GRA
Posts: 9104
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:38 pm

smkettner wrote:
GetOffYourGas wrote:Of course, we are talking here about the occassional road trip. What we are missing is the elephant in the room - the daily commute. This is the bulk of most people's annual mileage. .....snip
Exactly this.

If you build all the infrastructure for fueling all cars as hydrogen it will be a huge undertaking. If you build infrastructure to charge EVs for long distance there is not any need for the same scale. 80%+ would be my guess that EVs would charge at home with less than 20% needed for long distance travel. You just do not need as much public infrastructure for an EV.

No one is advocating building nothing but H2 infrastructure. As yet, both H2/FCEVs and BEVs which fully meet customers ICE requirements are unavailable and/or unaffordable for most consumers, and until that changes for one or both (plus biofuels) large scale take rates aren't going to happen barring subsidies and mandates.

BEVs should be chosen wherever they can meet the operational requirements at the lowest TCO, as they are the most energy efficient option. They are the best match for local and regional use, and given limited charging infrastructure, the longer-range ones impose fairly small compromises on weekend trips, but they constrain where you live and work to a much greater degree than central fueling points. Faster charging, longer range and AVs have the potential to eliminate much of this bottleneck. FCEVs' niche, at the moment, is for those whose needs skew towards road trips/high duty cycles*, or who only wish to have a single ZEV, and who can't charge at home or work. The ideal, for people who can benefit, would be PHFCEVs, with the pack handling the routine driving and the cell stack's convenience advantages coming into its own on the longer trips.

As for commercial use, FCEVs make sense for places where time is money, and where the traffic simply doesn't justify an electric infrastructure - such as long, low-density train routes. Marine usage instead of biofuels is also a possibility, and regional aviation also seems a likely usage for FCEVs. Zero or negative-carbon biofuels niche will start with long-range aviation, and work their way down from there depending on the size of the supply and the price. If we could provide drop-in carbon-neutral biofuels for everything without impacting food production or having any other major environmental effects, that would obviously be the route preferred by most, as the least disruptive and requiring the least new infrastructure.


*I define a road trip as one requiring multiple (ICE) fuel stops each way, over greater than weekend distances. While relatively rare for most people, they do happen often enough that people want the capability. Of course, one option is to own a car for your routine usage and rent for extreme cases, but that assumes that you're willing to deal with the hassle and the vehicle you want is available when you want.
Last edited by GRA on Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:54 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: 9104
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:50 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:And the higher throughput of the H2 stations means less land is required per car served.
Absolute nonsense. You conveniently ignore the fact that the vast majority of BEV refueling is done at the destination, requiring NO additional land.

No, Reg, I make the point that most car owners in the world don't currently have that option, unlike the case of say the typical U.S. BEV owner now. Installing charging at every existing parking space (at least 3 per car, in some areas it's closer to eight) will take forever and be incredibly expensive. Not that we need to install them at every spot, but there are around 1.3 billion LDVs in the world at the moment, with more to come, so even providing one spot per vehicle will take a very long time. AV BEVs, especially if most of them are car-shared, that can drive themselves to/from charging stations and wirelessly charge will cut way down on the number required (but decreasing energy efficiency owing to deadhead miles and charging inefficiency).
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: 9104
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:06 pm

GetOffYourGas wrote:
GRA wrote:
GetOffYourGas wrote:Of course, we are talking here about the occassional road trip. What we are missing is the elephant in the room - the daily commute. This is the bulk of most people's annual mileage. How much time do you save in a year by charging while sleeping or working (i.e. about 10 seconds/day to plug/unplug your car) versus travelling to the pump (gas or H2) once a week and standing there for 5 minutes while pumping fuel? I know it's a change in mindset, but I'll take the slightly longer road trip over the weekly fuel stop any day.

But going further, the last time I took a trip beyond my car's range, I simply timed my charge stop to coincide with a meal. So even my 40 minute charge session took considerably less time out of my trip than gassing up. If I had to buy gas, I would have eaten dinner and then had to go to the pump for 5 minutes to refuel.

All true, for those who can charge at home. For those who can't, which is currently most of the world's car-owing population, you have the same issue of time spent driving to/from the station, plus a much longer wait once you get there, and owing to the currently shorter ranges of affordable BEVs, you'll probably be doing it more often too. Which is why I think installing charging at workplaces and local parking lots, along with a switch to AV BEVs which can charge wirelessly, will be essential to make the large-scale switch I think is needed quickly, instead of over a half-century or more.

