GRA
Posts: 8676
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:38 pm

Via GCC:
PowerCell Sweden receives first marine order for two S3 prototype stacks; on-board H2 production via solar electricity
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/11 ... rcell.html

PowerCell Sweden AB has received the first marine order for two PowerCell S3 prototype stacks, which Swiss Hydrogen will install on a ship powered by photovoltaics. . . .

The ship will be supplied with a system that encompasses on-board production of hydrogen gas from solar electricity, storage of hydrogen gas and two fuel cells each one 30 kW, which amounts to 80 hp in total. . . .

More countries are demanding fossil-free energy for marine fields of application. The Netherlands has decided to develop fossil-free ferries. Norway, that was an early user of battery operations, is far advanced in establishing fuel cell-powered ships. Over the next few years car ferries, passenger ferries and a fishing boat will be powered by fuel cell technology in Norway.
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
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10074
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:33 am

Dear hydrogen folks,

It appears the "gig is up". But, don't worry; the state of California will still be giving uber-favorable status to hydrogen cars (over EVs), while sucking tens of millions in taxpayer fund for hydrogen stations for the next ten years or more. They will get their hands on oodles of the VW "dieselgate" bucks, and lots more.


https://electrek.co/2016/11/07/toyota-l ... s-failing/


"Now one of the most prominent proponents of hydrogen fuel cell cars, Toyota, is reportedly planning to mass produce battery-powered long-range electric cars by 2020."

"The news comes as Toyota is having difficulties selling the Mirai, its hydrogen cars, in the US. Despite cutting the price on several occasions, with now a lease at only $350 (down from $500) in California, the Japanese automaker can’t find a market for the vehicle and only delivered 782 units since it started deliveries last year – and that’s including the state buying dozens of them for their own fleets to justify the millions of dollars spent on refuelling infrastructure.he hydrogen lobby will be still cashing checks from the state of California for a decade or more."

lorenfb
Posts: 1787
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 Nov 07, 2016 10:11 am

TonyWilliams wrote:Dear hydrogen folks,

It appears the "gig is up". But, don't worry; the state of California will still be giving uber-favorable status to hydrogen cars (over EVs), while sucking tens of millions in taxpayer fund for hydrogen stations for the next ten years or more. They will get their hands on oodles of the VW "dieselgate" bucks, and lots more.


https://electrek.co/2016/11/07/toyota-l ... s-failing/


"Now one of the most prominent proponents of hydrogen fuel cell cars, Toyota, is reportedly planning to mass produce battery-powered long-range electric cars by 2020."

"The news comes as Toyota is having difficulties selling the Mirai, its hydrogen cars, in the US. Despite cutting the price on several occasions, with now a lease at only $350 (down from $500) in California, the Japanese automaker can’t find a market for the vehicle and only delivered 782 units since it started deliveries last year – and that’s including the state buying dozens of them for their own fleets to justify the millions of dollars spent on refuelling infrastructure.he hydrogen lobby will be still cashing checks from the state of California for a decade or more."


As I posted in the Mirai thread:

Like some, you've surmised more than the reality, i.e. Toyota for the near term will "push" the hybrid
to its next phase, a BEV, as an interim small market vehicle as will most automotive OEMs. As do most
automotive OEMs, Toyota views a long term "seamless" transition for the typical ICEV consumer as a FCEV.
Leaf SL MY 9/13: 66K miles, 50 Ahrs, 5.2 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=78, L2 charges to 100% > 1000, max battery temp < 95F, min discharge point > 20 Ahrs

ydnas7
Posts: 590
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:57 am

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:00 pm

In Toyota timing, this is double fast, Basically 3 years to make EVs for compliance purposes. They have no choice, now that China is committing to a ZEV program, the rules of which are, sell EVs, and/or buy credits, and/or pay fines and/or limit ICE sales.

But how for Toyota to turn to EVs while saving face for it Hydrogen loving hybrid leadership? They must always keep saying H2 is the future, even as their EV sales ramp up.

