The Economist: Electric cars Difference Engine: Tailpipe truths

$4 per kilogram is current cost of hydrogen which is good for 60 miles in the Honda FCX. Gasoline is approaching that cost now.

As Toyota noted, hydrogen would be much more efficient use of fossil fuels is one is comparing electricity or hydrogen generated from fossil fuels. Natural gas for instance. Kind of like a Prius vs. a regular car, hydrogen would give us much more "mileage" (literal and figurative) and much less green house gas emissions per mile.

When one switches to sustainable generation such as wind and solar, electricity itself is more efficient but with no fuel input it loses that generation efficiency advantage and hydrogen wins on utility, range and refueling.

Hydrogen can also be directly generated from biomass sources so converting our human and animal sewage systems to hydrogen generating power stations has big sustainable economy advantages. NY Water Dept would become a big supplier of hydrogen fuel (revenue) while having its disposal costs drop. It also greatly reduces the waste output of the sewer plants, another big advantage.

At each stage, hydrogen wins out. Transitional phase using fossil fuels to generate hydrogen or electric, hydrogen wins. Sustainable phase, hydrogen wins because fuel cost drops out and waste system produces fuel. Usability hydrogen wins due to range and refueling issues. Nothing needed other than current fuel station system.

 

A distinction without a difference. The 9 kg of hydrogen vs. the 10 gallons of gasoline in the tank of a car are both fuel. One costing $4 per kg one costing $4 per gallon.

The gasoline powered Prius would have much higher greenhouse gas emissions than the hydrogen powered Prius.

 

150,000x $1M = $150B
Currently they are more like $2M with California wanting $100M for 50 refueling stations (about the same amount of money could provide 20,000 L2 chargers). Prices might go down with higher volume, but that's a lot of money.

Until 2020 hydrogen is limited to people in a few large MSAs around the world. Well before then there will be plenty of chargers for apartments, condos, and work areas. Currently those that can charge at home is much larger than the percentage that will be able to conveniently refuel at hydrogen charging stations 10 years from now.

You can look to see that hydrogen fueling station in 2015 will only be in a small area.
http://www.hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/stations_cars/stations_cars.htm

Now how much would you pay for a fcv-r? Toyota says they may sell them for $50K, I assume that is a very small number only in LA after government subsidies
http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/01/toyota-fcv-r-concept-brings-fuel-cell-cars-closer-to-reality-ai/

They say european price will be 110,000 euros.

 

There you go...we've "saved" $350B already from the wag $500B.

US has a very large hydrogen production and distribution base so the "limits" are about the same limitation as gasoline and oil refining. Currently US produces 15 million metric tons of hydrogen which would be about 10% of gasoline. That's a huge existing base and is available everywhere.

Since both run off electricity, the numbers are exactly the same but the NECESSITY of the EV's to charge at home, have a home with a garage severely constrains electric vehicles future. It's why I didn't buy a Volt vs. a Prius.

Refueling and range are the biggest holdups to electric vehicles.

Wow! In a heartbeat! Less than Highlander or Lexus hybrids? Same price as Leaf and Volt? That's great news.

 

This is why they used a SUV for the test mules. Those four tanks take up more space than the Highlander's gasoline tank. My google-fu has failed me on finding JC08 numbers for the Kluger hybrid, but the FCHV-adv JC08 range is only slightly better than the hybrid's EPA range. It can refuel faster than a BEV, but will have to refuel more often than an ICE.

The Phil once available for home fueling CNG was estimated to cost around $2000(it was lease only). It required an annual service to replace seals that cost $1000. It could fill a Civic GX over night with 3800psi CNG. For compressed hydrogen, a home system needs to go up to 5000psi, and current prototypes use 10000psi tanks.

A home fuel cell with reformer is probably in the $50k to $100k range. The bulk of which is the fuel cell. The reformer is probably several thousand alone. Honda is developing a home system. It basicly sounds like it will be a home fuel cell with a hydrogen purifier, compressor, and storage tank. It's fuel will likely be large enough to power the fuel making process, but the waste heat will be available for hot water/heating.

At best, it can defray some of a hydrogen plants costs. The oxygen itself will be sold at a lost. It's cheaper and more efficient to just purify and concentration it from the atmosphere. Collecting the oxygen will also add to the hydrogen plant's equipment costs.

And like CNG, it switches one fossil fuel for another. Natural gas has several advantages over crude; less pollution and domesticly sourced are some. Shifting to it in some cases is a good. It has efficiency advantages, whether turbine or fuel cell, for electricity production.