Yes, this is also true. The solution is to provide charging outlets where people are parked overnight, not to add more high-power chargers so they can continue the old MO. I know that will take a while, but I have to believe that adding L2 charging to street/lot parking spots would be cheaper than building a ton of H2 fueling stations. But that's just my gut. I haven't done the math - feel free to prove me wrong.

More to the topic, home fueling is the ace in the hole for EVs. It won't happen for H2 at any larger scale than the current hobbyist making bio diesel at home. In order to be competitive at all, FCVs will need a bigger battery and a plug, with an AER sufficient for a typical commute. But then that causes a downward pressure on demand for H2 fueling stations, which makes it even harder to build and operate one profitably. I'm in the camp that doesn't see FCVs ever working out as passenger cars. The Mirai only seems to confirm that.

At least we agree that PHFCEVs are a good operational solution for those who can benefit (i.e. have somewhere to charge for local use). On-street charging is the most expensive type of L1/L2 there is, and as concrete sidewalks last much longer than asphalt streets, ripping them up and installing all the necessary wiring to allow curbside charging at every spot is only likely to happen as they wear out. Which is why I prefer L1/L2 charging efforts to be concentrated at commercial locations where cars are more concentrated and the installation costs are lower, i.e. public/private lots/garages, MUDs and workplaces. That, combined with AVs (preferably car-shared), strikes me as the only things that will make possible the much faster fleet turnover I think is necessary.

I also think daytime workplace charging will be critical, if we are to take full advantage of variable wind and (obviously) PV by load matching.
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: 6292
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:22 pm

GRA wrote:No, Reg, I make the point that most car owners in the world don't currently have that option, unlike the case of say the typical U.S. BEV owner now. Installing charging at every existing parking space (at least 3 per car, in some areas it's closer to eight) will take forever and be incredibly expensive.
I repeat: compared to what?

Here are the simple facts:
- BEVs are currently ushering in the beginning of the end of sitting around waiting for your car to refuel except for the rare long trip.
- This change is already available to homeowners and those who have access to charging at work.
- As BEVs and PVs proliferate, there is clearly a requirement to store the energy from the PV panels in the BEVs DURING THE DAYTIME. Doing that will be, by far, the cheapest solution to the storage issue, even factoring in the cost of installation of daytime charging infrastructure.
- A LOT of land will be freed up by reclaiming what is used by the refueling stations of today.

H2 FCVs like the Toyota Mirai do not provide a path to a future in which transportation is powered by PV.
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: 9104
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:29 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:No, Reg, I make the point that most car owners in the world don't currently have that option, unlike the case of say the typical U.S. BEV owner now. Installing charging at every existing parking space (at least 3 per car, in some areas it's closer to eight) will take forever and be incredibly expensive.
I repeat: compared to what?

Here are the simple facts:
- BEVs are currently ushering in the beginning of the end of sitting around waiting for your car to refuel except for the rare long trip.
- This change is already available to homeowners and those who have access to charging at work.
- As BEVs and PVs proliferate, there is clearly a requirement to store the energy from the PV panels in the BEVs DURING THE DAYTIME. Doing that will be, by far, the cheapest solution to the storage issue, even factoring in the cost of installation of daytime charging infrastructure.

H2 FCVs like the Toyota Mirai do not provide a path to a future in which transportation is powered by PV.

Except that they can and in some case are being powered by H2 produced by PV (currently, wind is more common). And as noted above, the percentage of car owners who have the option of home or even workplace charging is very limited, and will be for a long time given that most people don't live like the majority of Americans. That workplace charging is important to soak up excess PV is something we have no disagreement over, as I mentioned in my reply to GetOffYourGas. That there will also be times when BEVs alone will be unable to soak up all the excess as the shift to intermittent renewables continues, and some of it will need to be stored or used for other purposes (like making H2), is also the case.
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.

downeykp
Forum Supporter
Posts: 605
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 9:11 am
Delivery Date: 31 May 2011
Leaf Number: 1931
Location: Keaau, HI

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:13 pm

GRA wrote:
RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:No, Reg, I make the point that most car owners in the world don't currently have that option, unlike the case of say the typical U.S. BEV owner now. Installing charging at every existing parking space (at least 3 per car, in some areas it's closer to eight) will take forever and be incredibly expensive.
I repeat: compared to what?

