GRA wrote:For H2/FCEVs, neither is there yet; even so, the average speed and minimal amount of time spent refueling reinforce the advantages for road trips of long range combined with rapid energy replacement, commensurate with liquid-fueled ICEs.
Compared to what? A comparably-priced Tesla Model 3 (which can likely be built at a profit at that price, unlike the Toyota Mirai), could make this trip with only two stops with air conditioning and likely would get there faster. The fuel for the trip would likely cost less than about 1/4 as much, even paying the standard Supercharger rates.
Reg, don't be silly. Any vehicle with a longer range and faster refueling, capable of the same speed, will arrive first if one or more stops is required. The only thing that prevented the Mirai from getting there even faster is the current sparsity of fueling stations, which requires driving at slower speeds to stretch the range to reach them. As I stated in the post you are quoting,
As always, this example makes clear that any AFV is dependent on an adequate fueling infrastructure as well as the price of that fuel for its commercial viability.
This is no different than any other vehicle, regardless of its energy source. Or are you claiming that such speed compromises don't have to be practiced by Tesla drivers wherever the SC infrastructure is too sparse for the range? You know better, but here's a current example from the lack of an SC on I-10 in Ft. Stockton, TX:
With my old P85 each trip through the area cost me about 3 hours of my life.
Forced to take the Jeep most trips, starting in early 2014. After 4 years I decided to punt and buy the bigger battery.
With the new 100D it only costs me about 30 minutes per trip - plus the $110,000 of course
As to current costs being too high, did you expect an argument from me? I've been consistently saying that the price of fuel, of fuel cell stacks, and fueling infrastructure must come down for H2/FCEVs to be commercially viable. You know this, or should, because I've said it directly to you numerous times. FCEVs are already operationally viable, if
the necessary fueling infrastructure is available, because they currently provide 80-90% of the same capability as ICEs, with more to come, and longer lifespans with less degradation than BEVs. BEVs are down in the 50-70% range owing to the life/degradation issues, but improving as well.