Honda Rolls Out Hydrogen-Powered Fuel Cell Car

Honda’s FCX Clarity rolled off their Japanese assembly line last week and arrived in California where some Hollywood big shots were eager to get their hands on the new “zero-emission” car that runs on hydrogen and electricity. According to CNN Money, the car emits only water and none of the gases which are thought to contribute to global warming. A few dozen cars will be leased to certain individuals this year and some will be available to the general public on a very limited scale in early 2009. Details, inside…

The article says,

Among the first customers are actress Jamie Lee Curtis and filmmaker husband Christopher Guest, actress Laura Harris, film producer Ron Yerxa, as well as businessmen Jon Spallino and Jim Salomon.

“It’s so smooth,” said Harris, who played villainness Marie Warner on the hit TV show “24.” “It’s like a future machine, but it’s not.”

Harris, Spallino and Yerxa were flown to the ceremony, courtesy of Honda. Yerxa says he’s excited to show off the car and believes there’s “a lot of interest.”

The biggest obstacles standing in the way of wider adoption of fuel cell vehicles are cost and the dearth of hydrogen fuel stations. For the Clarity’s release in California, Honda said it received 50,000 applications through its Web site but considered only buyers living near hydrogen fuel stations in Torrance, Santa Monica and Irvine.

We’re not yet sure how much it will cost to fuel this car once it is available. But whatever the initial cost is, we imagine that we will happier spending our money on hydrogen rather than gasoline.

Honda rolls out fuel cell car [CNN Money]
2009 Honda FCX Clarity [Business Week]


Edit Your Comment

  1. cobaltthorium says:

    Awesome. Definitely a step in the right direction, and as they become more widespread, so will hydrogen fuel stations; The system for deploying a liquid fuel is already in place! (thanks, gasoline – don’t let the saloon door hit your ass on the way out).

  2. veterandem says:

    How soon will it take Exxon to get the leasing rights to all the hydrogen in the universe?

  3. cobaltthorium says:

    @veterandem: I once read a science fiction series that, in historical context, showed how when earth first discovered means of FTL travel, it divided the universe into 3 equal parts, with earth at the centre. Can’t say it’s that far-fetched, really. Sort of like if Exxon said they own all the hydrogen in the universe ;) I can see it happening … High school science teachers under arrest for violation of a DMCA-like law prohibiting hydrolysis …

  4. sleze69 says:

    @cobaltthorium: Ironically, gasoline is a very good source of hydrogen.

    Although they really can’t speculate how much hydrogen fuel will cost in the future but it would have been nice to report how much it is going to cost TODAY.

  5. Now all we need is an economical means of producing hydrogen in sufficient quantities to fuel all these H2-powered cars.

    @cobaltthorium: It’s kind of like Ford taking people to court for using an assembly line, but let me point out that the RSA encryption algorithm is patented; they make this point clear when teaching it in computer science classes. If you can patent a series of mathematical formulas, why not a whole process for producing something like H2?

  6. dh86sj says:

    Unfortunately most of the hydrogen in this country comes from natural gas. To be renewable, it would have to come from an electrolytic process powered by a wind farm or nuclear reactor or some other green energy source.

    Good step in the right direction though.

  7. hypnotik_jello says:

    @cobaltthorium: I dunno, other life forms in the universe might not take kindly to an exxon hydrogen monopoly.

  8. kpfeif says:

    I still want my “Mr. Fusion” that was showcased in “Back to the Future.”

    Seriously, though – Honda has demonstrated a “Home Fuel Station” that will provide hydrogen and power for your house. Who knows how far away that is, but it’s a cool idea.

  9. cobaltthorium says:

    @hypnotik_jello: How did you know what happened?!? Yeah. The chinese section got gobbled up by a religious socialist state, the american/european section by a capitalist state filled with poverty, and the russians by a atheistic feudal slave-state. In 50 years, someone might appreciate the irony …

  10. joerdie says:

    Well I guess my Pius is officially obsolete. :(

  11. cobaltthorium says:

    @dh86sj: Hopefully some entrenpraneur will step outside one day, look up, and notice the giant ball of burning gas that hangs in our sky and think, maybe we can use that to produce H2.

  12. jeffjohnvol says:

    I would love this to take off, but I fear that it may not be feasible. You may see technology that strips H2 from the gasoline later on.