One other note, Subaru is old school EV pioneer, Subaru R1e then G4e then Stella EV were pioneering EV before the effect of Toyota share ownership and Mitsubishi iMiEV competition took its toll. My prediction is that Toyota will joint venture an EV with Subaru (similar to Toyota 86 / Subaru BRZ partnership). And that the resulting product will be surprising excellent.

I also predict a mediocre compliance EV based upon the Toyota Yaris.

rcm4453
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 5:35 pm
Leaf Number: 304133
Location: Wayzata, MN

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:02 pm

lorenfb wrote:
TonyWilliams wrote:Dear hydrogen folks,

It appears the "gig is up". But, don't worry; the state of California will still be giving uber-favorable status to hydrogen cars (over EVs), while sucking tens of millions in taxpayer fund for hydrogen stations for the next ten years or more. They will get their hands on oodles of the VW "dieselgate" bucks, and lots more.


https://electrek.co/2016/11/07/toyota-l ... s-failing/


"Now one of the most prominent proponents of hydrogen fuel cell cars, Toyota, is reportedly planning to mass produce battery-powered long-range electric cars by 2020."

"The news comes as Toyota is having difficulties selling the Mirai, its hydrogen cars, in the US. Despite cutting the price on several occasions, with now a lease at only $350 (down from $500) in California, the Japanese automaker can’t find a market for the vehicle and only delivered 782 units since it started deliveries last year – and that’s including the state buying dozens of them for their own fleets to justify the millions of dollars spent on refuelling infrastructure.he hydrogen lobby will be still cashing checks from the state of California for a decade or more."


As I posted in the Mirai thread:

Like some, you've surmised more than the reality, i.e. Toyota for the near term will "push" the hybrid
to its next phase, a BEV, as an interim small market vehicle as will most automotive OEMs. As do most
automotive OEMs, Toyota views a long term "seamless" transition for the typical ICEV consumer as a FCEV.



I highly doubt the long term solution will be a FCEV for the following reasons:

- It will take way too many years to build an H2 infrastructure that reaches all the cities throughout the U.S. By the time this happens BEVs will have advanced to provide long enough range, fast enough quick charging, superior performance and all this at a more completive price then FCEVs.

- Price of H2 is too high, how long before it's as cheap as gasoline? ($2/gal equivalent) What gas station owners are going to want to try and sell H2?

I see people continuing to drive ICEVs, hybrids and PHEVs then slowly transitioning over to BEVs in the next 5 to 10 years.

GRA
Posts: 8676
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Via IEVS:
Chevrolet Colorado ZH2 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Appears At SEMA (w/videos)
http://insideevs.com/chevrolet-colorado ... a-wvideos/
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.

lorenfb
Posts: 1787
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 Nov 07, 2016 10:19 pm

rcm4453 wrote: I highly doubt the long term solution will be a FCEV for the following reasons:


Any company, e.g. Tesla, relying on a single technology to maintain long term growth and not maintaining an R&D
effort to transition to new technologies, e.g. FCEVs, as they become competitive is very likely to become marginal
or non-existent, e.g. Kodak, Blackberry, IBM (marginal), HP (marginal), Intel (marginal compared to Qualcomm),
and Microsoft (before the cloud). An automotive OEM would be very naive and negligent to their shareholders to not
maintain a development effort for a FCEV, since it provides the most "transparent" transition from an ICEV for the consumer.
Leaf SL MY 9/13: 66K miles, 50 Ahrs, 5.2 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=78, L2 charges to 100% > 1000, max battery temp < 95F, min discharge point > 20 Ahrs

finman100
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:42 am
Delivery Date: 06 Jun 2014
Location: Albany, OR

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:53 pm

OMG. that is the funniest thing I've read today. thanks for the laugh. wow, the denial of a wasted/failed transportation "fuel" like Hydrogen is so far-fetched. just. wow.
Albany, Oregon
2014 Silver SV with charge/LED package. June 2014, I'm in the EV game!
46,000 miles
17.5 kWh on 100% charge (51-ish Ah), down 1 bar
4.2 miles/kWh average
Best trip: all of 'em. They're all no-gas!

