User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5871
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:09 pm

If this imagined "convergence" is so "rapid", then I wonder why the DOE feels compelled to kick the can 22 YEARS down the road. Perhaps because when Toyota kicked that can down the road 15 to 20 years back in 2005, their prediction failed miserably.

I'm not about to pay for this so-called research, but I will point out some obvious nonsense reported in the news article:
- BEVs with a range of only 50 miles will be sold in 2040.
- BEVs with a range of over 300 miles will not be sold in 2040.
- BEV refueling infrastructure will somehow become more expensive in the future than building H2 refueling stations.
- BEVs will somehow have a higher level of "inconvenience" in 2040 than a vehicle which cannot be refueled at home.
- BEVs will have a higher TCO in 2040 even though they will likely use about half as much fuel and the cost of that fuel for homeowners is, and always will be, limited by the cost of photovoltaics and, eventually, batteries.

I'm sorry, but there is no reason to think this report is anything more than the result of an effort funded to obtain a desired conclusion by some entity who wants fuel cell vehicles to eventually be successful in the U.S. Don't expect anyone to stand up and salute this one.

Frankly, I wonder if H2 FCVs will have ANY benefits over BEVs in the year 2040 for ANY applications.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
10K miles: Apr 14, 2013, 20K miles (55.7Ah): Aug 7, 2014, 30K miles (52.0Ah): Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah): Feb 8, 2017, 50K miles (47.2Ah): Dec 7, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

SageBrush
Posts: 1737
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sun Jan 14, 2018 9:57 pm

Yep.

I currently pay 2.5 cents a kWh for my home PV electricity, and there is no reason to think the price is heading up -- scum in the White House or not. That works out to ~ 0.5 cents a mile, compared to 16 cents a mile for the Mirai today. I can easily imagine fuel cell stacks getting better, cheaper, and more reliable, but I don't see ANY pathway that will make hydrogen cheaper than I pay today, or anything close.

It will also be probably true that EVs will continue to get cheaper as batteries improve in energy density*. A 2040 FCV may compare favorably with a 2010 Model S price wise, but not a $25k, 300 mile Model 3 in 2025.

It is also worth mentioning that the article under discussion specifically excluded infrastructure costs from their analysis. Tsk, tsk.

* Elon has said that he will be disappointed if his battery cost is over $100 a kWh by 2020. It is thought to be ~ $130 a kWh today. $50 a kWh is not far fetched at all by 2030 and then a 250 mile EV will include $3000 worth of batteries. And by then it seems likely that 800v / 10 minute charging for trips will be widely available, thus erasing the one single advantage the H2 dream has clung on to.
2013 Model 'S' with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California with 63.9 Ahr after 22k miles
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado

WetEV
Posts: 1865
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jan 15, 2018 5:58 am

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 0X17303789

Abstract

Electric taxis have the potential to improve urban air quality and save driver’s energy expenditure. Although battery electric vehicles (BEVs) have drawbacks such as the limited range and charging inconvenience, technological progress has been presenting promising potential for electric taxis. Many cities around the world including New York City, USA are taking initiatives to replace gasoline taxis with plug-in electric vehicles. This paper extracts ten variables from the trip data of the New York City yellow taxis to represent their spatial-temporal travel patterns in terms of driver-shift, travel demand and dwell, and examines the implications of these driving patterns on the BEV taxi feasibility. The BEV feasibility of a taxi is quantified as the percentage of occupied trips that can be completed by BEVs of a given driving range during a year. It is found that the currently deployed 280 public charging stations in New York City are far from sufficient to support a large BEV taxi fleet. However, adding merely 372 new charging stations at various locations where taxis frequently dwell can potentially make BEVs with 200- and 300-mile ranges feasible for more than half of the taxi fleet. The results also show that taxis with certain characteristics are more suitable for switching to BEV-200 or BEV-300, such as fewer daily shifts, fewer drivers assigned to the taxi, shorter daily driving distance, fewer daily dwells but longer dwelling time, and higher likelihood to dwell at the borough of Manhattan.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

lorenfb
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:07 am

All should just ignore this thread and maybe the hyperbolic FCEV posts will diminish!

WetEV
Posts: 1865
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:56 am

lorenfb wrote:All should just ignore this thread and maybe the hyperbolic FCEV posts will diminish!


Been tried already. Didn't work.

Maybe we should try the Plössl strategy.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

lorenfb
Posts: 1495
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jan 15, 2018 10:08 am

WetEV wrote:
lorenfb wrote:All should just ignore this thread and maybe the hyperbolic FCEV posts will diminish!


Been tried already. Didn't work.

Maybe we should try the Plössl strategy.


Yes, for some, e.g. a FCEV evangelist, being myopic can be problematic.