    Fact: There is more hydrogen in a gallon of gasoline than a gallon of liquid H2.

  13. Zaos says:

    Love this :

    you have 1 company doing hydrogen-powered fuel car whos MPG was 35 when i bought my car 7 years ago,

    and you have other companies happy to be introducing 31mpg cars using oil in 2008.

  14. lifescool123 says:

    How about leasing the fuel efficient cars to regular people who are the target customer base and would appreciate help with the current high gas prices. With private planes and limousines, i find it funny when someone in Hollywood touts their Prius.

  15. SacraBos says:

    @Steaming Pile: The RSA patent expired several years ago. Patents are good only for so long. By the time we realistically get mass adoption of H2 cars, their patent will have expired, too.

  16. sn1per420 says:

    @Zaos: Honda is also happy to be introducing 31mpg gasoline-powered cars today. The fact is, gasoline was much cheaper in the past, and so people didn’t really look at MPG when buying cars. Now that that’s changed, car manufacturers are scrambling to make cars that are more fuel efficient.

  17. Apeweek says:

    Sorry to be negative, but fuel-cell cars are just a distraction. Hydrogen just stores energy (like a battery), it is not an energy source (since there is no free hydrogen on earth.)

    An FCV is an electric car (including batteries, the FCV can’t accelerate without them.) So take a perfectly good EV, and add a big fuel cell and H2 tank on top. Such a car will always be heavier, less efficient, and more expensive than a plain old electric car – and cost more to fuel, as well.

    New battery technology allows 10-minute charging, and 20-year battery lifetimes. Pure electric vehicles is where research money belongs.

  18. Elcheecho says:

    I thought water vapor was a greenhouse gas.

    @jeffjohnvol: But then what would you do with all the carbon that’s left over?

  19. cobaltthorium says:

    @Apeweek: There is free hydrogen, as in it’s free to produce. Sun+Solar Panel + Hydrolysis machine = free H2.

  20. Gokuhouse says:

    @Apeweek: Glad somebody said it. We need to go in the direction of pure EV. There are more than a couple companies working on newer and better batteries capable of 10 times what today’s batteries are. Give them a few years, that’s where the future lies.

  21. Myrddraal says:

    Then why not just Sun+Solar Panel=power. Skip the h2 part and save energy. H2 is a waste of time and money. It is the hippie version of the golden fleece.

  22. hi says:

    BTW: You forgot to mention this is NOT available to everyone. It is limited to a three year lease for $600 a month and only available to certain people who they hand pick in California. You have to qualify and meet certain requirements to even be considered. You can’t even buy the car, it’s leased for three years.

  23. Apeweek says:

    @cobaltthorium: Yes, hydrogen can be produced with electricity, I agree. This is why hydrogen is just another battery technology.

    However, the electricity –> hydrogen and hydrogen –> electricity cycle is much less efficient than any other battery technology. Just put the same electricity in a battery and drive twice as far.

  24. CharlieInSeattle says:

    Most hydrogen comes from burning fossil fuels. BTW if you want to save gas, hypermile. I’m currently getting between 35-43 mpg depending on how light traffic is in city with a 1999 Ford Escort ZX2 with 70K miles. On one 100 mile highway trip I got 47mpg. This with a regular 2 liter gasoline engine, just by changing driving habits.

  25. balthisar says:

    @Steaming Pile: the formulae aren’t patented; it’s the use of the formulae in a certain process that was patented.

  26. drakono says:

    Hydrogen must first be separated via more conventional methods, so while the car might have zero-emissions, the emissions are really just off-loaded to another place. Calling this (in and of itself) “green” is just bunk.

    However, if you were to use nuclear power to separate hydrogen to power your car, then at least all emissions and waste would be contained, rather than spewed to all corners of the earth. So, I suppose it is a helpful step — but only in conjunction with a cleaner power source.

  27. cobaltthorium says:

    @Apeweek: That’s a great point. I just get pissed when people complain that hydrogen isn’t clean. It can be clean. I’ve heard of the “Zenn Car” someone developed in BC that runs on batteries, or supercapacitors, or something, but the federal government hasn’t deemed it safe for roads and is leaving it up to the provinces. Bummer. Still, not really practical since a lot of energy it consumes stiff comes from dirty sources.

