Using hydrogen as a power source isn’t a new concept, the idea has been around for around 150 years. The science fiction writer Joules Verne wrote in his novel Mysterious Island about hydrogen powered technology and it was hydrogen which sent astronauts to the moon, and still sends rockets into space today.

With all of the concerns over global warming and C02 levels, not to mention the looming end of the Earth’s supply of fossil fuels, hydrogen is the future.

This new generation of hydrogen fuel cell technology removes the need for an engine, and replaces it with a number of electric motors, effectively turning the car into a power station. The idea of hydrogen is that it would replace petrol and diesel at the fuelling stations, so all you would need to do to fill up is stop off at a station as per normal.

This new Hyundai will offer a range of 369miles on a single tank. Granted the UK doesn’t quite yet have any infrastructure for offering hydrogen at your local petrol station, but the EU has already begun building a number of specialist hydrogen fuelling stations throughout the continent, so give it a few years and I’m certain they’ll start popping up here.

For now Hyundai is the first car manufacturer to begin mass production on a hydrogen fuel cell car, and plans to have released 1000 into the wild by 2015.

The Hyundai ix35 Fuel Cell

Using Hyundai’s proprietary technology, the ix35 Fuel Cell’s fuel cell stack converts hydrogen into electricity, which turns the vehicle’s motor.  The only emission generated is water.

The ix35 Fuel Cell can be refuelled with hydrogen in only a few minutes.  It accelerates from 0 to 62mph in 12.5 seconds, has a top speed of 100mph and can travel 369 miles on a single tank.

Hyundai ix35 Fuel Cell specifications 

Although these are not staggering performance figures, do bare in mind the internal combustion engine as we know it has been around for well over 100 years, so hydrogen technology is still in its infancy. But looking at the speed of the advancements in recent years, this will soon overtake the performance of current engines.

There is however a slight downside to this. They’re set to cost £66,000 ($100,000). That’s right, for what is at the end of the day a Hyundai.

The reason for this is because like with all things, new technology costs a lot of money initially. So in time this cost will come down as it becomes more common throughout the world. In recent years it has already dropped in cost by a factor of 10.

Aston Martin have provided an alternative solution with their new Rapide S touring car. They have developed an engine that can run on petrol, hydrogen gas or a combination of both. For the moment this engine will only be fitted to their touring car, but may signify future possibilities in standard engine technology, easing us off out fossil fuel dependency and onto greener hydrogen.

No matter what the solution is, it’s finally now in sight. So let’s all join hands and rejoice, the future is here.

Realistically, the electric car is only suited to urban environments where there is a lot of stop start driving, and is not ideal for a regular long distance commute. Not to mention not wanting to be too far away from a plug socket.

But in the real world, how to they actually add up against the comparative petrol and diesel cars?

Thanks to the people at CarBuzz, they’ve worked out the numbers comparing vehicles in the new (and stunning) Renault range.

Pricing

First off is the actual retail price of each of these new cars, the most obvious factor when deciding which new car to purchase. One of the benefits of buying an electric vehicle is that the government offers a £5000 grant to assist in the cost.

Renault Zoe Expression: £13,650 on-the-road (after £5,000 government grant)
Renault Clio Expression+ TCe ECO: £13,245
Renault Clio Expression+ dCi ECO: £14,345

It’s a good start for the Zoe. After the government grant, it’s only a few hundred quid more expensive than the turbocharged petrol Clio, and £695 cheaper than the diesel. If price was the only thing putting you off electric cars before, then that barrier has effectively been removed.

Tax and congestion charging

The Renault Clio puts out CO2 of 99 g/km and 83 g/km for the petrol and diesel respectively. Meaning that as it stands at the moment, both Renault Clios are also exempt from having to pay any road tax.

Likewise for the Renault Zoe, because of it being electrically powered, it’s road tax is also free.

When it comes to driving through London into the congestion zones, all 3 cars wont incur any charge. However the Mayor of London is pushing to have the CO2 boundary changed, which would mean that both Renault Clios would be charged £10 per day to enter the zone. The Zoe on the other hand will remain free for the forseeable future.

Servicing

At the moment, both Clios and the Zoe all come with Renault’s 4+ package.

