Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion 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.
I would like to know how many of those FCEVs were sold (leased) to employees and related parties at a steep discount.
Secondly I would like to know how many actually buy out the lease and start paying out of pocket for H2.
 
smkettner said:
I would like to know how many of those FCEVs were sold (leased) to employees and related parties at a steep discount.
I wonder, as well. I work for a company that has nothing to do w/automotive and I've seen at least 1 Mirai in the parking lot. It helps that there's an H2 station just down the street. I've sometimes seen other Mirais fueling up there.

There's at least 1 Mirai on a street connected to mine at home. Silicon Valley isn't the center of large offices for automakers but many of them have small research offices in the Bay Area.

I've seen at least one other Mirai running around kinda in my area, near home.

I don't know any of the drivers.
smkettner said:
Secondly I would like to know how many actually buy out the lease and start paying out of pocket for H2.
Probably very few, unless the cars are heavily discounted and there's some large fuel subsidy/discount.
 
cwerdna said:
smkettner said:
Secondly I would like to know how many actually buy out the lease and start paying out of pocket for H2.
Probably very few, unless the cars are heavily discounted and there's some large fuel subsidy/discount.

We know the answer to that... virtually none.

But, many will likely lease another H2 powered car with free or otherwise heavily discounted H2 refueling costs.

So, what happens to the lease return? It probably gets crushed. There just isn’t a market for any car that requires fuel that is far more expensive than electricity, natural gas, propane, gasoline or diesel.
 
GRA said:
According to Jaffery, a respectable hydrogen fueling ecosystem will not be ready until 2020. The slow buildout of the hydrogen stations has given an opening to battery electric vehicles whose sales are rapidly gaining ground.

I had to chuckle at this one. Yeah, that's it - BEVs were only given an opening because of the slow buildout of hydrogen stations. Laughable.

RegGuheert said:
By 2021, at least 11 automakers will have rolled out hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, including Toyota, Lexus, Hyundai, Kia, Honda, Mercedes-Benz and BMW. Other entrants in this space include Tata Motors, Pininfarina S.p.A. (owned by Mahindra & Mahindra) Riversimple and the RONN Motor Group.
Look for these companies to fall far behind those who are embracing BEVs today. Some will likely never recover.
I agree with your sentiment, but disagree with your list, particularly BMW. They are one of the definitive leaders in PHEVs and BEVs.
 
http://abc7.com/hydrogen-tank-explosion-on-semi-truck-prompts-evacuations/3068078/

What could go wrong with millions of hydrogen tanks, all pressurized to 10,000psi, in dense environments?

This hydrogen fire in a truck resulted in 500 people being evacuated.
 
GetOffYourGas said:
GRA said:
According to Jaffery, a respectable hydrogen fueling ecosystem will not be ready until 2020. The slow buildout of the hydrogen stations has given an opening to battery electric vehicles whose sales are rapidly gaining ground.
I had to chuckle at this one. Yeah, that's it - BEVs were only given an opening because of the slow buildout of hydrogen stations. Laughable.
For another expert's opinion on this subject, here's an excellent speech by Mate Rimac:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP6g4bHHhS0[/youtube]

At the end of his speech, he was asked about hydrogen cars:
Audience member at 35:35 said:
Hello Mate, and thank you for a great lecture. Uh, one question: Uh, Toyota just announced with this model, Mirai, uh, hybrid revolution, uh, the hydrogen revolution. What do you think about it?
Mate Rimac said:
Um, there will be many transition, uh, solutions in the next decade or two decades. Uh, hybrids, plug-ins, um, range-extended vehicles, uh, hydrogen vehicles, which are electric cars with, uh, on-board generators. Um, there will be electric cars with hybrid, uh, with hydrogen range extenders. There will by hydrogen-burning internal combustion engine cars. There will be, um, fuel made out of algae, or out of biomass, or artificially-created, uh, fuel. Um.

But the end solution is electric. 'Cause it's just efficient. So you have a powerplant which is efficient. Or you have, um, I don't know, uh, wind farms, uh, or solar panels or whatever, and, uh, the best way to get that energy where it's generated into transportation is just electric.