  28. SuffolkHouse says:

    It is my understanding that traditional fuels (coal, gasoline, nuclear) are used to produce the hydrogen. Moreover, compressed hydrogen can function as a large bomb during an accident.

    I think hydrogen is a scam intended to keep us going to pumps to fill up. The worst thing in the world for Mobil and the rest is if we fuel our batteries up at home by plugging in our cars.

  29. Steeb2er says:

    Where was the story on the fuel-cell Chevy Equinox when it was released in limited quantities a week or two ago?

    I’m being a LITTLE tongue-in-cheek here … but … is this liberal media hating on the big American corporation?

  30. battra92 says:

    @veterandem: Exactly. I’m more excited about the Chevy Volt!

  31. sardonumspa says:



    The real big hurdle for electric/battery cars is the charging. How far can you go when you have to charge your car overnight?

    With the development of quick charging batteries, like Toshiba’s nano battery, the electric car could really be here soon.

  32. Apeweek says:

    @cobaltthorium: It doesn’t matter so much that the electricity used for EVs or hydrogen production still includes dirty fuels; these vehicles are far more efficient than gas vehicles.

    More miles on less fuel equals less pollution, regardless of what gets burned.

    @sardonumspa: My own EV is old-technology. I can go maybe 50 miles (but I charge at home and work, too, so I have miles to run errands on the way home.) Picture of my EV is at the top of this page:


    Newer EVs like the Tesla can get over 200 miles per charge.

  33. DashTheHand says:

    @kpfeif: But Mr. Fusion only powered the Flux Capacitor and time circuits and allows the DeLorean to create the 1.21 gigawatts to make time travel possible. It also powers the modified flight capabilities of the car.

    As noted in the third movie, the car still runs on the standard combustion engine for normal driving, which is why they had to find alternative means to get it up to speed in the end since the fuel line was damaged and all the gasoline was lost.

  34. rhombopteryx says:

    This is AWESOME!
    Using lots of gasoline to inefficiently generate and transport hydrogen, which is then used to inefficiently generate electricity in a car! This is almost as good an idea as using lots of gasoline (and fertilizers) to grow corn, and then transport it, and ferment it, and distill it, and pour it in some other gasoline, and then burn it!

    Maybe we can eventually get a car that simultaneously burns ethanol and fuel-cell-converts fossil-fuel-derived hydrogen at such a rate that its efficiency reaches the critical singularity of 0% efficiency. It’ll just be a big flash!

  35. mariospants says:

    @Apeweek: “Sorry to be negative, but fuel-cell cars are just a distraction. Hydrogen just stores energy (like a battery), it is not an energy source (since there is no free hydrogen on earth.)

    An FCV is an electric car (including batteries, the FCV can’t accelerate without them.) So take a perfectly good EV, and add a big fuel cell and H2 tank on top. Such a car will always be heavier, less efficient, and more expensive than a plain old electric car – and cost more to fuel, as well.

    New battery technology allows 10-minute charging, and 20-year battery lifetimes. Pure electric vehicles is where research money belongs.”

    By your definition, a fuel cell is basically a glorified battery – so you’re being rhetorical, right?

  36. Trai_Dep says:

    It’s nice to see. But it irks that Big Oil takes their billions in tax money to figure out how to turn gasoline into hydrogen. And the Gov’t okays this energy three-card-monte.
    I want a refund, dang it.

  37. domestic_goddess says:

    I hope this doesn’t turn out like the last car that went up against the fuel companies.

    I remember watching a movie “who killed the electric car” that followed another car that didn’t use fuel.

    wasn’t it called the Evo?

  38. differcult says:

    The eletric car will never take off until there is a recharge time of less than 5 mins and a range of 300 miles @ 70 MPH.

    The Telsa has the range, but takes 3 hours to recharge and only goes around 250 miles.

    I see a great war in the future, like HD-DVD vs. BluRay

    I personally like hydrogren as a middle man, a lot of gasoline engines could be converted to run on hydrogren while we wait for the electric car to get better

  39. artki says:

    This whole fuel cell/hydrogen car/hydrogen economy business is a lot more complicated that the politicians let on. Here’s a comprehensive analysis of just how much trouble it would be to actually do anything on a large scale using hydrogen fuel.


  40. battra92 says:

    @Apeweek: If I didn’t live in such a cold climate, I would love to build an electric car. Maybe if there was a way to build it in an old roadster or something like that.

