GRA
Posts: 12189
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:17 pm

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:04 pm
GRA wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:19 pm
Most of the world's car owners can't charge at home.
Most of the world's car owners have AC power to their house. L1 charging is fairly simple and cheap to add. L1 charging is all most people need for almost all of their driving.
Unlike the U.S., most of the world's car owners don't live in detached single family homes with private garages. FTM, as noted previously 44% of U S. households can't charge at home either. If you can, great, some kind of PEV could work for you.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:04 pm
GRA wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:19 pm
Of course, either tech needs fueling/charging infrastructure, but you need less of it for FCEVs owing to their greater range and faster refueling time. After all, we serve something like 260 million cars in this country with only 160k or so gas stations. As we're likely going to replace ICEs with a mix of EV types, we should need far fewer H2 stations to serve a smaller total # of FCEVs.

Good hydrogen stations can serve 1200 cars per day at a cost of 5.5 millions each.

L1 station can serve 1 car per day at a cost of $0.68 each.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Leviton-15- ... /301361472
I like how you switched from the capital cost of an H2 station to the cost/fill of an L1. Apples to apples would be total cost/fill over the lifetime of the installation. And then you neglected to include the cost of the wiring, protection, install, tubing, permits, inspection, etc. in the cost of the L1.

Of course, H2 stations aren't costing anything like that much now, as California's annual H2 reports have been showing a drop due to economies of scale as well as the usual technical improvements, a trend that will accelerate for a while yet. The IHS Markit link said the same thing.
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.

WetEV
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sun Jul 19, 2020 9:03 pm

GRA wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:17 pm
WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:04 pm
GRA wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:19 pm
Most of the world's car owners can't charge at home.
Most of the world's car owners have AC power to their house. L1 charging is fairly simple and cheap to add. L1 charging is all most people need for almost all of their driving.
Unlike the U.S., most of the world's car owners don't live in detached single family homes with private garages. FTM, as noted previously 44% of U S. households can't charge at home either. If you can, great, some kind of PEV could work for you.
You don't need a detached single family home with a private garage to have an L1 station by your parking spot on a driveway or the street.

Why are you so anti-BEV?
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
2019 eTron Blue

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 752
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:47 am

GRA wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 3:38 pm
WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
GRA wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 3:41 pm


No one has claimed that it is, only that it's on a path to being solved in the next 5-10 years, and that it's now time to start moving from the Dem/Val phase into production to start getting costs down, but subsidies and mandates will be required for a while yet. IOW, the same process that RE and BEVs have followed; Wind/PV have now reached cost-competitiveness and can stand on their own, BEVs and H2/FCEVs haven't, with BEVs closer to doing so at the lower end of capability.
Then you could identify the technology. What technology will produce hydrogen cheaper than renewable electric power in 5-10 years? (I expect to hear crickets.)

To repeat for the umpteenth time, H2 doesn't have to be cheaper than RE, it only has to be competitive with gas/diesel, which is the goal. Anything beyond that is gravy.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
The path to FCEVs is actually a rather different path. The compelling use for FCEV is aviation, not automotive. Fuel cells are not yet ready for aviation, but perhaps they might be ready for test vehicles in a decade. Fuel cost is less of a concern, as renewable electric power isn't the competition. I'd expect to be able to fly to California in a fuel cell power plane before I could drive there.
Seeing as how the only thing preventing you from doing so is the lack of an H2 filling station or two along the way, while FCEV a/c will have a lot of testing and certification to do before any passenger can fly on one, I'd say you've got it bass-ackwards.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
Electric power has long been cheaper than gasoline.

Image

Hydrogen has long been more expensive than electric power. Making hydrogen cheaper will first displace a lot of fossil fuel produced hydrogen, used for all sorts of thing in industrial applications. FCEVs are far down the list of potential economic uses.
And yet, despite electricity being usually cheaper than gas (not for me at retail chargers), ICEs dominate because of the capability they provide. BEVs will improve, but at the moment FCEVs also provide greater capability.

BTW, when talking about a/c you ignore FCEV trains, which are already in commercial service in Europe. The justification for them here is much greater given our much lower population density, which makes track electrification uneconomic bar a few routes like the NE corridor. Then there's ocean-going shipping.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
GRA wrote:
Sat Jul 18, 2020 3:41 pm

The step from 200-400 miles represents far more than a doubling of utility to me (and most car buyers). I only need to take a break every 4-6 hours.
You are not the typical car buyer. I'm not as well, my typical trip includes a stop about every 80 miles. Not for me, for my wife. That is about her "comfort range". This is why a 200 mile range is very acceptable to me.

