Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

[LTLFTcomposite]

Why would anyone want to trade gasoline prices they can't control for hydrogen gas prices they can't control? Same with natural gas. No thanks.

 

[NeilBlanchard]

Oil and gas and coal and wood are fuels because they yield more energy that we put into the process.

Hydrogen will always take more energy to get than it yields.

What is so exotic about electrolysis? Nothing. We can get it with less loss, but there is still more loss than just using electricity on the grid and in a battery. And you still have to transport it, and compress it - both are non-trivial. This will require more renewable energy that just using the electricity directly.

Who builds the production and the transportation infrastructure? Who pays for it? What are the energy losses?

How much chlorine do we need? How can a byproduct possibly be produced in quantities needed to power millions of cars?

Why not just put a bigger battery pack in the car, rather than a fuel cell and hydrogen storage tanks? What happens in severe crashes? How long do fuel cells last?

Electricity is the basis for our society working the way it does. We can get electricity from several different renewable sources. Why should we lose a fair bit of it just to split water to make hydrogen - and then turn it back into electricity?

That makes no sense, at all.

 

[AndyH]

That makes no sense, at all.

Neil - it makes no sense to you at this point because you haven't been reading and haven't looked at the info I've given you. Familiarize yourself with the Third Industrial Revolution and start to think in terms of systems efficiency rather than through the blinders of 'give me BEV or give me death'.

It makes perfect sense. It is happening. Hydrogen has been used in our society since the late 1800s - it's made, piped, trucked, compressed, stored, and used. It's used in ICE, it's used in fuel cells, it's used to make your cooking oil and the oil in EV gearboxes. It will be more widely used because it provides more benefits than ANY other fuel/energy storage substance.

Look at just one item from Germany's energy transition: They are turning excess wind and PV into hydrogen and storing it in the LOW PRESSURE natural gas pipeline system. Instead of curtailing renewables, they keep going and are used to reduce the amount of fossil gas. The German pipeline system can hold enough H2 to power the entire country for a full six months - that's electricity, heat, and industry. It doesn't need any new pipelines, no new trucks, no new compressors, no new generators.

Again - learn what's happening TODAY around the world. California is NOT leading this revolution, nor is the USA, other than the minds that built the plans are from here. We're clearly not smart enough to understand what they've thought up - and that's just sad.

 

[smkettner]

OK so how are sales actually doing?

 

[Zythryn]

Neil, I agree with you for the most part.

Hydrogen does have some advantages though.
One is as storage. If you have a surplus of solar, wind, or geothermal and you don't need the power, there are very few methods for storing that power.
One of the best current methods is to produce hydrogen. Basically, the choice is turn the power generator off, or produce hydrogen.

Even if it isn't very efficient, it is better than nothing.
The hydrogen can then be used for a number of purposes.

For limited applications, the refueling time is also benificial as long as you have a properly functioning pump adequate for the task.

I see lots of uses for hydrogen, it just seems to me small vehicle use is a rather silly one.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Electricity is the basis for our society working the way it does. We can get electricity from several different renewable sources. Why should we lose a fair bit of it just to split water to make hydrogen - and then turn it back into electricity?

This is the absolute best overview. Why not just use a bigger battery for personal transport.

With battery costs at $100/kWh, a 50kWh battery that would be required for a 150 mile LEAF costs only $5000. The car could be sold (without subsidies) for $20k - $30k.

Game changer that unsubsidized hydrogen just won't touch.

 

[edatoakrun]

...Hydrogen does have some advantages though.
One is as storage. If you have a surplus of solar, wind, or geothermal and you don't need the power, there are very few methods for storing that power.
One of the best current methods is to produce hydrogen. Basically, the choice is turn the power generator off, or produce hydrogen...

I think not. For example:

Batteries developed for grid stabilization

...Alevo, a privately held Swiss company, says it has managed to solve many of the problems usually associated with large-scale batteries, and can transform power grids by providing a cost-effective way to meet demand at peak times with lower pollution than other technologies...