It has limitations, whether or not it's reformed to hydrogen, in transportation. The big one is energy density. The Civic GX has a tank range of 120 to 150 miles, and loses much of its trunk. FCVs have higher efficiencies and range. They also require much higher pressure tanks that are costlier, heavier and bulkier. They are also hybrids. There is also better use of space in the proposed consumer models, but the Civic is just a conversion. It wasn't designed with CNG in mind.

In buses, trucks, and trains, where space isn't an issue, might work. In which case, we should work on NG direct fuel cells and onboard reformers. Natural gas is easier to store and transport. Hydrogen is going to leak out of everything over time, and can only be trucked. While mostly private, there are NG refueling stations already in service. Its cheaper to install NG stations to service both fuel cell and CNG ICE/hybrid trucks than seperate fuel pumps for both.

The high pressure tanks under development can be adapted for CNG. Refueling stations would need to be updated. That could be done over time, when stations are do for tank replacements. It isn't like a 10k psi tank couldn't be filled with only 3800.

Ultimately though, hydrogen as a 'fuel' is a diversion of resources. Natural gas isn't a renewable, and electricity gets better mileage in a battery than electrolysis.

It is probably the best fuel to run through a fuel cell. However, we can skip its storage limitations by reforming NG on site, as needed. This might make it unfeasible for FCHV cars, but plug in ones are already unfeasible. The tanks and battery are competing for real estate. Methanol or other liquid powered fuel cells might be an answer.

The hurdle for plug ins isn't the fuel cell, it's the battery. They are already feasible for most families. We just need to get more people into them or even plain hybrids. The best bet for fuel cells to be viable in a car is as a range extender, onboard or off. We already have options there though. Their efficiency might not be up to snuff. That is secondary to packaging for a successful plug in though when EV range can cover the majority of miles.

Fuel cells may have a place in the future, but let's focus the short term now. Hybrid uptake has only been 3% at most here. Plug ins even less. Let's get more of them on the road before trying to replace the ICE in them.

 

But weigh much less. Much of the fuel savings in cars has come from weight reduction.

Same as electric service or natural gas service for home vehicle fueling. The advantage of hydrogen is people don't need a home fueling station while it is a requirement of electric vehicles. Huge advantage of hydrogen of electric.

Same for electricity. Nice part about hydrogen is that it has the range and refueling advantages of natural gas and the emissions advantages of electric.

As Toyota scientists noted, direct conversion of natural gas to hydrogen is much more efficient than burning natural gas to create steam to turn generators to generate electricity. It gives hydrogen a 20-40% advantage at the start. Going to sustainable electric such as solar and wind, no fuel cost eliminates electrics direct generation advantage and hydrogen wins on range and refueling.

 

Wrong.. the hydrogen fuel may weigh less, but the hydrogen tanks weigh more, much more. if one considers weight of Fuel+tanks, gas wins.

And the fuel savings in cars has NOT really comme from weight reduction (we could gain there but have not). Fuel savings in ICE cars have come rom improved control systems and injectors. In the past ten years, compact cars grew over 500lb heavier but improved their fuel economy.
Story of a Decade: compact cars gain weight, become more fuel efficient

Its not the same. There is virtually no house in america without power and virtually non with hydrogen. My fueling station is the plug in my garage. And one does not have to charge at home, here are people that charge only at work.. Or there is the "better place" model with 200m batteries that are swapped out via a car-wash like machine.

Yes, reforming NG to produce H2 + using a fuel cell is more efficient than burning it, but overall an H2-based FC system is 10% less efficient than using a NG-based fuel cell system. Guess toyota forget to tell you that. So if you want to use NG as a source, just use it in a NG fuel cell -- its easier to mange and its more efficient.

For renewables, batteries win on efficiency by a wide margin. Hydrogen has exactly 1 sustainable advantage, its refueling time for long trips. BEVs like the model S, with 300 miles of range currently cost less, than a FCHV. With QC, they can do a reasonable trip but need to stop for an hour every 200 miles or so. The range for hydrogen is not really better, unless its better at a cost-performance view,which it is not.

I can see a FC-EREV, but with an EREV with say a 100mile EV range, the extender will need to be used only a few thousands of miles a year.
So cost is critical for an infrequently used item. I find the fact that all the manufactures are doing pure FCEV, not FC-EREV as a clear sign they are focusing on engineering prowess, marketing and CARB-placation.