User avatar
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10074
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:58 pm

finman100 wrote:OMG. that is the funniest thing I've read today. thanks for the laugh. wow, the denial of a wasted/failed transportation "fuel" like Hydrogen is so far-fetched. just. wow.


Ya, Tesla should stop developing world class electric powered cars and concentrate on another source of powe as flawed as hydrogen. Heck, using that logic, they should have gasoline, natural gas, wind-up toy power... maybe "blow hard" power, whereby folks blow real hard into a tube to power the car.

Some will get more miles than others.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 6230
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

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:26 pm

lorenfb wrote:Any company, e.g. Tesla, relying on a single technology to maintain long term growth and not maintaining an R&D effort to transition to new technologies, e.g. FCEVs, as they become competitive is very likely to become marginal or non-existent, e.g. Kodak, Blackberry, IBM (marginal), HP (marginal), Intel (marginal compared to Qualcomm), and Microsoft (before the cloud). An automotive OEM would be very naive and negligent to their shareholders to not maintain a development effort for a FCEV, since it provides the most "transparent" transition from an ICEV for the consumer.
That all assumes that hydrogen is the end-game when it comes to transportation. It is not, as I have pointed out repeatedly in this thread as well as others:

May 26, 2014:
RegGuheert wrote:What I object to is the idea that hydrogen is somehow the "end game". I believe this is the message being pushed by some in the oil industry since they believe that they have a chance to at least partially control the hydrogen market while they have little they can do with BEVs except lose market share to them. However, for most applications I believe BEVs are the "end game" and hydrogen is now simply a distraction from the steady roll-out that is now occurring.
June 8, 2014:
RegGuheert wrote:6) There are many people, corporations and governments who are pushing hydrogen as the end-game when BEVs are that for most personal transportation applications. That tells me there are ulterior motives for the push for hydrogen. It is clear what it is for petroleum companies.
September 25, 2014:
RegGuheert wrote:FCVs cannot compete with BEVs in ANY of the significant cost areas:
- Manufacturing cost
- Fueling infrastructure costs
- Fuel costs

There is NO crossover point for fueling infrastructure costs or fuel costs, so BEVs will always win there. While there is a possibility of a crossover point in manufacturing costs, the differences today are so great that it is extremely unlikely. And even if that happens in a couple of decades, the issue of fuel efficiency will always result in BEVs being the best overall solution for the environment and the economy.

The simple conclusion is that FCVs are NOT the end-game for transportation, BEVs are, since they are the solution with the lowest overall costs and also the lowest impact to the environment. FCVs need not apply for any task that a BEV can handle, which includes most personal transportation tasks. Because FCVs are so much more expensive than BEVs, the opportunity cost of funding their deployment today is huge: many more BEVs could be fielded with the same government expenditure. As a simple result, each time the government spends so much money to put an FCV on the road, they do significant damage to the environment through the massive expenditure of resources, but they also cause many more ICEs to be put on the roads that would have otherwise been replaced by efficient BEVs.
May 10, 2015:
RegGuheert wrote:What I and others have demonstrated repeatedly in this thread is that whatever resources are required to transition the world's energy resources to renewable generation and battery-based storage are a small fraction of what would be required by the "hydrogen economy" which has been dreamed up by politicians and economists who somehow believe that physics does not apply to their pet project. Put another way, any transition away from fossil fuels by storing energy in H2 will require more resources and will produce more waste and will result in more damage to the environment than will an approach which stores the energy in batteries (or capacitors). As such, hydrogen will ONLY be applied in applications where other, more efficient, storage technologies cannot meet the requirements (or where politicians can distort the economics enough to overcome hydrogen's glaring inadequacies).

The "hydrogen economy" is a political idea which is directly at odds with physics. Physics will always win in the end, but that does not mean that politicians will not ruin the world in the meantime.
May 17, 2015:
RegGuheert wrote:Physics tells me that BEVs are the end game, not hydrogen. Plus, I really like refueling at home.
May 18, 2015:
RegGuheert wrote:
epirali wrote:- Actually physics tells me the opposite: with technology recycling water-> H2 / O -> water is the end game, NOT batteries with chemicals. Its so simple it is obvious. Assuming the technology improves I would then say the same: electro-chemical batteries are just a stepping stone in energy storage.
The truth of the matter is exactly the opposite of what epirali has written.