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2ea8fbe8-5dec-11e4-897f-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=engage/email/topic/reg/topics/crm&utm_source=reg&utm_medium=email&utm_term=topic&utm_campaign=topics&siteedition=uk#axzz3HpTulyrO" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=18363" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[GRA]

The price of battery storage versus H2 ditto, along with operational advantages/disadvantages, will determine which of them (or both) succeed. At the moment, neither has the price or infrastructure to beat out fossil-fuels except in limited circumstances, and any attempt to predict which one will first achieve the necessary price reductions and performance/infrastructure improvements is guesswork.

 

[GRA]

Via GCC:

DOE SBIR/STTR Release 2 topics includes fuel-cell hybrid trucks and QC devices for PEM fuel cells

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/11/20141101-doesbir.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The first part refers to "Fuel Cell-Battery Electric Hybrid for Utility or Municipal Medium Duty or Heavy Duty Bucket Trucks". The 'QC' refers to "quality control of membrane electrode assembly component manufacturing processes".

 

[AndyH]

...Hydrogen does have some advantages though.
One is as storage. If you have a surplus of solar, wind, or geothermal and you don't need the power, there are very few methods for storing that power.
One of the best current methods is to produce hydrogen. Basically, the choice is turn the power generator off, or produce hydrogen...

I think not. For example:

Batteries developed for grid stabilization

...Alevo, a privately held Swiss company, says it has managed to solve many of the problems usually associated with large-scale batteries, and can transform power grids by providing a cost-effective way to meet demand at peak times with lower pollution than other technologies...

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2ea8fbe8-5dec-11e4-897f-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=engage/email/topic/reg/topics/crm&utm_source=reg&utm_medium=email&utm_term=topic&utm_campaign=topics&siteedition=uk#axzz3HpTulyrO" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=18363" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't disagree with you about batteries - this is only one company with profitable battery systems for grid stabilization. I've linked to a Berlin company, and I'm sure we know about Tesla batteries and Nissan's plans. But this is NOT the same as hydrogen storage for national or continental energy needs.

Recall from the earlier conversations that the Third Industrial Revolution uses ALL storage that's available in an area - but H2 is the primary method not because it's the most efficient, but because it's the ONLY system that provides the MASSIVE amounts of energy storage required to allow winter winds to power summer air conditioners. There's not enough suitable locations for pumped water, or CAES, and there aren't enough battery factories on the planet to do what H2 can do today.

Look again at this first phase of Germany's transition: They're building renewables-to-H2 plants and storing the H2 in the national natural gas grid. This is a low-pressure system overall - in the US it's reported to be between 200 and 1500 PSI. Yet Germany's system, if filled with H2, can store enough energy to run the entire country for about six months with NO other energy inputs. That's a hell of an uninterruptible power supply happening - and it requires zero infrastructure changes, no new pumps, no new tech, no new factories - it's off the shelf and it's more profitable than battery storage.

Videos and transcripts from the energy field show very clearly that H2 pumped underground into caverns formerly used for compressed air storage can store many times the energy for the same overhead (14x comes to mind right now, but the info's well up-thread and I've not looked at it in a few months...).

That's why I keep pounding on people to first expand their circle of focus from the one around the lithium battery pack and charger and look at the entire system, and then expand further to the other systems that depend on or support the electric grid today. That change in perspective changes everything.

I agree with you about small cars and especially commuter vehicles in general, though bicycles and mass transit would be a very useful development...

 

[GRA]

Can we all agree on basic terms so that this doesn't keep popping up?

I'm not sure how important it is that hydrogen is a storage medium and not fuel to the subject of hydrogen "refuled" cars.

A car that is electric powered doesn't make it an EV, since there are very specific differences that ARE important to this discussion.

How about we stick with that actually refueling medium as the naming protocol?

:shock: A car that is electric powered is not an EV?! An electric vehicle is not an electric vehicle? And you offer that as an example of agreeing on basic terms?

I guess it was too much to ask. Yes, you'd have to slightly adjust your thinking so that we could spend less time debating BS issues, and more of the core ones.

If I put hydrogen in it, it's hydrogen powered.

If I put electricity in it, if electricity powered.

Yes, that's the suggestion.

I wrote a longer reply to this yesterday but it seems to have disappeared, so here's a second try. Tony, you say if you "put electricity in it, it's electricity powered". Since that electricity has to be generated somehow, ISTM that what you're really saying is that as long as the electricity isn't generated in close proximity, in your opinion it's "electricity (sic) powered". That raises the question, at what minimum proximity between the generating source and the electric motor does an EV cease to be "electricity powered", and thus (by your definition) is no longer an EV?