Uh, hydrogen cars are nothing more than electric cars with a different storage system instead of batteries. Which are now maybe comparable to batteries, but as batteries improve, the other forms of transportation will have less-and-less sense. So I think, even today, hydrogen makes really no sense. It's just an engineering exercise. And as the batteries advance, the solution will be clearer and clearer. So I think that there is no way, there is no sense for any other forms of energy storage inside the car. Except, I don't know, if you manage to, to shrink down a cold fusion, so that it could fit into a car. But, otherwise, battery-electric vehicles are the only sensible choice.
 
TonyWilliams said:
http://abc7.com/hydrogen-tank-explosion-on-semi-truck-prompts-evacuations/3068078/

What could go wrong with millions of hydrogen tanks, all pressurized to 10,000psi, in dense environments?

This hydrogen fire in a truck resulted in 500 people being evacuated.
Horrors, that sort of thing's never happened with any other fuel or energy source: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17145&p=519172#p519172

There's plenty of good reasons to believe that H2 and FCEVs will never be commercially successful, but the implication that H2's a uniquely hazardous fuel is not one of them.
 
Via GCC:
DEWA and Siemens sign MoU for MW-scale solar-drive electrolysis pilot project for hydrogen production
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/02/20180213-dewa.html

Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) and Siemens have signed a memorandum of understanding ( MoU) to kick-off a pilot project for the region’s first solar-driven electrolysis facility to produce hydrogen at DEWA’s outdoor testing facilities at the Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Solar Park. . . .

DEWA and Expo 2020 Dubai intend to use fuel-cell vehicles powered by the green hydrogen generated at the facility.
 
GRA said:
There's plenty of good reasons to believe that H2 and FCEVs will never be commercially successful, but the implication that H2's a uniquely hazardous fuel is not one of them.
Perhaps it is not uniquely hazardous. It is just hazardous. The transportation of electricity is MUCH safer than the transportation of hydrogen. We have Nikola Tesla largely to thank for that!
 
RegGuheert said:
GRA said:
There's plenty of good reasons to believe that H2 and FCEVs will never be commercially successful, but the implication that H2's a uniquely hazardous fuel is not one of them.
Perhaps it is not uniquely hazardous. It is just hazardous. The transportation of electricity is MUCH safer than the transportation of hydrogen.
Safer sure, but still hazardous, as the people who used to live in Santa Rosa before their houses burned down owing to fires which at least in some cases apparently started due to lack of tree trimming near power lines are aware (investigations still underway, but PG&E is already worried and the legal vultures have already begun circling, with ads on TV trolling for customers): http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/7935333-181/sonoma-county-to-sue-pge

Or the next of kin of various fatal air crashes which were due to fires caused by thermal runaway of Li-ion batteries, and which led to them being banned from being carried in bulk on passenger a/c (which didn't stop several fatal fires from happening on cargo a/c): https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20160209.aspx

Hazmat is just that. Back in my Teamster days we had to take hazmat compatibility training and get certified for this, and anytime there was the slightest question of whether or not two different substances were compatible we'd check, because otherwise you may have to unload a trailer and remove one or more of them - the fines are steep if you are in violation, for a very good reason: http://www.otrain.com/OTI_MSDS(DOT)HM-SEG_TABLE.html

I've seen a few people sickened or injured because of improper loads or improper placarding, and most of us were damned careful with anything that could harm us.
 
Via GCC:
ANL: life-cycle water consumption of fuel cell vehicles can be cut in half compared to that of conventional ICE vehicles
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/02/20180216-anl.html

The life-cycle water consumption of fuel cell electric vehicles using hydrogen produced from natural gas with steam methane reforming is almost 50% less than the life-cycle water consumption of conventional internal combustion engine vehicles using gasoline, according to a study by researchers at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL).

If the hydrogen is produced from solar power and water, the life-cycle water consumption is almost 60% less.

Average life-cycle water consumption associated with the majority of BEV and FCEV pathways (other than H2 production via water electrolysis using US grid electricity) ranges from 9 to 36 gal/100 miles driven as compared to 23 gal/100 miles driven by gasoline E10 ICEVs with corn ethanol. On average, BEV-210s consume the smallest amount of water at 2 gal/100 miles when solar power is used, while the water consumption increases to 26 gal/100 miles when US grid electricity is used.