    @domestic_goddess: The EV1. GM pulled it from the market because it was impractical, lost them a ton of money and wasn’t really all that great.

    It did give them a good test run for the Chevy Volt though, which is expected to be up for sale in 2010 which is an electric plug-in car with a small gas generator for long trips.

  41. Apeweek says:

    @mariospants: Yes, a fuel cell is indeed a glorified battery. That is indeed the point I’m making.

    Here’s the important part: it’s a really, really bad and inefficient battery, one which involves shipping and storing hydrogen all over the country instead of just charging your battery at home.

    If you have a fuel-cell car, you’ve got an electric car. So why bother with the H2? Just plug the darn thing in.

  42. Apeweek says:

    @differcult: the magic battery (10 minute charge, 20-year lifespan) is already here; the problem is with the press, which have ignored it. It is used in this car:


    @battra92: I live in a cold climate (Michigan), and I drive an electric car. Do you know why cold temperatures are not a problem? My car is plugged in overnight, charging. The batteries are toasty warm in the morning.

  43. battra92 says:

    @differcult: I personally like hydrogren as a middle man

    I actually see Diesel as more the middle man. If we could get more high mileage Diesels we’d be doing alright. Diesel is selling for $4.87 a gallon near me ($5 most places) and Europe has some sweet high mpg cars/trucks. Plus you can use bio if you are green.

  44. joemono says:

    @DashTheHand: Waaaay off topic, but since I was just talking with a friend about BttFIII, I need to bring it up here:

    Could Marty and Doc have simply siphoned out the gas from the other DeLorean that existed in 1885?

  45. battra92 says:

    @Apeweek: Hmm …

    I was more referring to the snow and junk here. I assume there are decent heaters and such in your car. ;)

    I drive 25 miles each way to work. On weekends I often make 100 mile round trips. I do relatively little in town errands driving plus I don’t know if my work would let me run an extension cord out to my car.

    Great idea, and I’d love to do it someday maybe if I had my current car paid for. It’d be nice for my folks who do almost all in town driving in a pickup truck and get 20mpg.

  46. Apeweek says:

    @battra92: FWIW, my EV handles great in snow. It’s got lots of ballast (batteries) and electric motors excel at low-speed torque.

    And to be truthful, I don’t use the heater in my car – instead, I use a portable one on a timer, that heats up the car before I get in. This way, I don’t have to use my batteries for heat.

    Of course the EV is not my car of choice for long trips. Many families have more than one car. We use the EV whenever we can, and the gas car when we have to.

    Charging at work may be tricky to set up, but your employer may even see it as some positive PR for the company. The electricity just costs a few pennies.

  47. TMurphy says:

    “Harris, Spallino and Yerxa were flown to the ceremony, courtesy of Honda.”

    Lets hope they didn’t fly in private jets or they’ll never drive those cars enough to balance the emissions out.

  48. @sn1per420: @Zaos: I have a 1993 Honda accord that the EPA says gets 21/29 MPG. (My fill-up calculations concur that this is still true after 180k miles.) The 2008 Accord gets 22/31.

    I used to think about how it wasn’t a staggering improvement in 15 years. Now I realize that, by comparison with, say, a Ford Taurus (18/24 in 1992, 18/28 in 2008), it was already really good for a car of its size.

    @Steeb2er: Where was the story on the fuel-cell Chevy Equinox when it was released in limited quantities a week or two ago?

    It’s the liberal media hating on the SUV. Chevy, please just let it die. Also, anyone can hypothetically lease an FCX. That doesn’t seem to be the case with the Equinox Fuel Cell.

    @artki: This whole fuel cell/hydrogen car/hydrogen economy business is a lot more complicated that the politicians let on

    Breaking news: Hydrogen Infrastructure Doesn’t Yet Exist to Power the Country’s Cars
    Update: Problems Will Have to be Solved
    Update2: Hydrogen is Just a Fancy Way to Store Energy (that one’s for you, Apeweek)

  49. battra92 says:

    @Apeweek: Charging at work may be tricky to set up, but your employer may even see it as some positive PR for the company.

    I work for the wrong kind of Utility company.

    Thanks for the info though, very interesting. Too bad I couldn’t see one in person, ya know and give it a test drive. Being a techie this sort of stuff really interests me.

