The Economist: Electric cars Difference Engine: Tailpipe truths

They certainly are more expensive than plug ins. The big advantage to hydrogen is supposed to be the ability to use renewable electricity. Why would you not allow its less expensive competitor to not be able to use this renewable electricity. The only reason I can see for them not to have plugs is for honda and toyota to claim at some date way in the future fc vehicles will be less expensive than plug ins. That is the current line.

If fuel cells are about substituting natural gas for oil, something advocates have never said, the pickens plan is a much more efficient one for that. FC advocacy was about renewables for oil, something phevs and bevs do better.

They are using gas turbines, assuming all the ev's require the least efficient method to burn the natural gas to be added to the grid, while the fuel cells use the most efficient. But if we are adding more power to the grid to power these phevs and bevs would we not at least use the mix of new power plants Instead you want the fcells to be entirely natural gas, and the phevs and bevs to be entirely the legacy grid. I am saying no. What we are adding is a combination of natural gas and wind. Much of the natural gas is turbines because it is less expensive, but certainly if the DOE is paying for it, cc gas and wind are much less expensive than hydrogen fueling stations. Much of california are adding 50% efficient bloom boxes also for peaking power.

So no Toyota was using deception to pretend natural gas is the only fuel and its more efficient in fuel cells. It should be clear that electricity is also a fuel, and it is used less efficiently when converted to hydrogen then used in a fuel cell vehicle.

I can't quite agree there, here is the tesla S performance has an 85kwh pack, and seems to have great interior volume. It does add weight, weighing in at a little over 4000 lbs. No one makes a fuel cell vehicle as fast, but certainly is much less expensive to produce than the clarity or any of the other fuel cell cars. The density seems quite fine today. For smaller volumes phevs seem to be the right way to go, although they have only been small so far, there is no reason they should stay that way.

At least we can agree that fc vehicles are expensive to produce. I can't image volume production without a plug. Toyota has european prices which are likely to be lower than there costs at over $100K before taxes for their future fuel cell trial. There are 4 manufacturers still pushing this, but IMHO its only to take the government R&D dollars. Honda is the most promising, saying a production vehicle in 2018. Freedom car said 2020s for viability with demos by 2015. We will get those demos. Carb said mass production with heavy volume in 2011, which is clearly wrong. Don't believe the hype. We will still just have demo fleets in 2018. Honda and Toyota are on their way to admitting as much. Honda will have a phev this year, and toyota is adding a bev to its phev. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have both already said fc are not going to be affordable in the near future.

 

If 4 seats are a hang up for the Volt, how aren't they going to be for a FCHV? If Toyota's sedan comes to market, it's going to have 4 seats, no trunk space, or a short range. Between the battery and the hydrogen tanks, I bet it won't have a spare.

With a rough conversion; 93mph top speed. No acceleration number listed, but it has 67 less hp than the 4cyl. Highlander, and is 150 to 200 pounds heavier.

They might have a place in the future. It appears 5kw cogen units are available for home power and heat.

It appears that the news on improvements are rosier than batteries. Such as the assumption that installing the refueling infrastructure will just happen. BEVs have drawbacks, you don't need an exterior network chargers available to make them work for people. CNG and LPG vehicles have been available for years, and there are very few public refueling stations.
Toyota's flyer is marketing propaganda.

Hydrogen is a poor energy carrier. Those home units might catch on, perhaps just for back up generator replacements. Maybe commercial scale ones will replace gas turbines for peak power. The reformers is built in, so they only require NG to be piped in.

FC cars need it to be compressed. Even at 10k psi, the Clarity only has a range of about the Civic GX, or maybe twice current BEVs. Once affordable they'll have about the same range. They do refuel faster, but for those that the latest BEV's range won't do, aren't going to want to pump hydrogen one to two times day.

GHG are still produced when reforming NG. The carbon has to go somewhere. FC advocates claim it's more concentrated, and thus easier to capture, but work is currently getting them practical and affordable. NG is still non-renewable, and using renewable for electrolysis is wasteful compared to charging batteries.