Similarly, on average, FCEVs with H2 from electrolysis using US grid electricity consumes a large amount of water (65 gal/100 miles), but are much less water intensive compared to E85 ICEVs with corn ethanol (147 gal/100 miles). Diesel and CNG ICEVs consume a smaller amount of water (8 and 4 gal/100 miles, respectively).

Major water consumption processes include irrigation for corn farming, evaporative loss from hydropower reservoirs, and indirect (upstream) losses associated with H2 liquefaction and compression using a US grid electricity mix. The large water consumption for corn ethanol pathway can be reduced if a less water-intensive cellulosic biomass is used as the feedstock. While evaporative loss from hydropower reservoirs is inevitable (largely determined by climate and other design conditions), these hydropower dams are located in freshwater-rich regions. Therefore, the regional impacts of hydropower on water availability warrant further investigation.

—“Water Consumption for Light-Duty Vehicles’ Transportation Fuels. . . .”
There's a graph comparing them all using different pathways. Direct link to the original paper: https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/17005_water_consumption_ldv_fuels.pdf

Also GCC:
US Air Force demonstrating hydrogen as alternate fuel source
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/02/20180216-usafg.html

In a recent visit to JB Pearl Harbor-Hickam, members of the Air Force Civil Engineer Center’s Energy and Operations directorates were given a tour of the installation’s hydrogen production facility and shown several of the vehicles that use this alternative fuel. This project, with assets housed at the 647th Logistics Readiness Squadron and with the Hawaii Air National Guard, is part of a cooperative agreement between the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) and the Hawaii Center for Advanced Transportation Technologies (HCATT). . . .

In areas such as Hawaii, where renewable energy resources account for a large portion of the grid’s total electrical capacity, intermittent renewable energy resources, such as wind and solar, become less desirable. Continual sources of renewable energy, such as hydrogen, become an important focus in the shift towards cleaner, cost-effective energy. This is due to the need for a consistent supply of power to meet electrical load demands.

This hydrogen project has been in place for more than a decade, originally installed in 2006 as a mobile hydrogen production, compression, storage, and dispensing unit, and was upgraded in 2010. Both systems were set up to support all DoD hydrogen vehicle testing, to include both hydrogen internal combustion and fuel cell vehicles.

Some of the hydrogen vehicles currently supported by this station include a 25 passenger crew bus, a MJ-1E fighter weapons loader and a U-30 heavy aircraft tug. . . .
 
Via GCC (see post upthread on Sep. 13th):
Ballard receives follow-on order for next stage in development of non-precious metal catalyst-based fuel cells for material handling
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/02/20180221-ballard.html

. . . On 12 September 2017 press release, Ballard announced that it, with Nisshinbo, had integrated a non precious metal catalyst (NPMC) into a NPMC-based proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell product: the 30 watt FCgen-1040 fuel cell stack, which was made available for commercial sale in late-2017.

Subsequently, Ballard announced a program to assess the potential for development of NPMC-based fuel cell stacks for use in commercial material handling applications. With successful completion of that assessment, the newly announced stage will focus on certain performance and power density enhancements to support development of low cost NPMC-based fuel cell stacks for material handling applications.

  • Our goal for this multi-year Technology Solutions program is to expand the serviceable addressable market for fuel cell-powered forklifts and accelerate market adoption through the commercialization of leading air-cooled and liquid-cooled fuel cell stacks that deliver against market requirements at the lowest possible cost

    NPMC-based stacks represent a step-change in PEM fuel cell technology by dramatically reducing the amount of platinum that is needed. And, since platinum currently contributes 10-to-15% of the cost of a fuel cell stack, NPMC technology offers the potential for meaningful cost savings.

    —Dr. Kevin Colbow, Ballard’s Vice President – Technology and Product Development

Via GCR:
Germany's hydrogen stations exceed US; California beats Japan on density
https://www.greencarreports.com/new...s-exceed-us-california-beats-japan-on-density

As of today, there are 39 hydrogen fueling stations in the U.S., all but four of them in the state of California. They serve roughly 39 million Californians, whereas 284 million Americans outside the state have no access to hydrogen fuel-cell cars nor stations at which to refill them. Germany, on the other hand, has 83 million residents—and 45 hydrogen fueling stations that are accessible to the public (though some require prior notice). Japan leads the way on hydrogen stations, however, which is hardly surprising given that two of the three makers now offering hydrogen vehicles to the public are from that country. That country now has 91 hydrogen stations, according to an assessment by H2Stations reported by FuelCellWorks last Wednesday, to serve a population of 127 million people.

