User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 6332
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

Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:04 am

GRA wrote:As to dystopian, the world we live in now is dystopian; probably they all are.
We live in a beautiful world. It's sad so many cannot see that.

Regardless, even if you think the current world is dystopian that is not a justification to make it worse by polluting it more.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
10K mi. on 041413; 20K mi. (55.7Ah) on 080714; 30K mi. (52.0Ah) on 123015; 40K mi. (49.8Ah) on 020817; 50K mi. (47.2Ah) on 120717; 60K mi. (43.66Ah) on 091918.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

User avatar
IssacZachary
Forum Supporter
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:57 am
Delivery Date: 15 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 420789
Location: Gunnison, CO, USA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:09 pm

GRA wrote:On the contrary, you prove my point. You agree that energy efficiency isn't the sole and usually not even the primary consideration when choosing a transportation mode, in fact it's often well down the list of priorities. Don't want a bicycle because it's slow? Ride an electric bike, scooter, or motorcycle. Oh, but you can only carry one other person, you're not weather protected or climate controlled, you're less stable than a 3 or four wheeled vehicle so more prone to accidents, you're not surrounded by a few thousand pounds of material that serves to protect you from those accidents, if you want to carry any substantial amount of cargo you need to haul a trailer etc. Where does energy efficiency fall in this list?

Efficiency isn't high on the list because energy is cheap. Most people I know still think that 30 mpg is awesome fuel efficiency. That's the fuel mileage of the 6,000lb 1920's Doble Steamer, which also could go over 120mph, was dead silent, had instant keyed starting capability and got the emissions levels of modern day Californian standards. But after nearly 100 years, the majority of people haven't moved on. They are still drawn to 6,000lb mammoth vehicles that still only get up to 30mpg, if that. The only difference is that such vehicles are cheaper, have better safety features and A/C nowadays compared with the 1920's. But until the world runs out of fuel or the economy irreversibly colapses the majority of people just aren't going to care if their car gets good fuel mileage or not.
2013 SL SOLD :cry:
2013 Toyota Avalon Hybrid CURRENT

GRA
Posts: 9378
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sat Jun 23, 2018 1:29 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:As to dystopian, the world we live in now is dystopian; probably they all are.
We live in a beautiful world. It's sad so many cannot see that.

Regardless, even if you think the current world is dystopian that is not a justification to make it worse by polluting it more.

Of course, whether or not the world is beautiful or not, or dystopian or not, depends a lot on where you're viewing it from. If you're looking at it as a citizen of the developed world it probably looks pretty good. If you're looking from South Sudan, or Libya, or Syria, or Myanmar If you're Rohingya, or Guatemala/El Salvador/Honduras, etc., it looks a lot worse.

Just to take one issue, we've had the ability to feed the world's entire human population adequately for a couple of decades now, if we distributed food equally. But of course, we don't:
Of the roughly 7 billion people in the world, an estimated 870 million suffer each day from hunger.

That's hunger from malnutrition or not eating even the lowest amount of daily recommended calories—1,800—while often enduring food insecurity, or not knowing where the next meal is coming from.

The consistently massive population of hungry people—along with variables like severe weather and economic downturns—sometimes spark warnings that the planet faces impending food shortages.

And yet more people in the world—1.7 billion—are considered obese or overweight from a daily caloric intake that in some cases is at least six to seven times the minimum.
https://www.cnbc.com/id/100893540

Do you think the 2/3rds of Americans (as well as all others) who are overfed and under-exercised would be willing to voluntarily reduce their caloric intake and food options, if by doing so it meant that food would instead be distributed to people who are undernourished, providing food security for all? I don't. So yeah, I have no hesitation in describing human society as dystopian, for that and many other reasons. And people being people, I don't expect we'll ever not be dystopian in some way.

I'm not trying to pollute more, only to provide us with more non-fossil-fueled options, preferably ZEV but net- or better yet negative carbon will do (i.e. biofuels that don't take up cropland). Let's face it, private citizens, no matter how concerned they say they are with energy efficiency, only prioritize it up to the point at which it begins to impinge on their preferred lifestyle (assuming they can afford to pay extra for that), at which time its priority drops down to the AOTBE category, i.e. as long as they can get it at no cost to other things they value more. Anybody living in a developed country can increase their energy efficiency and reduce their energy usage and environmental impact, but most people are unwilling to do so if it involves having to make any significant personal sacrifice.
Last edited by GRA on Sat Jun 23, 2018 2:02 pm, edited 5 times 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.

