Official Hyundai Tucson FCEV thread

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
evnow said:
LOL - because the infrastructure is so non-existent. It is a so-cal compliance car !
+1

See also: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17003&start=6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
evnow said:
GRA said:
Which is just what they should be doing right now, expanding the sales region as the fueling infrastructure expands, because they obviously shouldn't be leased in areas where it makes no sense, yet.
LOL - because the infrastructure is so non-existent. It is a so-cal compliance car !
Sure, right now. By next year, as the number of H2 fueling stations grows around the state (they'll be building one in my city and several others beyond the one already in the Bay Area), it will be a California compliance car, along with the Honda and Toyota. I should add that this is a faster rate than Tesla Superchargers have been added in the state, and FCEVs are better suited to road trips in any case owing to shorter fueling times and no heater effect on range.

The station they'll build in Truckee (that's one that Toyota is providing financing for) will enable Bay Area to North Lake Tahoe/Reno area trips quite nicely, even if for some reason the stations scheduled for Sacramento don't get built (none in the state capital, where politicians from the Governor on down can see them and hold photo ops? Yeah, right). The station at Harris Ranch will connect Northern and Southern California. Socal already has a fair amount of stations, but the coverage area will be expanded considerably just in the next year. Whether they go beyond California will be determined by what other states do, as well as how they compete against BEVs/PHEVs, just as should be the case. I expect there'll be one in Barstow or thereabouts to let people drive to Vegas, but don't remember offhand if one is specifically included for next year. But I expect one will be built in Vegas sooner rather than later, just as Model S customers were accommodated early; Casino owners want well-heeled clientele, and the people leasing FCEVs for the next few years are in the same income brackets as Model S owners.
 
Which makes no sense... What would said well-heeled clientele drive a decidedly downscale and cheap-level Tucson when they can drive a very upscale and nicely appointed Model S? I simply do not see said clientele in a Tuscon.

GRA said:
But I expect one will be built in Vegas sooner rather than later, just as Model S customers were accommodated early; Casino owners want well-heeled clientele, and the people leasing FCEVs for the next few years are in the same income brackets as Model S owners.
 
TomT said:
Which makes no sense... What would said well-heeled clientele drive a decidedly downscale and cheap-level Tucson when they can drive a very upscale and nicely appointed Model S? I simply do not see said clientele in a Tuscon.

GRA said:
But I expect one will be built in Vegas sooner rather than later, just as Model S customers were accommodated early; Casino owners want well-heeled clientele, and the people leasing FCEVs for the next few years are in the same income brackets as Model S owners.

If they build the H2 stations everywhere, there is an advantage over the current "downscale" Rav4 EV, however the addition of a Supercharger inlet quickly tilts things in favor of Rav4 EV.

Now with the "open source" Tesla, any company can build a Supercharger anywhere for pennies on the dollar of a hydrogen one. By the way, no company is going to build H2 stations without PLENTY of handouts from you, the taxpayer.
 
TonyWilliams said:
Now with the "open source" Tesla, any company can build a Supercharger anywhere for pennies on the dollar of a hydrogen one. By the way, no company is going to build H2 stations without PLENTY of handouts from you, the taxpayer.
This to me is the most exciting near-term benefit of Tesla going open source.

For H2 to do any better than CNG, the price of refueling will have to come way down.
 
My point was that the "well-heeled" clientele he referenced is not likely to be driving a vehicle like a Rav4, Tuscon or the like, regardless of what fuel powers it...

TonyWilliams said:
If they build the H2 stations everywhere, there is an advantage over the current "downscale" Rav4 EV, however the addition of a Supercharger inlet quickly tilts things in favor of Rav4 EV.
 
TomT said:
Which makes no sense... What would said well-heeled clientele drive a decidedly downscale and cheap-level Tucson when they can drive a very upscale and nicely appointed Model S? I simply do not see said clientele in a Tuscon.

GRA said:
But I expect one will be built in Vegas sooner rather than later, just as Model S customers were accommodated early; Casino owners want well-heeled clientele, and the people leasing FCEVs for the next few years are in the same income brackets as Model S owners.