Here are statements of fact which will help everyone understand why H2 electrolysis/transportation/delivery/fuel cell cannot and will not EVER achieve the efficiency of Li-ion batteries:

FACT #1: NO CHEMICAL REACTIONS ARE INVOLVED IN THE FUNDAMENTAL OPERATION OF A LI-ION BATTERY

Li-ion batteries are fundamentally different than other battery technologies in that chemical reactions are NOT involved in the charging and discharging of the battery. Instead, the charging and discharging of a Li-ion battery involves ONLY the movement of lithium ions from the anode to the cathode and back again. That is the reason why efficiencies approaching unity are already being achieved in Li-ion batteries. From Battery University:
Battery University wrote:Charging and discharging batteries is a chemical reaction, but Li-ion is claimed to be the exception.
Losses in Li-ion batteries are associated with electrical resistances and unwanted chemical reactions occurring inside the cells. The areas of research ongoing are focused on solving these issues. The result is that efficiencies will move closer to 100% and battery life will be extended dramatically from where it is today. And, as I have already posted, these batteries will be made from materials which are more and more recyclable and

FACT #2: CHEMICAL REACTIONS ARE INVOLVED IN THE OPERATION OF BOTH ELECTROLYSIS DEVICES AND FUEL CELLS

There are several chemical reactions involved in the so-called hydrogen cycle, with most steps separated from each other. Here are some numbers I have found for theoretical maximum efficiencies:

Electrolysis: 120%
Transportation/Storage: 95% (depends on the distance traveled and time stored)
Delivery: ~75% (per compression cycle) (This number is being generous since you really need to HEAT and then COOL the H2 during delivery. There is virtually NO possibility to save here and still allow H2 to achieve its singular benefit: refuel time.)
Fuel Cell: 83%

Overall H2 THEORETICAL efficiency: 1.2*0.95*0.75*0.83 = ~70%

But we know that we are nowhere near these numbers today, as has been discussed at length.

The bottom line: H2 as a storage medium suffers from the fact that many chemical reactions as well as compression/decompression and leakage will ALWAYS hinder its efficiency. Li-ion does not suffer from these efficiency hits since the many challenges of chemical reactions and compression/decompression/storage do come into play.
August 15, 2015:
RegGuheert wrote:BEVs ARE the end game for nearly every passenger vehicle application. FCVs need to find applications where BEVs CANNOT play in order to have any chance for market acceptance. Even then, they need to be able to beat out incumbent ICE technologies. They are not close to that point today.
May 26, 2016:
RegGuheert wrote:Here is Toyota's prediction for BEVs back in 2005:
Jim Press - Then COO of Toyota North America at 49:40 wrote:There's a lot of debate today about what powertrains will emerge tomorrow: internal combustion engines, hybrid-electric, diesel, fuel cells, solar. All of these are great new technologies that are emerging that are making internal combustion engines better.
The point is that their disinformation campaign is designed to point people away from BEVs and make people think that hydrogen is somehow the end game. This approach allows them to continue the status quo and to therefore build massive quantities of gasoline-powered cars.
Aug 16, 2016:
RegGuheert wrote:
lorenfb wrote:
RegGuheert wrote:Since we know that BEVs are the end-game technology for personal transportation
We do?
Yes, we do...from first principles. I have covered this in detail multiple times: Because there is no chemical reaction involved in energy storage in a LI-ion battery, 98% round-trip energy efficiency is achieved with today's battery technology. This is approximately 3X the efficiency achieved with hydrolysis and a fuel cell.

A world striving to wean itself off fossil fuels cannot reasonably increase worldwide electricity production by 50%. Getting to 100% of today's electricity production will be a monumental challenge in itself.

As a clear result, H2 FCVs will be relegated to ONLY the tasks which cannot be accomplished in a more efficient manner.

ETA: Look at what OakLeaf just posted: MIT Study: Electric Vehicles can meet 90% of our transportation needs
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

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”