  50. consumerd says:

    Personally myself, I think I am going to look toward investing in hydrogen fuel cell stations. Cause I am sure gas is not giving up without a fight. They will try whatever they want to do to kill this idea.

    Thing is, I would make equipment that would allow it to be filled by the water in your house. Reason being is because the Oil companies would have to “outlaw” you using water from your house for the car.

    that would be awfully hard to do, and even harder to convince any congress to let that happen.

  51. synergy says:

    Again with the leasing of electric cars?? Does no one learn anything?? When do they get to actually own the cars so the companies don’t come by and take them and crush them again??

  52. mandiejackson says:

    i hate marketing. i bet honda is doing that so people go “oh look honda is being environmental, ooohhh and celebrities are buying them, so honda must be cool now….but i can’t afford a hydrogen car, but gee, the new civic sure looks nice….”

  53. BlackFlag55 says:

    The morning of 9/11 two things stick in my memoey. (1) I was paying $1.28 for gasoline.

    (2) I was reading news online when 9/11 started. Specifically I was reading a press release from Royal Dutch Shell how they were thrilled to announce they were completely divesting all their interests in oil by 2010, and going to be a hydrogen based energy company by 2010. In that press release was included a link to a General Motors web site where GM proudly demonstrated their fuel cell technology … fuel cells the size of a closet they were ALREADY using to power some of their office campus locations.

    I got up from the Mac and went to say “Wow!” to my darling bride and got stopped in front of the television … and never got back to saving that web page. And … it … is … gone … forever.

    Here’s Shell Oil, one of the original Seven Sisters crowing about getting out of oil, and fully invested into hydrogen … and today nary a word. Dead. Gone. Not a peep about that press statement. Now … here’s the conundrum …

    …. who can make a global powerhouse oil company back down from getting out of oil and leading the way in hydrogen? First one says Bush needs an MRI and to gargle a purgative for the parasites eating into your brain.

    Who is powerful enough to bully an oil company into staying with oil, when the course has already been committed to hydrogen?

    That, I think, is an indication of just how big the Real and Unspoken War is. Not Iraq, Afghanistan, I Hate Bush etc etc etc … the real war. The real power struggle. Who can buffalo a Seven Sister? Not even nations can do that.

    As to Honda?

    HOORAY! Because I can, and have made (simple test with wind power) my own hydrogen, by damn. Home and car hydrogen fuel cells puts a ‘Chris Matthew’ tinge up my leg.

  54. @mandiejackson: The Civic is a good car, small and efficient. Nothing wrong with people buying Civics. And Honda really is being environmental. They were making fuel-efficient cars decades ago, long before it was cool.

    @synergy: When the product is ready for prime-time. Note, for example, that the lessees can’t leave LA with their new FCX, because there’s no way to fill it up. If the price of gas stays high (here’s hoping!) that day will come sooner rather than later.

  55. GreatMoose says:

    Last I heard (last week), it was going to cost $190,000. Yup.

  56. Trai_Dep says:

    I bought my iPod Touch knowing I was going to get hit with an Early Adopter tax, gleefully shrugging it off, of course. But somewhere deep inside me, a tiny tear welled up.
    A hydrocar Early Adopter tax of, what, $120,000? Whoa.
    I’ll stop teasing my friends that have a MacBook Air from now on.

    Still nice to see car companies trying alternative tech out. But, whoa, that’s a lot of green to be first.

  57. LogicalOne says:

    I recall the chairman of GM said that ten years from now, you’d be able to go into any GM dealership in the country and buy a fuel cell car. He said this ten years ago.

  58. @Trai_Dep: I’m not sure what “early-adopter tax” you’re talking about. It’s a 36-month lease for $600/month, or $21,600 (plus some other stuff) over the length of the lease. Maintenance and collision are included. Seems pretty fair if you’re the kind that brag to all your friends about your fuel cell car.

  59. Shadowfire says:

    @Gokuhouse: Hydrogen has a place, same as electric does. If we go pure electric, how many more power plants do we need to build?

    Oh yea, we haven’t really been allowed to build them. ;)

  60. Trai_Dep says:

    @Michael Belisle: My bad, I took GreatMoose’s quote of $190K as being the list price. Not that I was knocking it – I was saying I gleefully did a similar thing, although with a more modest item.
    Hey, SOMEONE’S got to jump in the breech!

    $22K is insanely reasonable, actually.