The thing is, the typical car buyer wants about as much range as I do, certainly at least 300+ no worries miles plus a reserve in any conditions, for as long as they keep the car. Which is what virtually all ICE models provide.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
You can buy a top of the line EV with 400 mile range now. I'd expect the more affordable (aka Bolt/LEAF) class of BEVs will be there in less than 5-10 years. Realistically, long before hydrogen.

380 mile range Hyundai Nexo Blue FCEV CUV base MSRP $58,735, with a real range greater than the $74,990 base MSRP '400 mile' Model S offered by Tesla, because unlike the Tesla I can freely fill it up and and if I wish drain the tank (not that I would, as an emergency reserve is there for a reason) every time if I want without having to worry about causing long-term degradation. The new Mirai will apparently exceed 400 miles, being considerably more slippery than the Nexo.

A better comparison for the Nexo size-wise is with the 316 mile, $52,990 base MSRP Model Y (Edit: new MSRP $49,990); again, Mod. Y real range will be less, unless you're so wealthy you simply don't care about degradation.

Tesla specifically recommends not charging to more than 90%, and you don't get full Regen either if you do go above that level. As we all know, battery longevity is maximised by limiting the SoC range.

No comment on the Model Y SR being cancelled and the reason given by Tesla, which flies directly in the face of your contention that range isn't compelling? The silence is deafening.

To repeat, the only thing preventing FCEVs from being practical ICE car replacements is whether and when RE H2 prices can be made competitive with gas/diesel. The car and infrastructure costs will drop due to economies of scale, and as noted in the IHS Markit link have been doing so significantly over the last several years despite the low numbers of both.
It's replies like this and to the others that show how anti-BEV you are and how you are NOT an effective advocate for EV's in general. You flat out don't get how most people can _conveniently_ own BEV's, with today's choices. That 44% not having a garage is a complete red herring, and you don't even understand why. You're completely ignorant of what living with a BEV is like. I wonder if you're one of the last users of flip-phones before being forced out when they stopped making them?
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 752
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:03 am

Oh, and FCEV's are doomed. Hyliion is prototyping their CNG (they call it Renewable Natural Gas [from biogas], but it's essentially CNG) range extended class-8 BEV truck now.

And when/if this method for producing methane directly with CO2 and an electric field can be refined to commercial scale: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 114523.htm

... then there's no reason to electrolyze water to produce H2, because of the compression losses and containment issues. Rather produce renewable methane and get all the benefits of a fast-fill fuel, produced with renewable energy, and easily portable in existing [lower-pressure] CNG tanks.

Edit: The actual Chemistry Journal source: https://www.journal.csj.jp/doi/full/10.1246/cl.190930

Edit #2: My bad, H2 is needed as a feedstock in the reaction. So electrolyzing H2 is still needed. At least it doesn't have to be compressed first.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

cwerdna
Posts: 11008
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Delivery Date: 28 Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:53 am

Hope this isn't a repeat:
GM backs away from hydrogen fuel-cell tech in passenger vehicles
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... r-vehicles

'19 Bolt Premier
'13 Leaf SV w/premium (owned)
'13 Leaf SV w/QC + LED & premium (lease over)

Please don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

Oilpan4
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 2:18 pm

cwerdna wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:53 am
Hope this isn't a repeat:
GM backs away from hydrogen fuel-cell tech in passenger vehicles
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... r-vehicles
I remember about 10 or 12 years ago gm pleged to spend a billion dollars on hydrogen development.
I hope they didn't.
trumpvirus
Is going to get you.

cwerdna
Posts: 11008
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Delivery Date: 28 Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 2:43 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 2:18 pm
cwerdna wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:53 am
Hope this isn't a repeat:
GM backs away from hydrogen fuel-cell tech in passenger vehicles
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... r-vehicles
I remember about 10 or 12 years ago gm pleged to spend a billion dollars on hydrogen development.
I hope they didn't.
I never followed by a quick Google search turned up https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/hom ... rogen.html from 2016:
Fast-forward to 2016: GM has invested more than $2.5 billion in hydrogen fuel cell technology and is among patent leaders along with Honda, its collaborator since 2013 in developing a next-generation system that will be much more powerful but a fraction of the size of the equipment-crammed Electrovan, which had room for only a driver and two passengers.
:mrgreen:
I did briefly test drive a GM FCEV at the Detroit Auto Show (as it's informally known) inside (!, yes) a building in January 2009.