GRA
Posts: 7925
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:32 pm

lorenfb wrote:
WetEV wrote:
lorenfb wrote:All should just ignore this thread and maybe the hyperbolic FCEV posts will diminish!


Been tried already. Didn't work.

Maybe we should try the Plössl strategy.


Yes, for some, e.g. a FCEV evangelist, being myopic can be problematic.

Are there any such here? I'm unaware of anyone here who is "a zealous advocate" of H2/FCEVs. Many people here have accused me of being one, but as I've often said that both H2 and FCEVs will need to reduce their costs significantly and improve their looks and performance as well as build the infrastructure needed to support them before they have a chance to succeed, and even then there's no guarantee that BEVs (or biofuels) won't get to the point where they can provide full replacements in both cost and performance for ICEs first, that seems to me to fall well below "zealous advocate", certainly by the standards of some BEV enthusiasts here who met that criteria.

What I am and remain is a supporter of any AFV tech that has the potential to fully replace fossil fuels for transportation, until such time as one or more of them demonstrate they can do so at a comparable price. None of the AFV techs are there yet, so R&D/limited deployment should proceed, even though we will almost certainly waste semi-large amounts of money on one or more of them (and already have on all three).
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.

WetEV
Posts: 1865
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:52 pm

GRA wrote:
lorenfb wrote:Yes, for some, e.g. a FCEV evangelist, being myopic can be problematic.


Are there any such here? I'm unaware of anyone here who is "a zealous advocate" of H2/FCEVs.


I think I am more pro H2/FCEVs than most of the readership.

Of your 7700 posts, how many are in the H2/FCEV category?

As for biofuels:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2430252/

"If as predicted we look to use biofuels to satisfy twenty percent of the growing demand for oil products, there will be nothing left to eat. To grant enormous subsidies for biofuel production is morally unacceptable and irresponsible.”
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red

GRA
Posts: 7925
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:37 pm

WetEV wrote:
GRA wrote:
lorenfb wrote:Yes, for some, e.g. a FCEV evangelist, being myopic can be problematic.


Are there any such here? I'm unaware of anyone here who is "a zealous advocate" of H2/FCEVs.


I think I am more pro H2/FCEVs than most of the readership.

Of your 7700 posts, how many are in the H2/FCEV category?

No idea. There used to be a note on your personal profile that showed in which topic the largest number of posts were made, but it seems to have disappeared, or at least I couldn't find it. Anyone know where it is now?

WetEV wrote:As for biofuels:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2430252/

"If as predicted we look to use biofuels to satisfy twenty percent of the growing demand for oil products, there will be nothing left to eat. To grant enormous subsidies for biofuel production is morally unacceptable and irresponsible.”

Which is why I look to biofuels from algae in sea farms as most likely to be the only sustainable large-scale method that will not reduce food production, and there's absolutely no guarantee that they'll work out all the problems that will be required.
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: 7925
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:37 pm

Via GCC:
Shell, ITM Power to build world’s largest hydrogen electrolysis plant in Germany; €20M REFHYNE project
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/01/20180118-refhyne.html

. . . With a peak capacity of 10 megawatts, the hydrogen will be used for the processing and upgrading of products at the refinery’s Wesseling site as well as testing the technology and exploring application in other sectors.

The European partner consortium of Shell, ITM Power, SINTEF, thinkstep and Element Energy has now secured €10 million (US$12.2 million) in funding from the European Fuel Cell Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH) for this project, which is labeled REFHYNE. The project’s total investment, including integration into the refinery, is approximately €20 million.

Currently the Rheinland refinery, Germany’s largest, requires approximately 180,000 tons of hydrogen annually. The electrolyzer will provide bulk quantities of hydrogen to the refinery’s hydrogen pipeline system (currently supplied by two steam methane reformers). The new facility will be able to produce an additional 1,300 tonnes of hydrogen per year, which can be fully integrated into the refinery processes, such as for the desulfurization of conventional fuels.

The electrolyzer will be operated in a highly responsive mode, helping to balance the refinery’s internal electricity grid and also selling Primary Control Reserve service to the German Transmission System Operators.

Detailed technical planning and the approval process will now begin. The plant is scheduled to be in operation in 2020 and will be the first industrial-scale test of the polymer electrolyte membrane technology process. . . .

The combination of hydrogen sales to the refinery and balancing payments create a business case which justifies the installation. The business case will be evaluated in detail in a 2-year campaign of techno-economic and environmental analysis.

The REFHYNE business model is replicable in markets with a similar regulatory structure to Germany. However, to expand this market to a GW scale, new business models will be needed. These will include valuing green hydrogen as an input to industrial processes (to meet carbon policy targets) and also on sales to H2 mobility markets. . . .
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.

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”