GRA
Posts: 9378
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sat Jun 23, 2018 1:37 pm

IssacZachary wrote:
GRA wrote:On the contrary, you prove my point. You agree that energy efficiency isn't the sole and usually not even the primary consideration when choosing a transportation mode, in fact it's often well down the list of priorities. Don't want a bicycle because it's slow? Ride an electric bike, scooter, or motorcycle. Oh, but you can only carry one other person, you're not weather protected or climate controlled, you're less stable than a 3 or four wheeled vehicle so more prone to accidents, you're not surrounded by a few thousand pounds of material that serves to protect you from those accidents, if you want to carry any substantial amount of cargo you need to haul a trailer etc. Where does energy efficiency fall in this list?

Efficiency isn't high on the list because energy is cheap. Most people I know still think that 30 mpg is awesome fuel efficiency. That's the fuel mileage of the 6,000lb 1920's Doble Steamer, which also could go over 120mph, was dead silent, had instant keyed starting capability and got the emissions levels of modern day Californian standards. But after nearly 100 years, the majority of people haven't moved on. They are still drawn to 6,000lb mammoth vehicles that still only get up to 30mpg, if that. The only difference is that such vehicles are cheaper, have better safety features and A/C nowadays compared with the 1920's. But until the world runs out of fuel or the economy irreversibly colapses the majority of people just aren't going to care if their car gets good fuel mileage or not.

Yup, except where air pollution or some other factor starts to directly affect their standard of living, as happened in the developed world several decades back, more recently in China and India. Depending on the costs of renewables and other new techs, who knows, clean energy may well be cheap and abundant in the future, in which case people will opt for relatively inefficient AFVs just as they now opt for inefficient ICEs. Even if they did opt for efficient AFVs, under the above conditions Jevons paradox will ensure a rebound effect.
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: 6332
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

Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:20 pm

IssacZachary wrote:Efficiency isn't high on the list because energy is cheap.
Hydrogen is NOT cheap. The only way you can sell or lease someone a highly-polluting, very expensive H2 FCV is to use OPM to provide them with free fuel.

The efficiency of BEVs, OTOH, is a major draw because it can significantly reduce the price of fuel, particularly when coupled with photovoltaics.

We need to encourage people to do what GRA does: DO NOT purchase an H2 FCV! (OTOH, we need to encourage the purchase of BEVs.)
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
10K mi. on 041413; 20K mi. (55.7Ah) on 080714; 30K mi. (52.0Ah) on 123015; 40K mi. (49.8Ah) on 020817; 50K mi. (47.2Ah) on 120717; 60K mi. (43.66Ah) on 091918.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

GRA
Posts: 9378
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sun Jun 24, 2018 4:49 pm

This could be a real game-changer, via GCC:
Army researchers develop novel nanogalvanic alloys for on-demand hydrogen generation; plans to license
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/06/20180624-arl.html

Army researchers have developed a novel, structurally-stable, aluminum-based nanogalvanic alloy powder that, when combined with water or any water-based liquid, reacts to produce on-demand hydrogen for power generation at room temperature without chemicals, catalysts or externally supplied power.

These patent-pending powders produce hydrogen at a rate that currently is one of the fastest reported for Al and water reactions without the need of hazardous and costly materials or additional processes. The reaction results in the production of hydrogen and heat with only inert residual materials; i.e., no toxic by-products. ARL has demonstrated that hydrolysis will occur with virtually any water containing liquid. . . .

    This powder-based alloy includes material that disrupts the formation of an encapsulating aluminum oxide layer, allowing for the continuous production of hydrogen that can be used at the point of need to power a wide range of devices via fuel cells and internal combustion.

    The powder can be easily manufactured to scale, and can be conveniently and safely transported via tablets or vacuum pouches, thus eliminating reliance on high-pressure hydrogen cylinders.


