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.
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.