The article notes that Germany had the highest rate of increase last year, adding 24 operating stations to the 2016 total of 21.

Another way to put the numbers into perspective is by land mass: California has 164,000 square miles, Japan has 146,000 square miles, and Germany has 138,000. Summarized, Germany has 45 stations in the most compact area, serving twice as many people as the 35 now operating in California. Japan's 91 hydrogen stations serve three times as many people as California's 35.

It struck us a useful metric might be to calculate the number of hydrogen stations spread over the product of the number of residents and area served. Those results provide a somewhat different story on the relative density of hydrogen stations versus the overall number.

Even after accounting for its larger area, California has the highest number of hydrogen stations per trillion residents per square mile: 5.5 as of today The comparable figure for Japan is 4.9, and Germany lags somewhat at 3.9. (Though some may argue the stations should be considered only by population, not by both people and area, which is a justifiable position.)

Other factors make this analysis loose at best: California may have more drivers among its residents than Germany or Japan, which have the functioning mass-transit networks that the Golden State lacks. Both California and Japan also include substantial regions of uninhabited mountainous terrain, however, with their populations more concentrated on the coasts. . . .
 
Via GCC:
Australian-first, A$11.4M hydrogen demonstration plant to be built in Adelaide; power-to-gas
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/02/20180222-p2goz.html

. . . The power-to-gas demonstration plant—to be called Hydrogen Park SA (HyP SA)—will involve the construction of a hydrogen production and distribution facility using a 1.25MW PEM electrolyzer from Siemens to produce hydrogen utilizing electricity from the grid and potentially on-site solar.

The produced hydrogen will then be injected into AGIG’s local gas network to power the Tonsley Innovation District—but with the ability to be expanded to supply a proposed residential development in the area and other remote customers through tube and trailer facilities.

First hydrogen production is due in mid-2020. AGIG’s project partners are Siemens, SA Power Networks and KPMG.
 
GRA said:
Via GCR:
As of today, there are 39 hydrogen fueling stations in the U.S., all but four of them in the state of California. They serve roughly 39 million Californians . . .
That's sort of like saying the single station in Colorado serves the roughly 5.5 million people who live in that state.
 
jlv said:
GRA said:
Via GCR:
As of today, there are 39 hydrogen fueling stations in the U.S., all but four of them in the state of California. They serve roughly 39 million Californians . . .
That's sort of like saying the single station in Colorado serves the roughly 5.5 million people who live in that state.
Sort of. The H2 stations in California are mainly clustered in the major urban areas, so at least potentially they could serve the majority of the population, even though they obviously don't have the capacity to do so. Given the very limited number of vehicles out there, I consider stations/sq. mile to be the most useful measurement for now, which puts California in last place among the three.
 
Toyota is talking about the amazing technology they have developed for their "Tri-Gen" station which can produce enough hydrogen to fuel a total of 24 hydrogen-fueled trucks (if they only use 50 kg of hydrogen per day, average).

The article also contains a video with three minutes and forty seconds of video of a Class 8 truck with the words "Fuel Cell" on the side:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKHDtxZE5Xg[/youtube]
 
Via GCC:
Toyota, Nissan, Honda and 8 others form Japan H2 Mobility to accelerate deployment of hydrogen stations in Japan
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/03/20180305-jhym.html

Eleven companies, including automakers Toyota Motor, Nissan Motor, and Honda Motor, have jointly formed Japan H2 Mobility, LLC (JHyM), aimed at the full-fledged development of hydrogen stations for fuel cell vehicles (FCV) in Japan.

The newly formed JHyM will foster the deployment of hydrogen stations throughout Japan under the guidance of the Japanese Central Government’s Ministerial Council on Renewable Energy, Hydrogen and Related Issues (“Basic Hydrogen Strategy” published in December).