I think a FCHV which is fueled by NG or methanol might work. If it's a plug in, and it seems the first ones won't be. But liquid fuels will be available for a while, and have a large advantage in space requirements.

Why not now? They already have a battery. The cost of enlarging it for 10 miles AER with charger will be small compared to the total cost of the car. Space is the real issue, and that's because of the hydrogen tanks. Smaller batteries seem more likely than smaller tanks.

 

Tesla Model S with 400 miles range (EPA) may not be physically possible with the current battery technology. It would surely be possible for a FCHV.

Remember, the energy required to compress H2 into 10,000 psi tank is included in the well-to-tank figure (67%).

I can recall, both Toyota and Hyundai hinting $50k FCHV on the market on 2015. They may not be as fast as Model S (also starts $50k after tax credit) but they should have higher range and faster refuel time.

Who knows, maybe the first Fuel Cell vehicle on the market will be a FC-PHV. That'll reduce H2 availability anxiety by having 10-15 miles EV range (with grid electricity).

 

Larger families can go for the five seater BMW7h.

Not the case with other hydrogen cars such as Honda FCX or BMW7h. 13 cu ft on Honda FCX.

From the start, Honda engineers designed this car to be tons of fun to drive. The FCX Clarity Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (FCEV) has a smooth and powerful electric engine for a great overall driving experience.

Seems like they have a nicely performing vehicle to point of selling fun performance as a feature.

These are first generation so I'm sure they'll evolve quickly just as the Prius did and we heard these same lamentations.

 

Its pretty easy to engineer, just make the floor thicker, if you follow how tesla makes its battery. But, the range of tesla's 85 kwh pack is fine. If you need longer range, as I mentioned use a phev. You can probably buy a tesla s and a phev for less than a fuel cell vehicle. The battery gets the roadster 300 mile range epa, I'm sure the S is less, but still a considerable range.

Really? Where was that hydrogen mined? What about the hydrogen from electrolysys, or is the only method to fuel from steam reformation of methane on site? That seems like a big restriction. 67% would be about the energy to take ng from the pipeline on site and to steam reform and compress it.

If you read the previous article I posted it talked about toyota backing away from the $50K price, and found toyota is estimating over 100,000 euros for european demos. That was November. It all depends on how much toyota and hyundai want to lose on each one. We can guess each clarity leased for $600/mo costs honda hundreds of thousands of dollars. GM said if they built more fuel cell equanox's it would cost them $400,000 each. Tesla is selling the S to whoever has the money and at a higher price than variable cost.

A tesla S 85kwh likely has a larger range than a clarity, plus that tesla has many more places to refuel. It can grab about 30 miles of range an hour from a L2. Refuleing is slower, but there should be L3 quick chargers all through california many years before a similar hydrogen fueling structure.

http://green.autoblog.com/2012/04/16/hyundai-will-make-limited-number-of-fuel-cell-vehicles-this-ye/
hyundai IMHO will soon cut estimates, but we shall see

We have gone from 2.8 million to 1 million. My guess is hyundai is willing to lose tens of millions but not hundreds of millions on fuel cell cars.

I would bet that any commercial car will be a plug in. All of these "limited production" models don't have plugs. A plug in needs a smaller less expensive fuel cell for the same acceleration and range.

 

Why reform to hydrogen when home fuel cells already exist that convert NG to electricity and heat at 50% efficiency for electricity plus any heat you might get out of it.

Current battery tech is fine for 400 mi range. You'll have to make some compromises to fit all the batteries, but otherwise no issue.

It's kind of dumb to pack in all those batteries when 95% of your driving doesn't exceed 100 miles / day, though. Much better off investing the money in QC stations.

 

The bloom box is big, but maybe they can make them smaller. Methanol fuel cells are also being developed. 59% is the theoretical efficiency if you don't recapture heat, which means 50% is close to as good as you can get. The other problem is price, at $1250/kw its not really priced for cars.

Or PHEVs.