    —Dr. Anit Giri, a scientist with the lab‘s Weapons and Materials Research Directorate

ARL will post a Federal Register Notice and launch a supporting website inviting companies to submit their ideas on how best to commercialize this technology. The laboratory will then select the most appropriate partners and collaborators. Officials said license exclusivity will then be determined.

The researchers said the powders has many advantages, such as:

Energy and Power Source
Stable Alloy Powder
Non-Toxic
Environmentally Friendly
Hydrogen Emitting
Manufacture to Scale
Easily Transportable . . . .
Last edited by GRA on Mon Jun 25, 2018 5:09 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.

GRA
Posts: 9378
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sun Jun 24, 2018 4:51 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
IssacZachary wrote:Efficiency isn't high on the list because energy is cheap.
Hydrogen is NOT cheap. The only way you can sell or lease someone a highly-polluting, very expensive H2 FCV is to use OPM to provide them with free fuel.

The efficiency of BEVs, OTOH, is a major draw because it can significantly reduce the price of fuel, particularly when coupled with photovoltaics.

We need to encourage people to do what GRA does: DO NOT purchase an H2 FCV! (OTOH, we need to encourage the purchase of BEVs.)

Of course, FCEVs can also supplied by H2 coupled with PV or wind to produce it when they are in excess, as is being done, e.g. http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/06/20180622-hyseas.html

http://greenhydrogen.dk/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Hydrogen-in-Rennerod-press-release-1.pdf
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: 9378
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:10 pm

Via GCC:
S Korea to invest $2.3B in hydrogen fuel cell vehicle industrial ecosystem over next 5 years
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/06/20180625-korea.html

. . . The target is to be able to install 310 hydrogen stations by 2022 to supply 16,000 fuel cell vehicles. The funds will be spent on building plants for fuel cell vehicles and fuel cell stacks, manufacturing fuel cell buses and developing hydrogen storage systems.

Some 125 billion won (US$112 million) will go to supporting R&D for major components such as the fuel cell stack.

In 2018, the plan envisions the investment of 150 billion won (US$135 million) in establishing a special corporation for hydrogen filling stations, with the goal of reducing the cost of filling station construction by 30%.

For 2019, the plan envisions spending 420 billion won (US$377 million) for the production of hydrogen buses and demonstrations, hydrogen storage vessels for buses, and the mass production of a domestic CNG reforming device for the production of hydrogen.

From 2020 to 2022, the plan foresees the expenditure of 2 trillion won (US$1.8 billion) on the expansion of plants for the production of hydrogen, fuel cell stacks, and the mass production of packaged hydrogen filling stations.
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: 6332
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 Jun 26, 2018 3:12 am

GRA wrote:Of course, FCEVs can also supplied by H2 coupled with PV or wind to produce it when they are in excess, as is being done, e.g. http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/06/20180622-hyseas.html

http://greenhydrogen.dk/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Hydrogen-in-Rennerod-press-release-1.pdf
Of course it's a very dumb idea to throw away 2/3 of that "excess". A much better idea is to keep nearly all of that excess and charge BEVs or other batteries instead.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
10K mi. on 041413; 20K mi. (55.7Ah) on 080714; 30K mi. (52.0Ah) on 123015; 40K mi. (49.8Ah) on 020817; 50K mi. (47.2Ah) on 120717; 60K mi. (43.66Ah) on 091918.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

WetEV
Posts: 2346
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Tue Jun 26, 2018 12:55 pm

RegGuheert wrote:A much better idea is to keep nearly all of that excess and charge BEVs or other batteries instead.


True until you get to beyond a week or more of storage. MIGHT not be true for the last bit, needed for seasonal shifting and such. The cost of energy from batteries rises the slower they are cycled, storing hydrogen (or perhaps some compound such as methanol produced from hydrogen) is less costly.

If there is a point to fuel cells in vehicles, it is probably mostly in aviation. More likely in fixed fuel cells to provide season shifting.

This is the last 10% problem in renewable energy. It is going to be more expensive than the first 90%, might even be far more expensive and inefficient. As long as it works, and the total cost isn't outrageous...
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

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”