4+ includes four years and up to 100,000 miles warranty, free servicing for four years and up to 48,000 miles, four years roadside assistance, and if required, four-year finance packages. It’s free for all three cars, so that takes another cost away.

It is important to note that different car manufacturers will offer different servicing plans to those provided by Renault, so it’s best to check.

Insurance

Insurance figures were worked out using the authors details, based upon 28year old who has held a license for 10 years and racked up a 9 years no claims. The Vehicle was parked on a driveway over night in a low crime area postcode.

The petrol Clio proved cheapest, with a premium of £180 for the year. Next up was the Zoe, at £194 for the year, and finally the diesel at £204.

There’s only £24 between cheapest and most expensive, which is unlikely to put anyone off any particular car.

Fuel costs

The most important part of the argument, is it actually any more affordable to run?

These figures are based on an annual mileage of 7500 as it is taking into account that it will be most likely urban travel, but also that this is the mileage stated by Renault for the basic battery leasing cost.

It is also being worked out using current costs of electricity and fuel, and assuming that these stay relative to one another.

Electricity pricing Economy 7 tariff at 9.08 pence per kilowatt-hour (source: Energy Saving Trust).

Petrol:  137.9 pence per litre (£6.21 per gallon)

Diesel 146.4 pence per litre (£6.59 per gallon).

The numbers part

Renault quotes three range estimates for the Zoe – 130 miles on the EU cycle, 90 miles as a likelihood, and 60 miles as a worst-case scenario.

Meaning the Zoe works out at £115, £166 or £245 per year in electricity depending on how many miles you get on a charge and how heavy your right foot is.

That looks pretty good next to the petrol and diesel Clios. The petrol’s 53.3 mpg urban rating would mean costs of around £873 per year, the diesel’s 78.5 mpg urban rating £629 per year.

However, there is the additional cost of leasing the battery from Renault, Which at the cheapest end works out to £70 a month. Adding up to a total of £955, £1,006 or £1,085 depending on whether you manage 130, 90 or 60 miles of range. Thereby actually making it more expensive than the petrol and diesel clio’s.

Well, possibly.

You see, 60 and 90 miles are Renault’s realistic estimates for Zoe range, compared to the official 130 miles. If we’re realistic with the petrol and diesel too and knock 15 percent off each urban figure – 45.3 mpg for the petrol, 66.7 for the diesel – then their respective annual fuel costs rise to £1,028 and £740.

The diesel is still a fair bit cheaper then (if you still think you can do 66 mpg around town…) and the petrol surprisingly close to the electric car.

Variables

All of this is relative, because there are so many variables involved. For example you may be able to get close to the Zoe’s 130mile range around town improving on overall cost. Or perhaps the Diesel and Petrol cars perform even less than the 15% reduced urban figures.

It’s safe to say that the price of fuel is only going to increase with time, but will the gap between petrol, diesel and electricity increase?

And there’s always depreciation to consider. Buyers can be safe in the knowledge that due to the battery rental system they will always be kept in peak condition, although who’s to say that in three or five years time fuel will be so expensive that we’re all driving around in electric vehicles. At the moment, depreciation just isn’t known for such a new vehicle.

Verdict

As it stands at the minute, on paper at least the Renault Clio Diesel looks like it’s the most cost effective and practical vehicle out of the three. On Paper.

However in reality it’s a little difficult to say, especially seeing the way that things are going, perhaps in 6 months time it will be a different story. For the moment at least, these electric vehicles are still better suited to the city and urban driving with their somewhat limited range.

What is safe to say is that electric vehicles such as the Renault Zoe are certainly catching up and are becoming a real alternative to the ‘gas guzzlers’ we’ve become so used to. It’s just a shame that the cost of renting the battery is still somewhat high.

Since BMW crippled Rover and retained the Mini brand in 2000, Britain’s long cherished car has been gaining a little weight in its old age.

The new redesign and revival of the Mini was welcomed by the masses, and sold in huge numbers. The demand for the car was so high that the price of used cars was even higher than a brand new one because production just couldn’t keep up.

The New Mini (2000 -)

The new Mini kept the charm of the old one, it was small, quirky and great fun to drive and being from BWM it had exceptional build quality. And most of all, it still resembled the much loved iconic Mini of years gone by.