 

5 kW NG fuel cell: ClearEdge 5 | Home Fuel Cell | ClearEdge Power

Looks to be about the size of a refrigerator - takes up the same floor space as an AC/HeatPump compressor. Weighs 1225 lbs.

Up to 90% efficient - presumably if you use all the heat it generates so it's electricity generation is probably around 40-45% efficient. Could be really useful if you have a pool or hot-tub to heat with a net-metering agreement - not sure how fast it can turn on/off and how that affects efficiency. I know that the Bloom boxes are best run all the time and take a good shot of electricity from the grid to warm up.

I believe this 5 kW FC costs around $50k, so close to the same.

 

Missing a zero ?

Wikipedia says that combined NG power plants (50%+ efficiency) are as low as $600/kw, but I cannot tell if that is the up and running from bare ground cost, or how much is left out.

Anybody know ?

 

A far more portable 5KW FC, sans tank and connecting plumming is $22,129.96, (just included one in a project budget.. though that may be academic pricing only).

 

Some bullet points from US Department of Energy regarding fuel cells and cost.

• Fuel cell vehicles will be affordable by the time they reach the marketplace.
• Hydrogen opponents look at the price of today’s hand-built prototypes and
  today’s stationary power generation systems and leap to the conclusion that fuel cell vehicles will not be cost-competitive. They ignore that prototypes and first-generation systems are almost always very expensive compared with mass produced units. Just like gasoline powered cars, personal computers, digital cameras, and many other innovative products, the price will come down.

 

Hydrogen fuel cell in Honda FCX weighs 148 lbs.

Reason for hydrogen over natural gas is natural gas is a fossil fuel. Extraction, refining, storage, transportation and use produce green house gases. It is an energy import for US and using it in quantities to replace gasoline would simply replace on fossil fuel import (oil) with another (natural gas).

 

No . . . it's NOT like cameras ... because hydrogen fuel stacks (which have to be REPLACED- they wear out) contain the precious metal - platinum:

The New Atlantis » The Hydrogen Hoax

Here's the pathetic part - when this article was written just a few years ago, platinum was less than half the cost that it is now in 2012. Besides the pathetic part ... here's the funny part - NO one ... that's right NO one from GM / Toyota / et al is willing to specifically say what even their hydrogen prototype cars cost ... only that they're now 'less'. When manufacturers fantasize hydrogen cars droping in cost once in production, the number of cars they base price reductions require cars produced at ans estimated 500,000. Consider the $40,000 Volt's sales numbers - then figure how long it's take to sell 500,000 cars ... though no technology currently exists to even get the cost that low. But then there's the fuel stack maintenance:

Hydrogen: The Fuel for Losers : Greentech Media

The real scientists continue to rail against hydrogen (unless the research dollars land in THEIR pockets) and it's waste:

Hydrogen fuel cell cars are a dead end from a technological, practical, and climate perspective -- Chu & Obama are right to kill the program, Part 1 | ThinkProgress

The DOE's positive hydrogen comments have only been stated by numskulls that have limited knowledge about hydrogen's feasibility. The parties that grasp the cost of the technology, and it's fuel production waste continue to rail against it.

Then there's the multi-trillion dollar "hydrogen highway" cost. yea, try and work that into a multi trillion dollar deficit. Even the oil industry - slated to begin building it have now backed off. Think about it ... if THEY know it's a looser, why would anybody else try and build 10's of thousands of "Hindenburg" stations.

Why the Hydrogen Feud Needs to End: Analysis - Popular Mechanics

Lastly, Google the "miricles" necessary to even dream about hydrogen even remotely being practical - and why it's been a dead science for 4 decades:

Hype About Hydrogen - Fact and Fiction in the race to save the climate - Joseph Romm

Once I get my glass of wine in me, the pro hydrogen waste thing ... I let it get to me more than usual. Why? Because PHEV's work ... and EV's work. That means every hydrogen R&D dollar wastes a little bit of PHEV & EV research.

.

 

Maybe it's like one of the other examples GASOLINE CARS?

Now what precious metal is in them thar cataleeetic convertars?

Honda, Toyota, US Department of Energy, history of technology development in late 20th century vs. internet conspiracy theory websites.