Here are the simple facts:
- BEVs are currently ushering in the beginning of the end of sitting around waiting for your car to refuel except for the rare long trip.
- This change is already available to homeowners and those who have access to charging at work.
- As BEVs and PVs proliferate, there is clearly a requirement to store the energy from the PV panels in the BEVs DURING THE DAYTIME. Doing that will be, by far, the cheapest solution to the storage issue, even factoring in the cost of installation of daytime charging infrastructure.

H2 FCVs like the Toyota Mirai do not provide a path to a future in which transportation is powered by PV.

Except that they can and in some case are being powered by H2 produced by PV (currently, wind is more common). And as noted above, the percentage of car owners who have the option of home or even workplace charging is very limited, and will be for a long time given that most people don't live like the majority of Americans. That workplace charging is important to soak up excess PV is something we have no disagreement over, as I mentioned in my reply to GetOffYourGas. That there will also be times when BEVs alone will be unable to soak up all the excess as the shift to intermittent renewables continues, and some of it will need to be stored or used for other purposes (like making H2), is also the case.


You have continually made this argument "And as noted above, the percentage of car owners who have the option of home or even workplace charging is very limited, and will be for a long time given that most people don't live like the majority of Americans."

According to Energy dot.gov "Because residential charging is convenient and inexpensive, most plug-in electric vehicle (also known as electric cars or EVs) drivers do more than 80% of their charging at home."

Someone is right here. I think you have been using the argument that most people do not charge at home to further the failed hydrogen experiment that you are always plugging. If I am wrong educate me.
2011 Black Leaf SL+QC Vin. 1931
Res. 6-14-10 Order 1-25-11
EVSE: Mod'd Ver. 2 Nissan L1
Delivered 5-31-11

7 years 33000mi. 8 bars

39 Suniva panels 10.3kw with Enphase micro inverters my electricity cost $21.87 a month.

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:03 pm

GRA wrote:
mux wrote:
GRA wrote:You seem to be arguing against yourself. Yes, charging speed are increasing, something that's much needed if BEVs are to compete with ICEs for long trips. But why should that be necessary, if refueling speed doesn't matter?


In these really long comment chains the original context often seems to get lost. I'm arguing a systematic point: if refueling speed is the major USP of high-density fuels, then this is poised to become moot as charging speed and availability of DCQC stations increases. Right now, charging speed is still a weak point of contemporary EVs compared to gas, diesel or hydrogen, but this is going to be moot in a very short timespan as range on a single charge as well as QC speeds improve.

That's my actual point, and that is completely congruent with what I've said so far.


We have no disagreement that charging speeds are increasing and must do so to be fully competitive with ICEs, the issue is at what point it will become moot, i.e. how close to ICE capability do charging speeds and range need to be to be considered generally acceptable to the public as a full ICE replacement. I don't believe 150kW is enough, 350-400 kW is closer and will satisfy many, but 900-1000kW (China's talking about 900kW for GB/T) would probably be necessary to render the discussion moot, as 6-7 minutes would give enough range to allow my 4 hour plus reserve freeway with HVAC replenishment, and that's probably close enough assuming every energy replenishment stop will at least include a bathroom break. The cost of the infrastructure necessary to provide anything approaching such rates is so far unknown. Such high-rate infrastructure can be limited to major road trip corridors, but will still be expensive.


I think you still fail to understand everyone else's point, but on the question you've asked, 150kw is indeed fast enough.