However, fast forward ten years and things have changed a little.

Mini Countryman (2010 -)

The Mini Countryman was released on sale in the UK in 2010 and had seemingly grown a couple more doors and really piled on the pounds.

This all new variant of the Mini had entered the ring to rival cars in the small family car sector, such as the VW Golf and even BMWs own 1 series. This new Mini offered a lot more interior space as well as the practicality of having those rear doors for the shopping and the kids and is even being offered with a 4 wheel drive system.

Love it or hate it, BMW sold over 40,000 of these things just in the first few months. Which may explain why we now have this:

The new Mini Paceman.

Mini Paceman (2013 -)

That’s Paceman, not Pac-man. Like Clubman but with pace. You get the idea.

In essence is the Mini Countryman, in a 3 door version. So what they’ve done is taken the over inflated mini, and taken away it’s practicality to give us a kind of sporty looking obese monster.

Talk about cars not knowing what they’re supposed to be. It’s seems to be becoming a trend these days, cars with an identity crisis. Trying to be everything at once, and ending up doing everything badly.

Take the Mini Paceman. It’s quite clearly just been through a chop shop where they’ve taken the front end off a BMW, the back end off a Range Rover Evoque and bolted them together. You can imagine exactly what the concept meeting was like. BMW bosses sitting around pulling out car parts from a hat.

Dont get me wrong, I really do like the look of this car, and I love the New Range Rover Evoque too, but to say that this is a direct competitor doesn’t make much sense to me, unless they’ve made this thing huge. Just imagine a range rover sized mini. But for a price tag of £30,000, surely you could find something much better to spend that kind of money on.

These cars are still built at the factory in Oxfordshire, however I can’t help but feel that BMW is somehow leavening the British market behind in search of greener pastures with these cars across the pond.

Long Live the Mini (1959 – 2000)

This simple list is designed to help you save time and money by performing a few visual checks before you take your car in for it’s MOT.

Often a car can fail its MOT because one of the bulbs isn’t working, or a wiper blade is too worn or even that there’s no wiper fluid in the tank.

Most garages will not only charge for this part to be replaced, but they’ll charge labour on top of that, meaning your bill could really start to mount up. Not to mention that there may be the hassle of having to book your MOT re-test.

I know all of this because I’ve been caught short myself. And what would have cost me a fiver to order online and fit myself, ended up costing me an extra twenty at the Garage.

The checklist as it is cleverly named should only take you a Minute or Two.

The Minute Or Two check

1.         Headlights and indicators

Check that all of your car’s lights function properly – headlights, sidelights, rear lights, hazard lights and indicators.

2.         Brake lights

Press the brake pedal and ask a friend to check that the rear brake lights come on – including any supplementary brake strip light. Alternatively, carefully reverse up to a reflective surface (window, wall or garage door) and look behind to see for yourself.

3.         Number plate

Make sure that the number plate is clean and legible – even a quick wipe with a cloth can make a difference. The font and spacing of letters must also comply with legal requirements to be passed by the MOT station.

4.         Wheels and tyres

Check that wheels and tyres are undamaged. The minimum legal tyre tread depth is 1.6mm and any tyres with less than this will be marked as an MOT ‘fail’ (though it’s recommended that tyres are changed when tread reaches 3mm).  If you’re in doubt about how much tread is left on a tyre, your local manufacturer main dealer can check for you. The dealer can also advise on the type of tyre that is right for your car if a replacement is required.

5.         Seats and seatbelts

The driver’s seat should adjust forwards and backwards and all seatbelts should be in good, working order. Test movement of the seat and inspect the seatbelt’s full length for damage. Tug sharply on all seatbelts to check that they react as they’re supposed to if you have to brake severely.

They save your life in a crash, but only if they work properly – inspect the full length for damage and tug sharply on all the seatbelts to check that they react as they’re supposed if you have to brake severely.

6.         Windscreen

Check the view out of the front of the car for damage – any damage larger than 40mm will cause a ‘fail’, as will any damage wider than 10mm in the ‘swept’ area of the windscreen in front of the driver.