We report. You decide.

 

Last I heard, the amount of platinum required was down to the level in the catalytic converter (main reason for the cost reduction) and durability was increased.

Nissan made major breakthrough as well. They also have a FCHV based on Leaf by 2015. Hyundai has Tucson ix35 FCEV achieving 73 MPGe.

Toyota FCV-R concept is indeed a 4 seater but said to have plenty of trunk space with 700 km (435 miles) range.

 

+1

I can feed in some of those details -
In-House Tank Manufacture Lowers Cost of Toyota FCV | News & Analysis content from WardsAuto

GM separately said their cost was about $400,000. The difference is probably volume estimates, gm was talking about if they build 100 cars and toyota must be assuming the 1000s they are predicting in 2015.

GM CEO: Fuel cell vehicles "won't be practical until the 2020-plus period"

But they would also need volume for cost reduction, and most of the heavily reduced fc haven't even made it to the lab. They can sell fc vehicles for $50K in 2015, but they can't sell many of them without losing lots of money. GM says it has already sunk $1.5B into the program.

 

If Toyoya can build FCHV-adv SUV prototpe for $129k, they can mass produced and further cut the cost. This is from the same link you provided.

“And that’s a prototype vehicle, not a mass-produced vehicle. We’re looking at reducing the cost even more.”

Will we see $50k FCV-R (car, not SUV) production version in 2015? I think there is a very good chance but may only be in California. I hope the exchange rate situation improves by 2015.

I read they have not decided if it'll launch under Toyota or Lexus brand but the number thrown around was ten of thousands. I bet they are not losing much money if they can sell that volume.

 

The thing is, auto hydrogen R&D is a cash cow for the folks in the business. They know what side of the bread the butter is on. Simply 'saying', they'll have cars ready (infrastructure, technological breakthroughs, & cost) and running for production in 3, 5, or 10 years doesn't make it happen. The industry said it in the 70's - the 80's - the 90's - the 2000's and they just keep saying it. There is a pattern. There is no accountability. No one gets fired for failing to meet the projected future date ... no one puts anything on the line. 3,000 years ago, false prophets were stoned to death, and yet there were still false prophets, even with that level of accountability. Now? we just throw more money at 'em. How many more chances do we give the industry, before we stop throwing money down the 'I promise you a silver bullet' sewer? You pick the year. When it rolls past with still more vapor, will you yield again when they say, "but this time we're really really really close"? We need to get up from the poker table before our pockets are empty. Look at our nation's trillion dollar deficit. Are we there yet? I guess we can rationalize that a couple more billion won't make any difference at this point.

.

 

False prophets = profits.

Luuucy, you got some 'splainin' to do....

 

There's the rub. The ol' chicken and egg. Who is going to pay for this infrastructure before cars are available?
For a PHEV, or even a NEV, the only investment required is to make sure your outlets are up to snuff, and upgrading a 15 to 20 amp circuit can be done by an enterprising homeowner themselves. A BEV will likely require a level 2 charger installed, but it's magnitudes cheaper than a hydrogen refueling.

Electricity is readily available. Fuel cells may have their part in electrical generation. Mobil, hydrogen powered ones are technically impractical as a primary power source for cars. Maybe for trucking, or a towable range extender, it might work.

Perhaps a hydrogen FC lasts longer? The company site I spent time looking at used the built in reformer. They claimed 70something% for just electricity, and 90% when cogenning hot water and heat.

At that price, they might start competing with generators for power back up.

It's spin. The prototype is the fuel cell drive train. The SUV is an off the shelf Highlander chassis. It's a midsize SUV because that gave plenty of space to fit the tanks. A car requires that tunnel like the Volt, and you always brought that up as a con.

Does the $129k include profit? Does it include refueling infrastructure? A boondoggle of E85 was that there was no requirement to install stations. Can the tank and cell manufacturing be scaled up? Has anyone even come across a current price for a 10000psi tank?

Like GM and the Volt. At $50k, with limited refueling points, it will make the Volt look like a deal.