new “city” car classification, it is possible for the government to create the market conditions where free market forces can generate the private sector investments needed to drive innovation. this is an appropriate role of government, and rather than the government attempting to fund innovation it should concentrate on finding ways through changes in laws (and user taxes – not taxes based on income) to create market conditions that will drive the innovation of new green technologies.