7.         Windscreen wipers

Make sure your wipers are able to keep your windscreen clean – any tears or holes in the wiper rubber can be an MOT fail.

8.         Screenwash

Top up the washer bottle before taking the car in for a test – something as simple as an empty container can cause an MOT fail.

9.         Horn

Give a short blast of the horn – if it doesn’t work, your dealer will need to repair or replace it.

10.       Fuel and engine oil

Make sure your car is filled with enough fuel and engine oil – you can be turned away from the MOT without suitable levels of either, both of which are required by the dealership when running the car to test its emissions levels. If you are unsure about the type of oil that should be used, ask your manufacturer main dealer.

Note: When checking fluid levels and handling parts that could be become hot to the touch (eg bulbs) it’s always best to ensure that the vehicle has had an opportunity to cool down fully.

Full details are available at: http://passmymot.com/

Under new laws, it could see that younger drivers are;

1. Made to spend at least one year learning to drive before taking their actual test.
2. Have their ‘probationary’ period extended to three years (instead of the current two).
3. Be subject to a curfew.

The inescapable fact is that a fifth of road accidents resulting in death or serious injury involve drivers under the age of 24. Which is a significant proportion, especially considering that younger drivers only account for an eighth of all drivers on the road.

Official statistics show the risk of accidents is significantly raised at night time and, at the meeting, the Association of British Insurers raised the possibility of a curfew for drivers aged 17 to 24.

At the moment, newly qualified drivers can be banned from the road for amassing six – rather than the usual 12 – penalty points. This “probationary period” could be extended from two to three years.

Another idea discussed was limiting the number of passengers young motorists can carry in their car and a zero-alcohol limit.

Currently drivers can take their test as soon as they are 17, but ministers are looking at creating a minimum learning period, possibly of six months or a year, to give them more on-the-road experience.

Learners could also take lessons on motorways.

Anything that will make the road’s safer, and reduce the risk of accident, injury and death is a good thing. Making the learning process cover travel on Motorways in my opinion is essential.

At the end of the day, you only really learn to drive once you’ve passed your test. It’s an entirely different matter when you’re out there on your own and are relying solely on your own judgement.

What this will also mean is that it will (if it works) drive down the cost of insurance for everyone (in theory, but less likely in practice) which at times like these would be a welcome sight.

The average annual insurance premium for a 17 to 18-year-old road-users is more than £1,800. This figure is set to rise every year, as motoring becomes more and more expensive.

Transport ministers and insurance bosses held talks in March on how to improve safety, with a full government green paper outlining possible future legislation to be published later in the spring.

In the lead unsurprisingly are Audi Drivers with 24% of them badly parked which works out as nearly 1 in 4. Whereas the best parked cars have been named as Land Rover and Rover.

The results come from a study of  more than 8,000 cars were analysed during February by online company www.StressFreeAirportParking.com, the UK’s biggest provider of ‘meet and greet’ parking at UK airports.

The company looked at cars parked in various city centre and out-of-town shopping centre car parks. Allowing for the proportion of each car marque on Britain’s road.

Nearly one in four Audi car drivers (24 per cent) were parked badly, compared to one in six Mercedes drivers (16.6 %) and one in seven Mazda motorists  (14.3%). They were followed by Lexus (11.5%), Jaguar (9.6%), Vauxhall (8.6%), Suzuki (8.3%), SEAT (8.1%), Ford (7.9%) and BMW (7.6%).

Best parkers were those in a Land Rover 4X4 with just 2.6% of owners parking badly, followed by Rover (3.2%), Skoda (3.3%), Citroen (3.8%) and Kia (3.9%).

And the award for the worst parked car goes to the Vauxhall Vectra, with the Ford Transit coming in at a close second. Shortly followed by the Ford Focus, Audi A6 and the Volkswagen Golf.

The report goes on to say that the drivers behind the wheels of large family estates, big multi-purpose vehicles (MPVs) and 4X4s among the best performers, a startling new study reveals today and not those of small family cars and super minis as you would expect. In fact, they are proving themselves to be the absolute worst at parking by straddling white lines, sticking out of bays or sitting askew.

Ironically, despite having the advantage of more space in which to manoeuvre between the white lines of a parking bay, it was drivers of ‘small family cars’ should have no problem slipping in between the white lines of a standard parking bay.

