First Hyundai now BMW. Ditching Fuel Cell Vehicles

over the long term, hydrogen stations can be built. That really is not a problem. The problem is the cost of the cars and cost of the fuel if the stations are built.

There is not a competition between fcv and plug-ins other than in government subsidies. R&D needs to bring the costs down for fcv, plain and simple. Their is no reason governments should favor fcv over plug-ins with multiple times the funding per mile driven.

Not really a problem, bevs aren't the competition. THe problem is cost of fuel is more expensive than a hybrid while the cost of vehicle even subsidized is higher than a hybrid.

I think the first is a key point to get initial adopters. A plug-in (please don't restrict to pure bev) can be charged conviently at home with choice of renweable fuels. That gives it a boost for initial adopters. Hydrogen is also subsidized to be free, so knock off 7, but there is contenent wide recharging in europe, Asia, and the americas. That will be much more expensive to build for hydrogen, and will add to cost of fuel.

Yes, and there is the pace of development. The mirai looks mainly like a uglier more efficient clarity. The tucson fuel cell is worse than the highlander fuel cell that seemed promised 7 years ago. Prices have not come down as fast as fuel cell producers promised. Maybe in 2 more generations.

On the other hand Tesla anounced minor improvements today that the fuel cell lobby seemed to act as if would never happen.
New Tesla Model S Options: 90 kWh Battery, Ludicrous Mode, Cheaper Base Model | Inside EVs

You can upgrade your car to higher range with anouther 5kwh at $600/kwh installed, allowing the model S 85d to go 300 miles at 65 mph (285 miles estimated epa range). A 70kwh rwd model is also available. Both seem to point to a successful bev SUV the model X, SUVs and 300 mile range (epa 2007) weren't supposed to be possible for bevs. 2018 the less expensive model 3 comes out with less expensive batteries.

2016 mitsubishi outlander phev and 2016 volt as well as current i3 are also signs that plug-ins are moving faster than fuel cells in the directions adopters want to go. 2017 leaf will show if nissan can continue to be the best selling plug-in or will hand the mantle to tesla.

The bar has been raised, fuel cells can use some of the tech coming out of these plug-ins. The question really is can the fuel cell research lower the cost of these things enough to be range extenders, which would be a first step.

 

I'd have to add one other thing. It's not just the problem of overpriced infrastructure and vehicles, hydrogen cars are also - for all intense purposes - just an overpriced natural gas car. Yes, that's right - no matter how you slice it, hydrogen cars are just another batch of fossil fuel cars. Why? because natural gas is is the only, barely, partially plausible source to distill hydrogen cheaply - and in volume -despite all the theoretical alternate refuel possibilities. Plugins, on the other hand can cheaply run from various roof top solar units ... roof top solar homes. You can charge from home - completely independent of grid source electricity. Being that natural gas is the least expensive way to make hydrogen, and once natural gas prices go back up to their volatile historic costs, the handful of earlier adopters are going to be hurting big time.
But again, this is just one of the other things, apart from cost of cars, their maintenance, the cost of their fuel, and the cost of their absent infrastructure.
.

 

oops - double post - I appologize

 

[QUOTE="austingreen, post: 2211312, member: 58508"

>> 7. Free EV charging at many places

Hydrogen is also subsidized to be free, so knock off 7, but there is contenent wide recharging in europe, Asia, and the americas.

Not so quick. Having free charging AT WORK makes a big difference for EVs. It isn't practical to have free hydrogen at work.

[/QUOTE]

 

I do get the premise of that point - but the upside for hydrogen cars is that they do have longer range than cheep EV's so despite the theoretical idea you may likely have to drive for several miles just to get to a hydrogen station - when you do finally get there - you DO get ~ 300 miles of natural gas distilled hydrogen. So the fact that hydrogen/natural gas cars can't do refills at work, or at home - it ain't that big of a deal. Is it weird here, that I sort-of just came to the defense of hydrogen?

.

 

Do the refueling distances as percentages.

Bob Wilson

ps. I see numbers.

 

Honda sells many hybrids for the Japanese market that we don't get here in the USA. Honda just could not compete with the Prius in the USA. Their hybrid system is night and day compared to the Prius. I had a 1st gen insight, and I enjoyed it. Honda does well in Japan in hybrid sales.

 

I wasn't putting down Honda's hybrid technology. Except for the Honda markup, the new Accord hybrid is probably the best mid-size sedan one out there.

I was bringing up their marketing strategy in regards to hybrids to compare the Toyota's FCEV one.
Honda wanted bragging rights about first North American hybrid for sale, since they lost to Toyota in Japan. This may or may not have lead to rushed R&D that contributed to the battery problems in the first Insight and Civic hybrids. With the all aluminum frame and low production, the first Insight was a high cost car to make. I don't know if Honda was losing money in terms of pricing it under production cost, but it and the first Prius to NA were both priced at around $20k. The Prius wasn't as fuel efficient, but it was a cleaner and had 4 doors.

Toyota is calling the Mirai the world's first production FCEV; mostly on the grounds that they are offering it for sale instead of lease only. The leases aren't refered to as a test program like the Clarity and F-cell were, but Hyundai got their leased FCEV to market first. So a bragging right that may become a historical footnote, but it may not be an indication of their future success. While they have made great improvements in reducing the cost of the fuel stack, the asking price is below the cost of the car.