I think it is likely they will buy an FCV. Afterall they like gambling and are poor at figuring out the odds ;)
 
TomT said:
GRA said:
But I expect one will be built in Vegas sooner rather than later, just as Model S customers were accommodated early; Casino owners want well-heeled clientele, and the people leasing FCEVs for the next few years are in the same income brackets as Model S owners.
Which makes no sense... What would said well-heeled clientele drive a decidedly downscale and cheap-level Tucson when they can drive a very upscale and nicely appointed Model S? I simply do not see said clientele in a Tuscon.
Maybe we should ask the first person to do so in the U.S.? From Hyundai press release, via ABG:

"TUSTIN, Calif., June 10, 2014 – Today, Tustin Hyundai's Dealer Principal, John Patterson, proudly handed over the keys to Hyundai's first mass-produced Tucson Fuel Cell CUV in a ceremony with Hyundai executives and Timothy Bush, the first Hyundai Fuel Cell customer.

"My family is certainly excited to be doing their part in driving a zero-emission vehicle that benefits the environment, and at the same time, reduces our nation's dependence on imported fuels," said Mr. Bush. "What's great about the Tucson CUV is that its day-to-day utility is virtually identical to the gasoline version, so we don't have to compromise our lifestyle in the process; I can easily fit all of our family's things in the back. The attractive $499 lease rate with unlimited free hydrogen fuel made the decision to drive a fuel cell even easier."

Full ABG article and press release here:

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/11/hyundai-delivers-its-first-tucson-fuel-cell-to-a-california-cust/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
TonyWilliams said:
GRA said:
The attractive $499 lease rate with unlimited free hydrogen fuel made the decision to drive a fuel cell even easier."

At the unsubsidized lease of $1499, I wonder how H2 green he would like to be?
Not very, IMO. And the same holds true for most people if they could only buy or lease any EV unsubsidized - see here:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=17059" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I imagine Tesla's use of funny math to claim that the Model S only costs ~$500 month to lease when the real number is twice that is another confirmation of that.
 
Via GCC:

"Hyundai delivers keys to first Tucson Fuel Cell customer; leasing for $499/mo, with unlimited free fueling; first drive"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/06/20140611-tucson.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mainly repeats info found in previous links, but also includes test drive report as well as experience fueling.
 
GRA said:
TonyWilliams said:
GRA said:
The attractive $499 lease rate with unlimited free hydrogen fuel made the decision to drive a fuel cell even easier."

At the unsubsidized lease of $1499, I wonder how H2 green he would like to be?
Not very, IMO. And the same holds true for most people if they could only buy or lease any EV unsubsidized - see here:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=17059" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I imagine Tesla's use of funny math to claim that the Model S only costs ~$500 month to lease when the real number is twice that is another confirmation of that.
At least with an EV we know the cost to refuel. Or what is the price of H2 compressed and ready to fill from a completely non government mandated or subsidized facility?
 
GRA said:
From Hyundai press release, via ABG:

"TUSTIN, Calif., June 10, 2014 – Today, Tustin Hyundai's Dealer Principal, John Patterson, proudly handed over the keys to Hyundai's first mass-produced Tucson Fuel Cell CUV in a ceremony with Hyundai executives and Timothy Bush, the first Hyundai Fuel Cell customer.

"My family is certainly excited to be doing their part in driving a zero-emission vehicle that benefits the environment, and at the same time, reduces our nation's dependence on imported fuels," said Mr. Bush. "What's great about the Tucson CUV is that its day-to-day utility is virtually identical to the gasoline version, so we don't have to compromise our lifestyle in the process; I can easily fit all of our family's things in the back. The attractive $499 lease rate with unlimited free hydrogen fuel made the decision to drive a fuel cell even easier."
Let Reg complete the thought:
RegGuheert's imagining of the rest of the statement said:
I could have leased a Nissan LEAF for half this amount. Manufacturing of the LEAF only does 20 to 25% as much damage to the environment as manufacturing the Hyundai Tuscon Fuel Cell CUV. Each time a new refueling location is built for my new ride, 20 times as much damage will be done to the environment as is done to create a new quick-charge location for a Nissan LEAF, and the LEAF refueling station can provide fuel for multiple times as many vehicle-miles in the same 24-hour period. When I refuel my new Tuscon Fuel Cell EV, four times as much electricity is consumed for each mile driven as is required for the LEAF. As a result, four times as much electricity-generating infrastructure will be required to be built and/or additional fossil fuels will need to be extracted and burned to power my vehicle.

