User avatar
evnow
Moderator
Posts: 11323
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:41 am
Delivery Date: 25 Feb 2011
Leaf Number: 303
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Wed Jun 18, 2014 2:19 pm

drees wrote:RAV4-EV: 0.44 kWh/mi * 0.4 lbs CO2 / kWh = 0.176 lbs CO2 / mi
LEAF: 0.3 kWh/mi * 0.4 lbs CO2 / kWh = 0.12 lbs CO2 / mi

Tuscon FCEV: 0.02 kg H2 / mi * 24 lbs CO2 / kg = 0.48 lbs CO2 / mi

Did I make a mistake or is the Tuscon FCEV 3 times worse than the RAV4-EV in terms of CO2 emissions per mile?

Thanks for this. To me this is all we need to know.

BTW, in this PNW - my "green" electricity is 100% renewable. But even avg CA electricity makes a BEV so much better than FCEV.

Ofcourse, FCEV will be zero Carbon too if made only from "green" electricity. But the problem is, we need 3 times the electricity to go the same distance in FCEV compared to BEV.
1st Leaf : 2/28/2011 to 5/6/2013
2nd Leaf : 5/4/2013 to 3/21/2017
Volt : 3/25/2017 to ?

GRA
Posts: 6756
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Wed Jun 18, 2014 5:56 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:You can find similar reality-check quotes about the exorbitant cost per ton of CO2 reduction due to California's promotion of EVs, compared to using the same money for any number of more cost effective measures. Of course, those calcs ignore the effects of reductions due to EVs sold outside California, but the fact remains that subsidizing EVs is far more expensive than reducing Carbon/CO2 through many other methods. If anyone wants to be smug about your transportation GHG emissions, get out of your car and walk, bike or take public transit, and don't fly or drive.
He was responding to a post which said nothing about the dollar cost of CO2 reduction. The post was primarily about the environmental damage caused by producing and fueling the Hyundai Tuscon FCEV compared with producing and fueling the Nissan LEAF considering the very small amount of additional utility provided.

The facts remain:
- Producing each Hyundai Tuscon FCEV does massively more damage to the environment than does producing each Nissan LEAF EV.
- Construction of fueling infrastructure for the Hyundai Tuscon FCEV is massively more damaging to the environment than construction of fast-charge fueling infrastructure to provide the equivalent number of vehicle-miles with the Nissan LEAF.
- Each mile driven in the Hyundai Tuscon FCEV does about 4X the environmental damage that driving the same mile in the Nissan LEAF would do.

Far from being the next progression in environmentally-friendly vehicle technology that Hyundai promotes it to be, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles are a huge step backwards for our environment. You can dance around these unfortunate facts all you want, but that is the reality today.

All of this could be forgiven if there was some future crossover point between the two technologies. It is a real stretch to try to promote that idea.

As has been pointed out in the H2 and FCEV topic, it's entirely possible for FCEVs to beat BEVs as far as GHG emissions, including all externalities. But whether they do or not, and whether they are more energy efficient than BEVs (they're not) isn't the point. The point is that either is better environmentally than ICEs, but unless they provide sufficient perceived capability and value to the general public, they won't be bought. At the moment, neither can do so at a price the general public is willing to pay, with or without subsidies (I assume, Reg, that given the studies I referenced in the other thread you're no longer claiming that the public will buy these cars sans subsidies?).

One or the other tech, or both, will have to succeed if we're going to get off fossil fuels. The only way I believe they can likely do that at current gas prices is by providing capability similar to ICEs, plus something else that the public values. Separate spheres _may_ work this time around, but I have my doubts. And unlike the case one hundred and ten years ago, ICEs aren't just one of three possible technologies all at similar levels of development; they have not only been the dominant technology for a century, but their capabilities and pace have woven themselves into the social fabric, especially in this country.

At the moment, BEVs are further away from matching ICE capabilities and fitting into that social fabric with minimal change than FCEVs are. Maybe BEVs will surge ahead faster in the coming years, or maybe not. Or maybe the social fabric will change significantly away from the one made possible if not essential by ICEs, which would weight things more in favor of BEVs. Although I personally think it's preferable, I'm not counting on the latter. People are much more inclined to continue along the same path even with its limitations, because it's familiar. Or as some wise gentlemen wrote some time ago, albeit on a different subject, "all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

FCEVs allow people to change to EVs with the minimal disruption in what they're used to, and absent any dramatic change in the situation, IMO are more likely to find favor with mainstream consumers in this country for that reason. Absolute measures of efficiency are nice to have, but are likely to be less relevant to people than other capabilities, just as many people here are driving BEVs instead of riding a bike (even an E-bike) despite the latter's efficiency and environmental advantages. And now back to the Tucson, because we're veering well into the area covered by the general H2/FCEV topic.
Last edited by GRA on Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5374
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Wed Jun 18, 2014 6:47 pm