'19 Bolt Premier
'13 Leaf SV w/premium (owned)
'13 Leaf SV w/QC + LED & premium (lease over)

Please don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

GRA
Posts: 12189
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 4:41 pm

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 9:03 pm
GRA wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:17 pm
WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:04 pm


Most of the world's car owners have AC power to their house. L1 charging is fairly simple and cheap to add. L1 charging is all most people need for almost all of their driving.
Unlike the U.S., most of the world's car owners don't live in detached single family homes with private garages. FTM, as noted previously 44% of U S. households can't charge at home either. If you can, great, some kind of PEV could work for you.
You don't need a detached single family home with a private garage to have an L1 station by your parking spot on a driveway or the street.
As I've pointed out, it will be enormously expensive and time consuming to build all those charging stations. Which isn't to say it can't or shouldn't be done; it should. But here I am, living in the U.S. metro region with the highest % of BEV sales in the country, yet 10 years after the first mass-produced BEV appeared the nearest public (L2) charging to me is 1/2 mile away in a city-owned public garage, which was opened in 2013 or 2014 IIRR, and charges $0.49/kWH.

I'm a firm believer in picking low-hanging fruit first, which is why I think we need to provide public charging in parking lots and garages first. There's such a city-owned lot 2 blocks from me. And far more workplaces have parking lots or garages they could install charging in, such as cwerdna has access to. So why do you think it hasn't happened faster?

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 9:03 pm
Why are you so anti-BEV?
As noted in numerous replies to others I'm not, nor am I pro-H2/FCEV. I believe both along with biofuels have a part to play in getting off fossil fuels, but that doesn't blind me to the fact that there are enormous obstacles to success in the way of each of them. I believe each has a decent chance of overcoming them but there are no guarantees, so also believe we must proceed ahead on as many fronts as possible.

BTW,here's a H2/FCEV forecast in line with your own views, via The Motley Fool:
Fuel Cell Investors Shouldn't Get Too Caught Up in the Hydrogen Economy Just Yet

https://www-fool-com.cdn.ampproject.org ... up-in.aspx

OTOH, via Which Car?:
Why can’t anyone make money selling an electric car?

https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/no-one ... ctric-cars
Last edited by GRA on Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:14 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: 12189
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:08 pm

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 1:47 am
GRA wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 3:38 pm
WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am


Then you could identify the technology. What technology will produce hydrogen cheaper than renewable electric power in 5-10 years? (I expect to hear crickets.)

To repeat for the umpteenth time, H2 doesn't have to be cheaper than RE, it only has to be competitive with gas/diesel, which is the goal. Anything beyond that is gravy.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
The path to FCEVs is actually a rather different path. The compelling use for FCEV is aviation, not automotive. Fuel cells are not yet ready for aviation, but perhaps they might be ready for test vehicles in a decade. Fuel cost is less of a concern, as renewable electric power isn't the competition. I'd expect to be able to fly to California in a fuel cell power plane before I could drive there.
Seeing as how the only thing preventing you from doing so is the lack of an H2 filling station or two along the way, while FCEV a/c will have a lot of testing and certification to do before any passenger can fly on one, I'd say you've got it bass-ackwards.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
Electric power has long been cheaper than gasoline.

Image

Hydrogen has long been more expensive than electric power. Making hydrogen cheaper will first displace a lot of fossil fuel produced hydrogen, used for all sorts of thing in industrial applications. FCEVs are far down the list of potential economic uses.
And yet, despite electricity being usually cheaper than gas (not for me at retail chargers), ICEs dominate because of the capability they provide. BEVs will improve, but at the moment FCEVs also provide greater capability.

BTW, when talking about a/c you ignore FCEV trains, which are already in commercial service in Europe. The justification for them here is much greater given our much lower population density, which makes track electrification uneconomic bar a few routes like the NE corridor. Then there's ocean-going shipping.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am


You are not the typical car buyer. I'm not as well, my typical trip includes a stop about every 80 miles. Not for me, for my wife. That is about her "comfort range". This is why a 200 mile range is very acceptable to me.

The thing is, the typical car buyer wants about as much range as I do, certainly at least 300+ no worries miles plus a reserve in any conditions, for as long as they keep the car. Which is what virtually all ICE models provide.

WetEV wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:16 am
You can buy a top of the line EV with 400 mile range now. I'd expect the more affordable (aka Bolt/LEAF) class of BEVs will be there in less than 5-10 years. Realistically, long before hydrogen.

380 mile range Hyundai Nexo Blue FCEV CUV base MSRP $58,735, with a real range greater than the $74,990 base MSRP '400 mile' Model S offered by Tesla, because unlike the Tesla I can freely fill it up and and if I wish drain the tank (not that I would, as an emergency reserve is there for a reason) every time if I want without having to worry about causing long-term degradation. The new Mirai will apparently exceed 400 miles, being considerably more slippery than the Nexo.