Much like how I learned through direct experience that the leaf's 84 mile range was all that was needed as a commuter car, the superchargers are indeed fast enough for vacation travels. Yes, we need to stop a little more frequently (every 2-3 hrs instead of 4-5), but that's actually safer, since you're less fatigued. The thought that 6-7 min full charge times are required for ICE replacement is a red-herring.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
Date - Miles / GIDs:
May '17 - 7300 mi / 363
Feb '18 - 20.5k mi / 333

mux
Posts: 159
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:52 am
Delivery Date: 13 Oct 2011
Leaf Number: 6177

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:10 pm

GRA wrote:We have no disagreement that charging speeds are increasing and must do so to be fully competitive with ICEs, the issue is at what point it will become moot, i.e. how close to ICE capability do charging speeds and range need to be to be considered generally acceptable to the public as a full ICE replacement. I don't believe 150kW is enough, 350-400 kW is closer and will satisfy many, but 900-1000kW (China's talking about 900kW for GB/T) would probably be necessary to render the discussion moot, as 6-7 minutes would give enough range to allow my 4 hour plus reserve freeway with HVAC replenishment, and that's probably close enough assuming every energy replenishment stop will at least include a bathroom break. The cost of the infrastructure necessary to provide anything approaching such rates is so far unknown. Such high-rate infrastructure can be limited to major road trip corridors, but will still be expensive.


Yeah, in the long run you're probably right. At that point, you are kind of running into equipment cost again, much like with hydrogen. 175/350kW right now is doable without special buffering (you can just run a 2MW trunk to the station, no problemo) and with simple water-cooled cabling. As you scale up to the megawatt range, you really need to be thinking about 1.2-2kV drivetrain systems to keep current flows in check, which right now is not commodity for EVs and carries much larger risks and isolation requirements with it. Actually, I kind of don't think this will happen for these reasons, I think the really high (absolute) charge rates will be reserved for trucks and semis just because of space constraints.

Alternatively, this kind of charging will require currents in the many-kA range, which means direct water jacketed cables or heat pump cooled cables. Or, well, automated charging, because then the cables don't have to be made thin enough for a human to carry, so you can use thicker, less-heating cables and connectors. Long story short, this is really a long ways away I think. Even though, funny enough, battery tech is basically there.

But in the meantime we do all try to make this point to you that in actual practical use, 50kW is so close to adequate that I can't imagine anybody really making a big fuss about 175-350kW chargers that are deployed now, as soon as cars support it of course.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 6292
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:18 am

GRA wrote:Except that they can and in some case are being powered by H2 produced by PV (currently, wind is more common).
No, they cannot. While you find it convenient for your argument to ignore the horrendously-low efficiency of H2 FCVs, physics does not care about your belief system. Simply put, in a world that has managed to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels from 83% of its needs to only 81% of its needs in 50 years, the idea that we can GROW the amount of electricity produced in the US by over 50% just so that most of that electricity can be wasted by H2 FCVs is ludicrous.

It will be enough of a challenge to grow it by 25% to enable BEV-based transportation. Simply put, the renewable resources that we currently can access are extremely limited in much of the populated world. Destroying our landscapes with wind generators is NOT the answer.

Asking if we can build a vehicle that runs on H2 which can be created using renewable energy is NOT enough. We need to look for solutions which are actually good for the environment. Truly H2 FCVs are the solution that solves absolutely nothing.
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

arnis
Posts: 896
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:21 pm
Delivery Date: 23 Jul 2014
Leaf Number: 015896
Location: Estonia, Europe

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:25 pm

RegGuheert wrote:...physics does not care about your belief system.


Well said. Whatever people prefer, it's not about their taste. It's about real mathematically calculated results.
Even without hydrogen cycle (from water to H2&O2 back to water) losses, it is REALLY hard to generate
enough green (solar etc) energy in the world for 1 billion vehicles. Adding wireless charging with 15% inefficiency
or hydrogen cycle with ultra high inefficiency is not debatable.

Therefore, it's not about what Toyota (hydrogen) or BMW (wireless charging) wants to sell us.

As we see, marketing -- profits are AGAIN prioritized over environment. Toyota and BMW are good examples.

I would say Tesla is far from perfect. I would even say that they are not even "very good". Model S/X consume a lot
of energy (compared to other EV's). No heat pump, excessive battery thermal management (heating up in cold),
EXTREMELY bad thermal insulation. And as far as I see, it hardly got better with Model 3 (except drivetrain efficiency,
that one is now "very good"). Glass surface everywhere and NO thermal blinds. Single layer glass, aluminum body
(more energy used in full production cycle).
Short range EVs <30kWh -- Medium range: 30-60kWh -- Long range: >60kWh
Charging: Trickle <3kW -- Normal 3-22kW -- Fast 50-100kW -- Supercharging >100kW

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”