Toyota Chairman STILL down on EVs

No but I'd be happy with an air-<metal> battery then there is the motor and power controller electronics.

Bob Wilson

 

I think your numbers are way too high for H2 from electricity. Industrial scale electrolyzers might be about 60% efficient. (50-80% according to wikipedia). But then this does not take into account compressing the H2 and/or liquifying it (depending on the storage method). These can consume another 10-20%. Nor does this account for losses during storage or the losses when refueling. And the 60% fuel cell efficiency, of course, is after warmup. Don't have this for EVs/PHEVs.

Mike

 

I used 80% for platinum pem electrolysis (expensive but state of the art), only a guestimate on how much it would take to compress it. If there is not high trafic at the station keeping it compressed will take more energy. Liquifying will take much more. But I wanted to give it the best shot. At its most efficient fuel cells from electricity should use about 2x the energy to go the same distance. When we compare something like the clarity to the tesla S, it is more like 3x the electricity in a smaller slower fcv, than the bev. Those that claim fcv use less ghg, are comparing grid electricity with no renewables against fcv with expensive efficient reformers at every station and high throughput. IMHO these are bad assumptions.

 

VIDEO of Speech

 

That's a good answer for the next Tesla Model N...
(N for Nano... )

 

lol. you can see the bicycle in the background. In the US I expect electric bicycles to do better than this contraption. Maybe it will sell in thailand or india? idk. Is it as good as the twizzy?
Renault Twizy Renault Sport F1 Concept &#8211; News &#8211; Car and Driver

Tesla is going in the opposite direction. This looks like its along Renault line of thinking, or maybe group "think". The idea is a money loser today, and likely tomorrow, but maybe it will work the next day (2018+). Prospects seem much better for this than fuel cells, but it needs a cultural shift, that could happen if somehow they got buzz.

Remember those 2008 charts had toyota thinking bev for tiny city cars with short range. These only make sense if gasoline is very expensive or they have special parking spots. The reality of tesla is plug-ins allow for performance or better cars for higher prices. The think ev corporation, the imev, etc have shown that these short range vehicles don't really have cost advantages versus something like a leaf, compared to their reduced capacity. The only time I take a city car (car2go (smart fortwo) is for special parking or one way trips)).

 

There's a nice read in EV world right now (Title: In the Great EV Shootout, Fuel Cells Won't Beat Battery Electri Cars). In short, it not only covers the typical miracles it'd actually take to even begin to compete with EV growth - but it also points to another "limit". Natural Gas. The read reminds us that even with our new-found "wealth" of fracked NG it has limits ... iow, NG too, is just another way of using a limited resource that WILL run out ... and sooner than many realize (my emphasis).
In the Great EV Shootout, Fuel Cells Won't Beat Battery Electric Cars - EVWORLD.COM
In addition and apart from the above read, I really hate thinking how far BEV's would be, if the billions in H research would have gone to straight electric transportation. It boggles my mind that in stead we continue to spend on (in essence) breaking the laws of the limits of physics.

.