A better comparison for the Nexo size-wise is with the 316 mile, $52,990 base MSRP Model Y (Edit: new MSRP $49,990); again, Mod. Y real range will be less, unless you're so wealthy you simply don't care about degradation.

Tesla specifically recommends not charging to more than 90%, and you don't get full Regen either if you do go above that level. As we all know, battery longevity is maximised by limiting the SoC range.

No comment on the Model Y SR being cancelled and the reason given by Tesla, which flies directly in the face of your contention that range isn't compelling? The silence is deafening.

To repeat, the only thing preventing FCEVs from being practical ICE car replacements is whether and when RE H2 prices can be made competitive with gas/diesel. The car and infrastructure costs will drop due to economies of scale, and as noted in the IHS Markit link have been doing so significantly over the last several years despite the low numbers of both.
It's replies like this and to the others that show how anti-BEV you are and how you are NOT an effective advocate for EV's in general. You flat out don't get how most people can _conveniently_ own BEV's, with today's choices. That 44% not having a garage is a complete red herring, and you don't even understand why. You're completely ignorant of what living with a BEV is like. I wonder if you're one of the last users of flip-phones before being forced out when they stopped making them?

I notice you didn't answer my question re what choice you'd make in the same situation

It's not 44% not having a garage, it's 44% not being able to charge at home in the U.S. The percentage is a lot higher in other countries with higher population densities, i.e. more people living in apartments/townhomes etc. The source for the U.S. data was a survey conducted by Plug-in America a few years ago. I guess they must be anti-BEV too.

As to flip phones, only got a smart phone last year. As I don't make phone calls anymore owing to my hearing, the only thing I used a phone for was texting and I did very little of it, but a smart phone's easier for that. The flip phone was smaller, lighter and more rugged, though,which made it easier to carry in the backcountry for emergencies.

OTOH my smartphone has GPS and I've got a nav/map app for it, which makes it fun to play with (and all too seductive, like many computer programs). As I learned to navigate using map, compass, altimeter and my brain decades ago the phone's non-essential and, being fragile and dependent on batteries, not to be depended on, and I prefer to get away from people who are constantly using theirs in the backcountry in any case.

When my last laptop died I realized just how much time I was spending on it at home, so didn't replace it and dropped internet service, resolving that I'd only use library computers from then on for private email etc., as they have time limits and I'd have to walk over there to use them.

I spend enough time at work on a computer to not want to also be spending most of my free time on one. The smart phone's been essential for the last few months though, as the libraries have all been shut since mid-March. I even considered getting myself another computer but so far have resisted it, even though typing replies like this on my phone is a royal pain.
Last edited by GRA on Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:50 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: 12189
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:21 pm

GCC:
SOFC-maker Bloom Energy announces initial strategy for hydrogen market entry; partnership with SK

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/0 ... bloom.html

Solid-oxide-fuel-cell manufacturer Bloom Energy is entering the commercial hydrogen market by introducing hydrogen-powered fuel cells and electrolyzers that produce renewable hydrogen.

These products will be first introduced to the South Korean market in 2021 through an expanded partnership with SK Engineering and Construction (SK E&C), an affiliate of SK Group.

Bloom’s technologies can be critical in enabling South Korea to execute on its government-mandated Hydrogen Economy Roadmap. Bloom’s existing partnership with SK E&C has already sold 120 megawatts (MW) of fuel cells in South Korea, generating more than $1 billion in equipment and future services revenue for Bloom. . . .

By the end of 2020, Bloom expects to ship a 100 kW pilot server to South Korea to power an SK E&C facility in early 2021. The second phase, a 1 MW hydrogen server installation, is targeted for a 2022 deployment. Both companies have committed to fund and to resource these two phases fully. . . .

SK Group is the leading oil and gas provider in South Korea with 3,400 gas stations. The South Korean government’s roadmap requires the construction of 1,200 filling stations to fuel 6.2 million hydrogen cars by 2040. Bloom’s electrolyzers would allow SK to play a vital role in helping to meet these targets.

—Jason Ahn. . . .

Generating low-cost hydrogen from intermittent renewables is a sine qua non for decarbonization. Solid oxide electrolyzers hold the greatest potential to generate low-cost green hydrogen because of their superior efficiency, rapidly declining costs, and scalability. Achieving zero emissions in many sectors will depend upon making massive amounts of renewable hydrogen. Because Bloom is the market leader in solid oxide technology, I am very encouraged by this announcement.

—Jack Brouwer, professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering and director of the National Fuel Cell Research Center (NFCRC) at the University of California, Irvine

Re the GM announcement, the GCR article says:
Now GM plans to focus on battery-electric powertrains for passenger cars, and fuel-cell powertrains for military and commercial vehicles, Parker reportedly said on the conference call.
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.

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”