Yet, when ranked by size of car, they came out as the worst parking offenders with 1 in 7 (14.5%) badly parked, followed by vans (12.0%) and then super minis (11.3%)

By contrast the best parkers were drivers of big estate cars with only 1 in 22 (4.4%) badly parked, followed by multi-purpose vehicles (6.3%), compact executive cars (6.3%) and 4X4s.

The Results

Best Parked Cars (By Brand)

1. Land Rover 2.6%
2. Rover  3.2%
3. Skoda 3.3%
4. Citroen 3.8%
5. Kia 3.9%

Best parked cars (By class)

1. Small Family Car 14.5%
2. Van 12.0%
3. Supermini 11.3%
4. Executive 8.2%
5. Large Family Car 8.2%
6. Compact 6.9%
7. 4×4 6.3%
8. Compact Executive 6.3%
9. Multi Purpose Vehicle 6.3%
10. Estate 4.4%

Worst Parked Cars (By brand)

1. Audi 24%
2. Mercedes-Benz 16.6%
3. Mazda 13.5%
4. Lexus 11.5%
5. Jaguar 9.6%
6. Vauxhall 8.6%
7. Suzuki 8.3%
8. SEAT 8.1%
9. Ford 7.9%
10. BMW 7.6%

Source: stressfreeairportparking.com

The changes will only apply to vehicles that have certain systems fitted and will expect more modern cars to meet higher standards. Which means that in theory these new test criteria will not cost you any more money, however it does now mean that your car will have more that it can fail on.

Changes include, ensuring that Airbags, ABS and Traction control are operational, that there are no warning lights (such as check engine light) and that all of the lights on the dashboard are working correctly. Put simply, if your car’s got it, or it came off the assembly line with it – It has to be present and working correctly.

That’s all fine for relatively new cars, but for the average used car that could prove very expensive.

I’m a pretty responsible driver, and I take very good care of my cars – It’s more of a hobby for me. But there are things that I always thought of little niggling issues that I just never bothered to fix, that would have now meant that my cars would have failed their MOT’s.

One of my cars, the driver’s seat would only lock in the furthest back position, otherwise it would just roll backwards and forwards. Which for me at 6ft was never a problem, as it’s where I had my seat anyway. But now that would cause it to fail its MOT.

Another of my cars had a bulb out on the dashboard illumination. I could always see what speed I was going, but at night time I always had to hope for the best for my fuel and engine temperature. I actually looked at fixing this one myself, but in order to get to the bulb, the entire dash and steering column would have had to have come out. So I can only imagine how much that would have cost me.

What the changes also mean is that in 10 months time I’m going to have to fork out a fortune for a new catalytic converter for my current car. I’ve known for a while that I’ve needed a new one, but haven’t exactly had the money to go and get it sorted.  It’s not severely affected my car’s emissions, and it’s not a legal requirement for me to even have one. But I can smell it needs changing, and because I have one, it means that my next MOT is going to cost me at least a good £200 more than it would have last time to replace a non vital part of the car.

The largest issue for me with these changes is that it’s going to mean that cars where the airbags have been deployed, and then not replaced and deactivated (Because they cost more than the car is worth to do so) will now no longer be deemed road worthy.

I’ve owned such cars myself, and have had friends and family who have also done the same thing. Insurance companies write off a great number of older vehicles that have been involved in accidents, even if they only need cosmetic work doing to them because of how expensive airbags are to replace.

It allowed me to pick up perfectly safe and road worthy vehicles at a fraction of the cost, which with the cost of motoring as it is, was a huge bonus. But the changes mean that these cars would essentially now just become scrap metal. Whereas a car which was built without airbags in the first place would be perfectly acceptable to still be driving around in.

The point is, that things that would have previously come up as an advisory notifications will now mean that vehicles will fail MOT’S. Meaning it’s going to cost motorists a lot of money to fix all these non essential issues with their cars, at a time where money is very tight for the whole country.

I’m all for progressive change and ensuring that all cars are safer, but in my opinion this hasn’t been thought through enough. The point of an MOT means that vehicles are tested to see whether they are road worthy.  Therefore it covers the minimum standard of how any car should perform. Previously that standard was across the board, whereas now different standards are being applied to different vehicles.