So, why have I chosen to pay twice as much for the Tuscon Fuel Cell EV and do all of this additional damage to the environment? Because this vehicle provides me with a small amount of additional utility ove the LEAF. My family makes approximately two trips each month which the LEAF cannot cover that the Hyundai Fuel Cell EV will be able to handle with aplomb. Instead of leasing the LEAF and taking Nissan up on their multiple free leases of ICE vehicles or keeping around the three-year-old CUV that we previously used for this purpose, we've decided to spend the extra money and incur the reduced utility that one FCEV offers over having both a BEV and an ICE. So instead of living out many years meeting our needs and burning very little fuel, our old CUV will be released to burn massive amounts of fossil fuels while being quickly worn out in daily use.

What can I say other than "I think we're worth it!"
 
RegGuheert's imagining of the rest of the statement said:
I could have leased a Nissan LEAF for half this amount. Manufacturing of the LEAF only does 20 to 25% as much damage to the environment as manufacturing the Hyundai Tuscon Fuel Cell CUV. Each time a new refueling location is built for my new ride, 20 times as much damage will be done to the environment as is done to create a new quick-charge location for a Nissan LEAF, and the LEAF refueling station can provide fuel for multiple times as many vehicle-miles in the same 24-hour period.

SNIPPED FOR BREVITY

So instead of living out many years meeting our needs and burning very little fuel, our old CUV will be released to burn massive amounts of fossil fuels while being quickly worn out in daily use.
+100
 
OMG, that is a fabulous, reality-check quote. Love it! Why we as humans ignore so much data and physics and general science info is astounding. I'm feeling that smugness warmth all over everytime I drive my Leaf...even with it's 'apparent shortcomings'.
 
GRA said:
I imagine Tesla's use of funny math to claim that the Model S only costs ~$500 month to lease when the real number is twice that is another confirmation of that.
I don't think anyone took Tesla's numbers seriously - and Tesla received well deserved flak for their numbers.

BTW, what is the well-to-wheel Carbon gm/mile for this FCEV vs Leaf (or for that matter RAV4EV)?
 
evnow said:
GRA said:
I imagine Tesla's use of funny math to claim that the Model S only costs ~$500 month to lease when the real number is twice that is another confirmation of that.
I don't think anyone took Tesla's numbers seriously - and Tesla received well deserved flak for their numbers.

BTW, what is the well-to-wheel Carbon gm/mile for this FCEV vs Leaf (or for that matter RAV4EV)?
Beats me. I'm sure it's around somewhere, but I haven't found it.
 
finman100 said:
OMG, that is a fabulous, reality-check quote. Love it! Why we as humans ignore so much data and physics and general science info is astounding. I'm feeling that smugness warmth all over everytime I drive my Leaf...even with it's 'apparent shortcomings'.
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.
 
RegGuheert said:
Let Reg complete the thought
LOL! :D

evnow said:
BTW, what is the well-to-wheel Carbon gm/mile for this FCEV vs Leaf (or for that matter RAV4EV)?
Some figures to start:

Tuscon FCEV is rated at 2 kg H2 / 100 mi
RAV4-EV: 44 kWh / 100 mi
LEAF: 30 kWh / 100 mi

So now you just need to figure out how many emissions are in each kWh of electricity or kg of H2.

Other figures if someone else wants to do the math:
The grid in California is around 400 lbs CO2 / MWh [1]
The CEC says that natural gas is around 13.446 lbs CO2 / therm [2]
A therm is around 29.3 kWh of energy [3]
Reforming H2 from natural gas is around 70% efficient [4]
A kg of H2 holds around 33.3 kWh of energy [5]
Compression of one kg of H2 to 700 bar takes about 3 kWh (9%) [6]

Using that data:

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

1 therm natural gas * 70% reforming efficiency * 91% compression efficiency = 63.7% overall efficiency or 18.7 kWh worth of H2 per therm
18.7 kWh / 33.3 kWh / kg = 0.56 kg H2 per therm natural gas or 1.78 therms per kg.
1.78 therms * 13.446 = 24 lbs CO2 / kg

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?

[1] http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/environment/calculator/pge_ghg_emission_factor_info_sheet.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
[2] http://www.pge.com/about/environment/calculator/assumptions.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_reforming" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
[5] http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/9013_energy_requirements_for_hydrogen_gas_compression.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
GRA said:
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.
 
Back
Top