GRA wrote:At the moment, neither can do so at a price the general public is willing to pay, with or without subsidies (I assume, Reg, that given the studies I referenced in the other thread you're no longer claiming that the public will buy these cars sans subsidies?).
:?: Nothing in those studies says that BEVs are too expensive for the public to buy. What they indicate is that more people buy them when the subsidies are higher. That shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Carlos Ghosn was very clear to point out that he was putting cars into markets where the subsidies are. It makes the most sense. Simply put, lifetime costs for BEVs are lower than any other option for some applications in some markets. I would have bought our LEAF with or without the subisides. It's still the best choice. That market grows as the vehicles improve.
GRA wrote:At the moment, BEVs are further away from matching ICE capabilities and fitting into that social fabric with minimal change than FCEVs are.
That's a ridiculous statement.
GRA wrote:And now back to the Tucson, because we're veering well into the area covered by the general H2/FCEV topic.
No, only you are veering there. We have been pointing out how environmentally unfriendly this vehicle is relative to the LEAF. Your attempts to convince people that this extremely-highly-subsidized technology is anywhere close to the lightly-subsidized BEV technology is pretty hard to swallow. It's about the most blatant attempt you have yet made to bash BEVs.

Sorry, I don't promote "green" technology that isn't.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

GRA
Posts: 6756
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:21 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:At the moment, neither can do so at a price the general public is willing to pay, with or without subsidies (I assume, Reg, that given the studies I referenced in the other thread you're no longer claiming that the public will buy these cars sans subsidies?).
:?: Nothing in those studies says that BEVs are too expensive for the public to buy. What they indicate is that more people buy them when the subsidies are higher. That shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Carlos Ghosn was very clear to point out that he was putting cars into markets where the subsidies are. It makes the most sense. Simply put, lifetime costs for BEVs are lower than any other option for some applications in some markets. I would have bought our LEAF with or without the subisides. It's still the best choice. That market grows as the vehicles improve.

The most relevant study indicated that over 70% of the California owners/lessees considered the state and California subsidies to be either "very important" or "extremely important" in "Importance of factors that made it possible to buy an EV", with another 30.6% saying that other incentive programs were also very/extremely important, and this was for people of whom only 24% had incomes of less than $100k/year. If you don't think that is indicative of whether the general public would buy these cars without subsidies, I guess we'll just have to disagree.

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:At the moment, BEVs are further away from matching ICE capabilities and fitting into that social fabric with minimal change than FCEVs are.
That's a ridiculous statement.

Since I don't wish to repeat everything that's been discussed in the general H2 thread here, see my posts there for my rationale.

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:And now back to the Tucson, because we're veering well into the area covered by the general H2/FCEV topic.
No, only you are veering there. We have been pointing out how environmentally unfriendly this vehicle is relative to the LEAF. Your attempts to convince people that this extremely-highly-subsidized technology is anywhere close to the lightly-subsidized BEV technology is pretty hard to swallow. It's about the most blatant attempt you have yet made to bash BEVs.

Reg, despite being accused of it on several occasions, I've never made any attempt to bash BEVs. Or PHEVs, FCEVs or EVs in general, for that matter. I'm perfectly happy to let each find their niche, succeed or fail on their own merits, as I've stated repeatedly in the other thread. Re the level of subsidies, see the H2 thread or the subsidy thread, as that has already been covered in both places.

RegGuheert wrote:Sorry, I don't promote "green" technology that isn't.

Reg, feel free to promote whichever green technology you want to, and more power to you. In the meantime, via ABG:

"QUICK SPIN - 2015 Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell"

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/18/2015 ... in-review/
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5374
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Thu Jun 19, 2014 3:10 am

GRA wrote:In the meantime, via ABG:

"QUICK SPIN - 2015 Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell"

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/18/2015 ... in-review/
Thanks for the link. There is something seriously wrong with the following quote:
Autoblog wrote:The standard Tucson Limited FWD, with a 2.4-liter combustion engine, tips the scales at 3,294 pounds. Brace yourself, as the Tucson Fuel Cell is a whopping 807 pounds heavier. Hyundai engineers note swapping the gasoline engine for a fuel stack under the front hood is virtually a wash, and the two Kevlar-wrapped fuel tanks don't add much weight. The bulk of the added mass comes from the 24-kW lithium polymer battery pack.
If the battery accounts for "the bulk of the added mass" then it seems clear that Hyundai could have easily made this into a real EV by adding a plug and a charger. But I suspect the reporter has this completely wrong, since I seriously doubt that a sub-1-kWh Lithium Polymer battery weighs anywhere close to 807 pounds. Fifty pounds would be my guess.

And the obvious secondary conclusion is that the fuel-cell system including storage tanks and battery add over 800 pounds to the weight of the vehicle above and beyond what the ICE-drive system and tank weighed. I would argue that a Hyundai Tuscon BEV with a battery over 30kWh would weigh the same and be a better choice for most consumers.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

User avatar
evnow
Moderator
Posts: 11323
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:41 am
Delivery Date: 25 Feb 2011
Leaf Number: 303
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Thu Jun 19, 2014 11:07 am

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:At the moment, BEVs are further away from matching ICE capabilities and fitting into that social fabric with minimal change than FCEVs are.
That's a ridiculous statement.