    I’m assuming the fill-ups on these is a small fraction that an internal combustion sedan would cost, so even better.

    And that’s not counting the Cool Factor.

    Shame, really: there was a time when US companies would have been the leaders of new tech. But it’s good to see someone doing it; we all benefit.

  61. rolla says:

    i’m glad gas prices are high now cause its forcing the car companies to develop new technology faster. the hell with paying all of this money to the OPEC countries…theyre like one big mafia. reaping the money from us in order to build massive buildings in their countries.

  62. kable2 says:

    if little idiot bush had spent the money he wasted in the bulls*it wars and used it to build massive solar / wind farms for the production of hydrogen, and built the infrastructure for distribution. the states could be about 70% free from oil right now.

    yes its true, and it would have cost less then what the wars have cost.

  63. TVarmy says:

    Hydrogen is not that great a fuel. In fact, in any green application, it isn’t a fuel, it is a battery. It can be refined from natural gas and/or petroleum via chemistry, which would be the cheapest method, but it would have the same problems as a gas engine with marginal (but welcome) increases in fuel efficiency. The “green” way to do it would be to harvest sustainable electricity from solar, wind, tidal, and possibly a well run nuclear plant, and use that electricity to electrolyze water, which separates the hydrogen molecules from the oxygen molecules. In this case, hydrogen effectively serves as a battery.

    However, hydrogen is not a very efficient “battery.” It is currently around 35% efficient in terms of carrying and delivering energy, and it has a theoretical limit of 45% efficiency. Meanwhile, lithium ion battery technology has a limit of around 85%, currently residing around 78% and rising every year. Hydrogen has the benefit of refueling in a few minutes like gasoline, while electric cars need an overnight recharge on home appliance circuits. However, electric cars could charge as quickly as 10 minutes if given enough juice quickly enough, either through massive power circuits to the home or capacitors that charge up over the day to quickly charge the car in a few minutes. There are currently plans to provide charging stations in japan that will charge a car within an hour.

  64. TVarmy says:

    @Shadowfire: Actually, we could run 3/4 of the nation’s cars on electricity with the existing power grid. The key thing is that the cars would need to charge most at off peak hours, ideally with a smart charging system that works over the internet to determine how fast they can safely charge. Capacitors/batteries inside the chargers could ensure that there would always be a big charge available locally for power outages and peak hours where electricity would be too expensive.

    Some concepts also propose that electric cars could sell back electricity they received at off peak hours to the grid at peak hours. This makes the owners of the cars money, and makes for a more stable grid.

    Of course, for the rest of the cars, we would need more plants. But it’s not that hard to build a much needed power plant. Believe it or not, even coal plants get subsidies. And the grid will need to grow for increased power usage in general. The population is going up, and everyone likes their air conditioning. NIMBY will never overcome the power of human aversion to heat.

  65. Shadowfire says:

    @TVarmy: Tesla Motors is working with Lithium Ion batteries. Good idea. There are still difficulties to overcome, though – they’re more expensive than Ni-MH batteries, and because of the size and number of batteries in use, and that they’re stored in a place that can become very hot very fast, the risk of fire is great. Still, I think it’s a great option to keep exploring.

    But again, you have the problem of power plants. We can’t build plants as it is (i.e. not allowed), so where are we going to get the power to fuel this fleet of electric vehicles?

  66. Shadowfire says:

    @TVarmy: I want more power plants to be built, but they won’t be for a while. You won’t find many people who support nuclear power more than I do.

  67. battra92 says:

    @Shadowfire: There are a few of us out there. Plus I want the grid updated in my lifetime. I remember living through the Northeast blackout (we had it for about a minute) and NYC had it for a couple days or something.

  68. @Trai_Dep: There’s a reason why they’re leasing and and throwing in collision: that $190k could very well be how much the thing is actually cost to build. The cost makes sense because the cars appear to be assembled by real, live humans.

  69. @Shadowfire: they’re stored in a place that can become very hot very fast, the risk of fire is great.

    Lithium-ion batteries do indeed have a nasty tendency to burst into highly toxic and dangerous flames (hence, the FAA restrictions, countless recalls, and free laptops).

    Somehow, I just don’t see Li-ion batteries running our nation’s automobiles any time soon, even despite their efficiency.

  70. QuasarErazar says:

    detroit responds with a new model of SUV…

  71. Hondenburg.