If you use a ground mounted generator (power plant size on down) to provide the electricity, it is still an EV, I assume. If, like Phil did, you build a trailer, mount a generator on it and haul it with the EV, does that proximity make the EV no longer an EV? If it is still an EV, how about if you put that same generator on the vehicle's roof - still an EV, or not? What if you put it in the cargo area - EV or not? Or does it cease to be an EV only if the generation source is integral with the vehicle? Or is it whether or not the generator is used to provide electricity to the vehicle's batteries or motor(s) while the vehicle is moving instead of only while it's stationary the determining factor in whether or not it's an EV, by your definition? Just trying to nail down the exact requirements for your definition of an EV, and the logic behind them.

 

[AndyH]

Why would anyone want to trade gasoline prices they can't control for hydrogen gas prices they can't control? Same with natural gas. No thanks.

"Anyone" doesn't need to.

Only the folks that need to take a pallet of solar panels to a job site, or haul 3/4 ton of tools and supplies to install HVAC at a new restaurant, or deliver trusses to a house being remodeled or if one has to deliver a 55 gallon drum of special Leaf gear lube to your local Nissan dealership or any of the other bazillion mandatory transportation events that cannot be conducted by ANY BEV currently on the road or planned. Those are the folks that need equipment more capable than a BEV in our near-future world without gasoline. There are more 'anyones' than folks driving BEVs and FCEV and PHEV and HEV and even ICE vehicles that achieve > 30 MPG today.

 

[NeilBlanchard]

Andy, all those uses of hydrogen are small - tiny compared to using hydrogen for fuel cell cars.

I like Jeremy Rifkin a lot, and I tend to agree with him on lots of things. He is advocating we push for exponential growth of renewable energy sources - 20% by 2020 and 100% by 2030. Everywhere. Just like we did with cell phones, and the Internet.

I just don't see how hydrogen is any better - for any reason - than electricity. Especially since virtually none of the infrastructure is in place - actually it is not even been imagined; let alone proposed. What is the model for paying for it - let alone actually paying for it?

Why is hydrogen worth doing, even with it's built in losses - instead of the electricity that we get from our hard earned renewable energy systems?

Let's talk scale: we have roughly 120,000 gasoline filling stations in the US. I may or may not be typical, but when I drive my Scion xA each day, I end up buying a tank of gas every 10-14 days. And I average about 475 miles on a tank. My regular gas station is not big - it has 3 pumps and each has two hoses. I think a rough estimate is they fill about 150-200 cars per day. It is open for about 16 hours a day, so that is just 9-13 cars per hour.

I may have missed it, but the only number I have come across for hydrogen filling stations is that some of the 12 that we currently have in the US, can only fill 15 cars a day. And the only FCEV that I know the range of - the Honda FCX Clarity can drive ~240 miles on the 4.4kg of hydrogen it carries onboard.

So, if I drive more than the average person, or if I drive (much?) farther on a tank of gas than most people - let's say those two things wash. And there are certain a lot larger gasoline filling stations than the one I frequent, but there also a lot that service far fewer cars per day - so lets just go with 150 cars per day is average.

A FCEV will have to fill up approximately 1.5X as often as a gasoline car. And lets say that the average hydrogen filling station can manage to fill 30 cars a day - 2X as much as the ones I mentioned.

So, a really rough estimate of the number of hydrogen filling stations we would need is 120,000 X 1.5 X (150 / 30) = 900,000. Nearly 1 million filling stations. The total mass of the hydrogen needed per year is 30 X 365 X 4.4 X 900,000 = 43,362,000,000kg. 43.3 Billion kilograms of hydrogen per year.

We need to talk about leakage. We need to talk about energy required, for all stages of this hydrogen infrastructure. We need to talk about water sources.

What is the best case scenario for overhead of hydrogen? Do we get 70% of the energy back out of the hydrogen that we put into it and transporting it, etc.? Do we get back 50%? 80%?