 

Hay guys, I am surprised you still keep answering ProximalSuns's little provocations!

 

But with hydrogen you don't need a home fueling station. With electric you must have it.

But the comparison was using natural gas to generate steam to turn generators to generate electricity or converting natural gas to hydrogen. As the Toyota scientists pointed out, the hydrogen was more efficient than the electric.

But loses on range and refueling which is why Toyota noted electrics are limited in replacing gasoline vehicles.

Hydrogen has all the advantages of electric in not needeing fossil fuels and none of the disadvantages, range and refueling. Plus hydrogen can run all transport needs from jets to boats which electric cannot do so building a hydrogen infrastructure is a complete solution.

As US Dept of Energy noted, the costs drop dramatically with economies of scale so best to start building the hydrogen economy now. Electric can never fill the need.

 

No you don't have to have one, its just that it is convenient and already there.

And I would have to have a home fueling station.. There are zero public H2 stations Colorado, and the closest private one is 120miles R/T.

I was pointing out that its that was a meaningless comparison. An ICE makes better use of gasoline than an FCEV. The FCEV would make more efficient use of captured cow-farts than burning them. But its FCEV is not more efficient when not using truly renewable fuels (wind/solar/hyrdo), which is the point.

Hydrogen is does not have "all the advantages of electric n not needing fossil fuels" as H2 is much less efficient and requires massive infrastructure. I used to believe that H2 was the answer, until I started to actually undertand the inefficiencies.

Hydrogen might have a role for some transportation, but for personal vehicles, its less efficient and much more expensive than EVs. We can transform energy into many forms, we can reform NG into jet fuel too. Hydrogen is not a magic answer, its efficient for a few things, and that's it.

I now see the Hydrogen highway infrastructure as not only a long way off, but maybe something that should never be built. Maybe there will be breakthrough but right now I don't see a viable future.

 

Of course you need home charging for an electric. Makes ZERO sense without it. Almost impossible to use without it. And at that, limited to home owners with garages.

But the point is what is most efficient and most practical not using gasoline (fossil fuels). Based on sustainable electric, the electric would win battle on efficiency by lose the war on practicality.

 

Really, I know condo and apartment dwellers with garages and plugs, and plenty of companies have parking lots with power in various places. I plug in at my condo too.

And companies like Better Place are all about EV without a plug.

Realistically the majority of people buying a 50K car have a garage if they want it. Yeah there are some city dwellers who don't, and who probably don't really need to own a car either.

As someone that OWNs a EREV, I can say its very practical, and very efficient. Even counting for the gas I've use in the past 6 months, its more efficient than a H2 FCEV would be using renewable wind power.

Of course your statement carries little weight from someone that has already gotten many facts about H2 wrong, (though glad to see you finaly admit on renewable energy its not as efficient), and is currently driving a gas guzzling ICE getting what maybe 60MPG on gas?

 

Anything is possible but the plug-in stations for electric vehicles are only practical in home garage scenario. It's part of the standard equipment sold for the vehicle. Leviton home charger display in the dealers show room.

So much for Trump Towers.

The need for home charging is an impediment as is the range and refueling issues for electrics.

 

I'm not sure where the $500B came from. The optimistic world wide projections for hydrogen by 2020 are now at a million cars. If all were sold in the US, that $150B would be $150,000 per car. These stations would also get no customers so would close down, as many have in California. Think about how much better the government could do with that money instead of build empty hydrogen fueling stations.

There is no doubt about that but most of it is on the gulf coast of lousiana and texas and used for oil refining. In California most of their low capacity uses oil as the feedstock. To get it from the refineries to stations there would need to be a great deal of liquid hydrogen trucked long distances, that is why new hydrogen capacity would need to be built and why the costs are high. Liquefying the hydrogen and trucking it greatly reduces well to wheel efficiency.

Change things up now, and understand the tech, and you would realize if Hydrogen was used as the range extender on an EVER (electric vehicle range extender) many fewer stations would be needed, but the hydrogen lobby is trying to suck money away from vehicle electrification.

The honda system produces about 0.5kg of hydrogen a day, about the amount of fuel to go 30 miles. It is much more expensive and uses about the electricity that the volt uses for 4 charges. This means it would need four times the electricity. The extra cost of the electrolysis system may actually be more than the battery in a EREV fcv.

This is not what the marketing says, its cost. If a volt was $20k instead of in the mid thirties it would sell much better. If a tesla S performance was $45K many of my neighbors would buy them. The hydrogen lobby feeds on deception.