Indeed it is. To get H2 infrastructure to be anywhere close to ICE, Trillions of $$$$$$$$$$ would need to be spent. For BEV we are only talking an order of magnitude less.
1st Leaf : 2/28/2011 to 5/6/2013
2nd Leaf : 5/4/2013 to 3/21/2017
Volt : 3/25/2017 to ?

GRA
Posts: 6756
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Thu Jun 19, 2014 3:37 pm

evnow wrote:
RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:At the moment, BEVs are further away from matching ICE capabilities and fitting into that social fabric with minimal change than FCEVs are.
That's a ridiculous statement.

Indeed it is. To get H2 infrastructure to be anywhere close to ICE, Trillions of $$$$$$$$$$ would need to be spent. For BEV we are only talking an order of magnitude less.

I was talking about general capabilities and similarity to ICE habits, not the fueling infrastructure. Obviously, building the fueling infrastructure will be expensive and take several decades, just as building the gas station infrastructure did (last year being the 100th anniversary of the first gas station in the U.S. The total at the peak was around 160,000, but has now declined to something over 100,000).

In the "Today the sun rose in the east" news category, via GCR:

"2015 Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell To Earn CA Credits, Not Profits"

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/109 ... ot-profits

As even the article makes clear, this is not exactly a shock.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 6756
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Thu Jun 19, 2014 4:30 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:In the meantime, via ABG:

"QUICK SPIN - 2015 Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell"

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/18/2015 ... in-review/
Thanks for the link. There is something seriously wrong with the following quote:
Autoblog wrote:The standard Tucson Limited FWD, with a 2.4-liter combustion engine, tips the scales at 3,294 pounds. Brace yourself, as the Tucson Fuel Cell is a whopping 807 pounds heavier. Hyundai engineers note swapping the gasoline engine for a fuel stack under the front hood is virtually a wash, and the two Kevlar-wrapped fuel tanks don't add much weight. The bulk of the added mass comes from the 24-kW lithium polymer battery pack.
If the battery accounts for "the bulk of the added mass" then it seems clear that Hyundai could have easily made this into a real EV by adding a plug and a charger. But I suspect the reporter has this completely wrong, since I seriously doubt that a sub-1-kWh Lithium Polymer battery weighs anywhere close to 807 pounds. Fifty pounds would be my guess.

I suspect you're right, or at least more right than the article. If we take the LEAF's battery as typical (I know, it's not a power battery), one kWh in the pack weighs about 28.3 lb., but that's not cooled. Frame weight as a % of total pack weight should decrease as the pack gets bigger (area/volume increasing faster than circumference), so the smaller pack plus cooling should weigh more per kWh than the LEAF. Then there's the knock-on effects of that unsprung weight on the suspension, as well as possibly other changes due to shifts in Cg and/or crash requirements. So, 50 lb. sure, 100 lb. isn't unreasonable, but anything over 200 lb. seems unreasonable.

RegGuheert wrote:And the obvious secondary conclusion is that the fuel-cell system including storage tanks and battery add over 800 pounds to the weight of the vehicle above and beyond what the ICE-drive system and tank weighed. I would argue that a Hyundai Tuscon BEV with a battery over 30kWh would weigh the same and be a better choice for most consumers.

The LEAf's uncooled 24kWh pack weighs 680 lb., so assuming a 30kWh pack of the same design that would add 20-25%, 134-168 lb. or 814-848 lb. total before adding a cooling system. And the range would be about 1/3 of the Tucson FCEV.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5374
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Fri Jun 20, 2014 5:38 am

GRA wrote:In the "Today the sun rose in the east" news category, via GCR:

"2015 Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell To Earn CA Credits, Not Profits"

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/109 ... ot-profits

As even the article makes clear, this is not exactly a shock.
From the article:
Green Car Reports wrote:According to the Ward's article, Hyundai will accumulate the ZEV credits to offset its needs in the future, as the required number of zero-emission vehicles rises in later phases of the program.

Each Tucson Fuel Cell could be worth up to $130,000 in such credits through 2017, according to the complex calculations for valuing ZEV credits.
I don't really understand how these ZEV credits work, but that seems like an obscene amount of government credit to provide. Is that statement accurate? Is it an actual credit, or is it rather an avoidance of some sort of penalty?
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
2011 miles at purchase. 10K miles on Apr 14, 2013. 20K miles (55.7Ah) on Aug 7, 2014, 3K miles (52.0Ah) on Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah) on Feb 8, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

Zythryn
Posts: 898
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:49 am

Re: Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

Fri Jun 20, 2014 6:40 am

As I understand it, the ZEV credits are not paid by the government, they are bought by other manufacturers that are not building up to the threshold set by CA CARB board.
Fuel cell vehicles get 9 credits per vehicle. So the manufacture can use those to meet the threshold and if they surpass them, can sell them to other manufacturers.
Previous owner of Prius, Volt & Leaf
Current owner of Model S
http://www.netzeromn.com

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”