Our typical grid losses are ~8%. With renewable energy, the losses of generation are moot. If we didn't utilize all of the capacity of all the sources, that is not a loss. It is just what it takes to gather the energy. If can gather enough for our needs, then we only lose the 8%.

In fact, it could argued that the 8% grid loss is moot, as well.

So, the question is: how much more electricity do we need to gather from renewable sources IF we use hydrogen to move it to our cars, rather than if we used the grid to move it to our cars?

 

[AndyH]

Neil - I've linked you to the answers to your questions. They're up-thread as well.

- How many pallets of solar panels can I haul to a remote job site 400 miles away in a Leaf? A Model S?
- Which BEV on the market today, or planned for the next 5 years will carry a 4x8' overhead rack, a pair of 6 foot long steel toolboxes, a gasoline-powered generator welder, and half a ton of materials and take them 200 miles to a site?
- How many Tesla Megafactories will we have to build in order to make enough batteries to store six months of energy for Germany's total needs - electricity, building heat and hot water, and industrial heat? Can a battery even do that with our current infrastructure? H2 can today and is being used today for just those purposes. With no new infrastructure, no new tech, no new compressors, no new power stations, no new machines at BMW or VW.
- How many batteries do we have to make in order for a Minnesota wind farm to store unusable wind as hydrogen, and then manufacture ammonia, fill tankers, and send this fertilizer to local farmers? That's being done in the US today.

Neil - how's the overall efficiency of making a gallon of crude oil? Start with photosynthesis. Do you think, with all the conversions, that the result will be positive? If so, congrats - you've just broken the 2nd law of thermodynamics. ALL conversions result in losses. H2 is no different. Neither is charging a battery. Our ability to plant more windmills isn't killing us - burning fossil fuels is. We have about 35 years to kick the habit - we cannot do that with only BEVs.

Until you realize we're not talking about putting fuel cells in Chevy Sparks, and that vehicle efficiency is meaningless if the vehicle cannot perform the needed mission, then there's really no point in continuing.

 

[mbender]

... or any of the other bazillion mandatory transportation events that cannot be conducted by ANY BEV currently on the road or planned.

Isn't the e-NV200 cargo van due to be available in the U.S. within a year? It has essentially the same battery as the LEAF, and with even minimal work-site recharging should be able to easily manage 150 miles per day. Moreover, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a 48-kWh is being designed for it as we, er, write. So it's not only planned, but it's on the road now in other countries, and soon to be on the road 'here'. If they do/market it right, and with 'EV-awareness' growing, I think there could be a lot of demand for it.

And following soon after its production ramps up, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Tesla designs a truck (body) around its S or '3' platform. I think they have even said (or intimated) as much, and suspect that there, too, the demand-pressure will continue to increase along with awareness of the benefits of electric propulsion (etc).

Yes, it's all speculative and even if it comes to pass as outlined, the numbers would be small (at first). But so would/are those for FCEVs.

 

[AndyH]

... or any of the other bazillion mandatory transportation events that cannot be conducted by ANY BEV currently on the road or planned.

Isn't the e-NV200 cargo van due to be available in the U.S. within a year? It has essentially the same battery as the LEAF, and with even minimal work-site recharging should be able to easily manage 150 miles per day. Moreover, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a 48-kWh is being designed for it as we, er, write. So it's not only planned, but it's on the road now in other countries, and soon to be on the road 'here'. If they do/market it right, and with 'EV-awareness' growing, I think there could be a lot of demand for it.

And following soon after its production ramps up, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Tesla designs a truck (body) around its S or '3' platform. I think they have even said (or intimated) as much, and suspect that there, too, the demand-pressure will continue to increase along with awareness of the benefits of electric propulsion (etc).

Yes, it's all speculative and even if it comes to pass as outlined, the numbers would be small (at first). But so would/are those for FCEVs.

Compare either the NV200 or an S Pickup and their range capability carrying a ton with a Ford F150 carrying a ton. That's the problem. It's not about getting 1 pax to and from work in the HOV lane...

We have 40 years at most to get rid of ALL fossil-fueled transportation and electricity generation and building heating. How many LEAF batteries will it take to haul 40,000 lbs of toilets from San Diego to our local Home Depot?

 

[cBeam]

We have 40 years at most to get rid of ALL fossil-fueled transportation and electricity generation and building heating. How many LEAF batteries will it take to haul 40,000 lbs of toilets from San Diego to our local Home Depot?