The fcv-r is a vehicle like a volt or a clarity, but IMHO uglier. Would your really pay $17K more for that than a volt or $22K more than a leaf? I won't even have the oportunity since I don't live in LA, the only likely place it will be offered in North America. California's ARB has been politicing hard for me to pay my taxes to help get them there. I don't believe you would rather have that POS than a tesla S 40kwh, which will be around the same price.

 

Same place most of the anti-hydrogen jihadists get their stuff...out of thin air. Hydrogen coming out of thin water.

Is that what we paid for gas stations? Who knew. Or was that bundled in the $4 gallon/kg price of fuel?

Doubt EVERY one of the 150,000 gas stations would have hydrogen pumps added if only 1 million hydrogen cars. Probably concentrated in high density coastal areas.

That explains the jihadist dogma of the anti-hydrogen electro car lobbyists on PC despite the science from DOE, Toyota etc. I wouldn't worry about hydrogen development taking money away from research into improving electric vehicles. It is not an either or situation. A breakthrough in battery technology that provided range and refueling ability could happen and should certainly be pursued.

Department of Energy only spends $15B on energy R&D. Considering US energy inefficiency (50% less energy efficient than Europe) and the resulting oil imports and environmental damage represent the biggest threat to US national security, DOE budget for energy R&D and feasibility should be at Manhattan Project levels of $30B, probably close to $100B when fusion is included. Military spending is $1.3T per year but does nothing to solve main US strategic threat of energy inefficiency and resulting oil imports.

Real key is government providing tax credits so the cost to consumer is $20K, subsidizing US manufacturers for the difference with substantial rewards for reduction in cost and increases in efficiency.

 

Stop spreading the misinformation. According to this 2 years old Bloomberg article:

Toyota and GM now use about 30 grams (1.06 ounces) of platinum per fuel-cell vehicle and aim to reduce it to about 10 grams, according to Masuda and Charles Freese, GM’s executive director of global powertrain engineering.

Toyota Plans $50,000 Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Sedan by 2015 - Bloomberg

An ounce of Platinum is $1,571 today. If the production version uses only 10 grams, the cost of platinum would be under $550.

 

2015. That's due date for my next car after 2012 Prius 3/3!

Means I've gotta start lobbying for hydro stations in on I-5 and I-84 for Whistler and Park City trips....on hydrogen...the future has arrived.

 

Looks like FCV-R has only one big tank.

With the fuel-cell unit located beneath the specially designed body, the vehicle can accommodate up to four passengers and boasts impressive luggage space. The fuel cell stack, consisting of a 70MPa high-pressure hydrogen tank, has been improved to provide a cruising distance of approximately 700 km or more (under the JC08 test cycle; according to TMC).

Fuel Cell Vehicle | TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION GLOBAL WEBSITE

NG is much cleaner domestic fossil fuel than coal and US has plenty of NG. Per Toyota calculation, FCHV has the highest well-to-wheel efficiency, even over EV when using NG.



Green Car Congress: Toyota Aims to Reduce Fuel Cell Vehicle Cost to 1/10 of Current By Commercialization in 2015; Reduction to Another 1/10 With Scale

 

Three comments regarding this graphic:
1, the NG to electricity step is not using current best tech plants that are about 55% efficent; and I hazard to guess are far less expensive than reformation plants.

2. Toyota has a 5 year engineering outline for a DI Prius that is 45% ICE efficient.

Either route is competitive with hydrogen's lifecycle efficiency for a fraction of the cost.

3. Is it reasonable to ignore hydrogen's transport costs ?

 

Leviton sells L2 chargers, which are optional equipment and of course dealers try to sell that stuff. I've done 6000+ Ev mles using the L1 charger supplied with the car. So what is needed for "home/office charging" a standard 120v outlet. Only need L2 if you drive a lot of miles and need to recharge between trips. L1 gives me 35 miles in 8 hours.. so I could be doing 70miles a day in EV mode with just that. (I rarely go that far).

If you live at Trump Towers in NYC, you don't really need to own a car. Manhattan is one of the few places in the US you can really be carless and will be happier for it. Parking on the streets there is a nightmare. Either get a garage or don't own a car. I know, I lived there (not at trump towers) and taught at Columbia for many years.

The need for charging and range "seems" like an issue and does play in people's perceptions. But compared to H2, having access to a 120v socket is much simpler.