Why is it so essential to my car being road worthy to know that the little wipers on my headlights are working? Most cars don’t even have them.

The defence that I’ve heard of this is; that if you’re a responsible motorist and have things fixed if there’s a warning light or when they go wrong, then you’ll have no problem.

To which I argue, as long as my vehicle is safe, and at no more risk to myself, other road users, property or environment, then it’s my choice whether I have all other things fixed.

Yes these changes are going to ensure that the standards of cars on the roads are better, and yes that’s a good thing. But it’s going to cost the motorist and not only that but it’s going to hit the younger drivers hardest, and that couldn’t have come at a worse time.

A full list of these ridiculous changes can be found on the VOSA website.

Earlier this week they published their latest results for a number of new vehicles, shedding light on a continuing trend.

In addition to their now commonly awarded 5 stars, NCAP offer a series of rewards for manufacturers who exceed norms and provide outstanding new safety technology. This week, 5 such awards were given to Skoda for new technology now fitted in their new Octavia.

The awards were given for;

• Lane Assist:  A rear view mirror mounted camera will read the road ahead and engage the power steering to offer slight steering correction if any lane departure is expected.
• Multi Collision Breaking: A system which will fully apply the vehicles breaks after the air bags have been deployed so as to reduce the risk or forces involved in a secondary collision.
• Crew Protect Assist: If an emergency manoeuvre is anticipated, the car will prepare the brakes for hard breaking, and engage the seat belt pre-tensioners to one of two levels depending upon severity.
• Front Assist: Front mounted radar will detect any object in front of the vehicle and calculate braking distance and likelihood of collision and either offer an audible warning or engage the brakes.

This innovative technology has been fitted to parent company Volkswagen’s Passat for the past two years and is slowly being installed on the respective Seat, Audi and Skoda platforms.

The trend with safety technology (or any new tech for that matter) in vehicles, is that it tends to first appear on higher end or luxury vehicles and then over time as technology becomes cheaper to produce, it becomes more cost effective for manufactures to use this same technology on their smaller or cheaper vehicles, becoming standard equipment. You only need to look at air bags and ABS, both of which first appeared on the Mercedes S Class but are now standard on nearly every new vehicle produced within Europe.

The recently published NCAP results also gave safety results for the new Renault Zoe super mini. This latest addition to Renault’s range of electric vehicles will be on sale in summer 2013. The Zoe was awarded the highest rating of 5 Euro NCAP stars, and scored 85% for safety assisting technology.

It includes as standard, an electronic stability program as well as a speed assistance program, which allows the driver to manually set the maximum speed of the vehicle at any given time.

Electronic Stability programs and traction control systems were first introduced by BMW and Mercedes, and have now both become common place to be included as standard equipment on new vehicles, as is seen with the Zoe.

The trend towards more collaborative working among manufacturers in sharing R&D costs, alongside pressure to perform in the NCAP testing, seems to be helping drive these emergent technologies into the mass market pretty quickly. The technology earning special recognition for Skoda this week could soon be on a number of the vehicles you might be looking to buy.

The emergence of a range of smaller diesels (some of which we have reviewed on DriveStart) offer private vehicle buyers a viable alternative. The economy conscious motorist can therefore experience MPG figures that rise into the high 60’s, often putting their petrol powered cousins in the shade.

Step-up the Audi 1.2 TFSI engine, which packs a punch with its 105ps power output but still delivers combined MPG of 57.6. This combination of power and economy wrapped up in the popular A3 body will certainly be attractive to some; especially those who appreciate everything else that comes included with the Audi offering. Having said that near £18k to get one on the road will send a lot of buyers looking around for alternatives.

Certainly, if you want to stick with an alternative within the Volkswagen Audi Group – the new Skoda Rapid 1.2TSI GreenTech, offers you the same 105PS power output and the same 0-62mph acceleration speed.  Crucially, however, the Rapid offers you a much improved safety rating from EuroNCAP over the A3 whilst allowing you to pocket quite a large amount of change!

Whether you are in the market right now or not, it looks like the petrol vs diesel debate has got a lot more miles in the tank.