The other eight partners in the venture are: JXTG Nippon Oil & Energy Corporation; Idemitsu Kosan Co., Ltd.; Iwatani Corporation; Tokyo Gas Co., Ltd.; Toho Gas Co., Ltd.; Air Liquide Japan Ltd.; Toyota Tsusho Corporation; and Development Bank of Japan Inc. . . .

JHyM aims to complete its mission within 10 years. It intends to start building 80 stations nationwide by fiscal year 2021 in line with the Japanese Central Government’s “Strategic Road Map for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells” (revised March 2016), and to extend the network further afterward. This roadmap released by the Council for a Strategy for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells targets the completion of about 160 hydrogen stations serving around 40,000 FCV by fiscal year 2020. . . .

The following key roles and responsibilities are undertaken by the founding member companies of JHyM:

  • Infrastructure developers will contribute some capital, construct hydrogen stations, and operate them.

    Automakers will entrust infrastructure developers to operate the hydrogen stations through JHyM, to help promote the expansion of hydrogen stations and FCV.

    Investors will contribute to scaling-up the deployment of hydrogen stations in the future with financial means. They will partially cover station deployment costs through investments in JHyM. By providing the funds necessary until the hydrogen station business becomes commercially sustainable, they will help reduce the initial financial burden borne by infrastructure developers and will help attract new participants.

    JHyM will start operating in April 2018, aiming to attract the wider participation of hydrogen station operators and investors, and to achieve sustainable hydrogen station business and FCV development in Japan.
 
So, what keeps the hydrogen train running? Lots of OPM and lies.

Here's an example of OPM at work:
Ballard Power Systems today announced it has received a Letter of Intent ("LOI") from Van Hool NV, a bus OEM partner in Belgium, for 40 FCveloCity®-HD fuel cell engines to power buses under the Joint Initiative For Hydrogen Vehicles Across Europe ("JIVE") funding program. These buses are expected to be the first fuel cell bus deployments supported under JIVE I.
JIVE, huh? Seems fitting. So who funds that? The article continues:
Europe's JIVE funding programs are intended to pave the way to commercialization of fuel cell electric buses by coordinating procurement activities to unlock economies-of-scale and reduce costs as well as supporting new hydrogen refueling stations. The JIVE I program targets deployment of 139 fuel cell buses in 9 locations and the JIVE II program targets a further deployment of 152 buses in 14 locations – for a total of 291 fuel cell buses to be deployed in European cities.

Results of the JIVE programs are expected to demonstrate the technical readiness of fuel cell buses to bus operators and the economic viability of hydrogen as a zero-emission bus fuel to policy makers. These programs are supported by a total of €57 million in grants from the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU).
I'm not sure quite how to pronounce "FCH JU", but I think I can guess. ;)

So I dug up some propaganda material from "FCH JU" to see what they say. I learned a few things.

First, they are using a LOT of OPM:

Hydrogen_FCH_JU_Funding.png


Next, there are a lot of feeders at the public trough:

Hydrogen_FCH_JU_Troughers.png


Finally, the lies. First, they claim that TCO of FCVs is just a bit higher than that of BEVs today and that it will be about the same in 2025:

Hydrogen_FCH_JU_TCO_Projections.png


Finally, the piece de resistance! "FCH JU" claims that BEVs will not be able to achieve a range capability higher than 225 km by the year 2050! Note that the range capabilities of the H2 FCVs and the BEVs have a huge gap between them with no overlap.

(Note that "C/D Segment" in the upper right corner refers to the EU designation for mid-size and large cars.)

Hydrogen_FCH_JU_Range_Projections.png


This last one is the most egregious lie, because many people believe such nonsense, even though BEVs have already surpassed that 2050 value today by a wide margin.

(FWIW, I recently asked a some family and friends how far a battery electric transit bus could drive on a single charge on an oval course at low speed in order to demonstrate the maximum range of the vehicle. I heard numbers from 30 miles to 600 miles. Most were completely shocked when I told them 1100 miles. Some came back with "that was just a demonstration at low speeds", to which I responded that owners of the car we drive have done this and the longest distance ever achieved was 188 miles. As such, 1100 miles is a rather impressive feat.)
 
Back
Top