AndyH, I don't understand what you are arguing. There is no doubt in my mind that we need to get off the oil burning habit. Or the fossil fuel habit overall, for many reasons (we run out of it, climate change, real costs of burning C (not only the cost we pay today, but also the cost of repairing the damage that we do burning it)).
There are many challenges to get off fossil: how fast, which changes are needed, who pays, what gets subsidized, etc, etc. Many vested interests to overcome.

I understand that this thread is about Hydrogen and FCEVs.

- Like others I think that batteries will be the better storage devices for passenger cars. I do not see fuel cells competitive for this application.
- I can see that for stationary storage hydrogen as energy storage medium might have a chance. I doubt it, but I do not rule it out yet. Most likely candidates are large scale (utility sized) facilities to decouple energy production and energy consumption. Still, this technology will need to compete with batteries.
- Then there is the middle segment, i.e. trucks and very large vehicles. Maybe batteries will be too heavy /too large for them to be really usable, maybe not. But let's assume we'd need to build a hydrogen infrastructure just for them, building filling stations in a density that enables them to operate countrywide or even globally. I have a very hard time to see that this can be cost effective, the unsubsidized price of hydrogen as fuel will be much much higher than the cost of filling up batteries with electrons.

So, are you arguing that hydrogen fuel cells for Leaf or Tesla sized cars have a future? Or are you just arguing that we need a good solution for trucks and large vehicles and batteries will have to have competition?

 

[mbender]

There are already HUGE electric buses that are starting to (successfully) dot the landscape of many large cities. Also, is there any doubt that the energy density of batteries will double or more within 10, let alone 20 years? I think that the cat is out of the bag, the handwriting is on the wall, and any other saying/cliche that you can think of, when it comes to the priority of batteries and battery research. You just know that labs (national and university) and large corporations are already working hard on this problem, and will be making breakthroughs -- or even continual incremental progress -- for years to come.

So I don't think that powering trucks (some likely to come from the makers of today's e-buses) and other large vehicles by batteries will be an issue, vis-a-vis size or timing. Plus, I suspect that hauling tons of supplies hundreds of miles isn't that frequent or routine, or at least the size of the pool of people for whom it is, is very small. That group can "safely" use their F-250s, Rams and Silverados in the meantime.



As an "amusing" post script, Musk even says we aren't that far from the possibility (ability) of electric flight, and posits that ("ironically") the only mode of transport that will be impossible using (battery) electricity is rocketry. And slightly related, I'd love to eventually see many of his 'Hyperloops' built, replacing much of today's passenger and even freight rail traffic. But I suspect that both of these things will come many years after electric trucks become commonplace.

 

[smkettner]

I see long haul trucking and rail going electric way before hydrogen. May need overhead power in conjunction with batteries.
Local electric delivery trucks are already being deployed. Any links on hydrogen?

I keep reading about utilities looking at batteries to better utilize solar and wind power..... hydrogen not so much.

Still like to see how many hydrogen cars are currently getting sold.

 

[WetEV]

I've never seen someone hand crank their car or use acetylene lights on it, but it can certainly be done.

I have. Almost a "Lost Art", but not quite. Bird City Kansas, last Thursday in July. There were three hand crank started cars. $10 donation to the Association would get you a ride in one, of course that was a decade ago, might be more now.

The Tri-State Antique Engine and Thresher Association grounds are located on the east edge of Bird City on Hwy 36 & Road 29. The annual three-day show is celebrated, starting the last Thursday in July. Many operating steam tractors, steam engines, gas tractors and combines from the teens and twenties are paraded each day along with early model cars and trucks and a fire engine. Activities include: steam engine and tractor pulls, corn shelling, antique shingle mill, sawmill and buzz saw are demonstrated. An early day cook shack (on wheels), a blacksmith shop, a creamery, a sod house, county school house and country church, all authentically equipped and furnished, and a swap meet area can be visited. One of the large buildings houses the Avenue of Lost Arts. Here are well-furnished models of early day rooms and many collections of antiques and displays of prairie arts and crafts. Demonstrations of many early day domestic arts are presented daily.

http://threshershow.blog.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;