 

Toyota, Nissan, and Honda Agree on Details of Joint Support for Hydrogen Infrastructure Development
Toyota Motor Corporation
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.

July 1, 2015 - Toyota Motor Corporation, Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., and Honda Motor Co., Ltd. have agreed on key details regarding a new joint support project for the development of hydrogen station infrastructure in Japan. In addition to partially covering the operating costs of hydrogen stations, the three automakers have also agreed to help infrastructure companies deliver the best possible customer service and create a convenient, hassle-free refueling network for owners of fuel cell vehicles (FCVs).

The joint project (conducted alongside the Japanese government’s support for hydrogen stations) will partially cover hydrogen station operating expenses incurred by infrastructure companies, and was first announced on February 12. Furthermore project partners will jointly raise awareness regarding these support measures, in order to encourage new companies to enter the hydrogen supply business. Financial assistance will be provided through the Research Association of Hydrogen Supply/Utilization Technology* (HySUT), which is setting up a project to stimulate demand for FCVs.

 

When it comes to area in square miles, the hydrogen infrastructure costs for japan would be the same as hydrogen infrastructure for Montana. Take out japans numerous islands, take out uninhabitable/mountainous terrain, and their area is even smaller. Hydrogen infrastructure in smaller areas/countries like that - although it's astronomical in cost - makes much more sense. And YES, of COURSE the manufacturers should pay for the infrastructure, if they truly believe in it. It looks like they've seen the light of Elon Musk's wisdom with Tesla Super Chargers . . . . where you PAY for it, if you really believe in it. It's about time the FC industry did the same thing. Stick U.S. taxpayers for the huge cost of building out infrastructure, and it sends a completely different message.
.

 

While we are at it, let's have the auto companies pay for roads too.

It is an amusing question to wonder how transportation would have developed in the US had Detroit been forced to pay for petrol stations.

 

By quick does it or does not include EV1?

 

I would guess not as the EV1 was a limited run vehicle in a small area never available for sale (lease only with no buyout option).
Most don't even include the Tesla Roadster due to the limited number made.

 

There is a big difference between diesel/gasoline and hydrogen at the time when the cars were being introduced. Diesel and kerosene was used in many homes for lighting and heat, and gasoline was a general purpose solvent at the local hardware store. Early engine manufacturers choose them, and alocohol, as fuels because they were readily available. Being mostly toys for the rich in beginning, having to fill up can wasn't a major hindrance. As the number of cars grew, the stores selling the fuel in cans saw an advantage in installing the first pumps.

FCEVs are also toys of the rich at this point, but their fuel system is a bit more complex than even a modern gasoline car's. They can only be filled from dispenser designed to work with. So they can't be filled with hydrogen bought at a welding or gas supply store. Which is probably a good thing considering a fuel cell is much more fussier than the early ICEs when it comes to fuel quality.

In short, Detroit didn't have to build petrol stations in the beginning, because the buyer's hurdle was being able to afford the car, not access to fuel. FCEV manufacturers should at least help pay for hydrogen stations, because they don't have a market without them.

 

not really quick - if the EV1 is this one;



.

 

So I suppose hybrid fans should exclude Insight 1.0 and Gen1.

 

The push for fcv and hydrogen stations in Japan is for the 2020 games. For those that don't remember FCV were also promoted in the 2010 olympics.

Fuel Cells and Hydrogen at the Olympic Games | California Fuel Cell Partnership
The fuel cell vehicles operated fine. When the buses continued to operate their costs were much higher than expected. That's similar to most olympic things over budget. still we seem farther from fuel cell success than we were promised in the 2010 winter games.

Toyota, Honda, Nissan To Support Hydrogen Fueling Sites In Japan
Green Car Congress: Toyota, Nissan and Honda agree on details of H2 station support in Japan

If the figure is divided equally between the 3 companies its only $16M each. After the olympics the funding may dry up, or maybe there will be enough cars to support the stations.

 

You forgot to mention that petrol begins with a 'P' and hydrogen with an 'H'

 

Should they include Briggs&Stratton's hybrid car? Or the EV crowd the the battery electrics that predate the Model T? There might have been a couple hybrids back then too.

The EV1, and the first Rav4 EV, were limited production cars that were only offered in one state. It could be said that CARB forced the automakers to make cars that they didn't want to sell. That also cost more than traditional ICEs in a time of even cheaper gas.

About a decade passed since the EV1 was crushed, and this generation of plug ins arrived. Hybrids with an electrified drivetrain are mainstream. Two car companies now want to sell BEVs. One wants to make up for their past mistakes with hybrids. It is actually a different era in the car market than when the EV1 rolled on the road.

You disagree that having a fuel, with other household purposes, readily available before a car's introduction is different than having to build a fueling network before the car can be introduced?

 

I don't know about the insight 1.0.
The first gen Prius was available for sale in the U.S. starting in 2000, I don't believe it was restricted in any way at that point. I also don't believe it was restricted within Japan in any way.
But yes, I do believe hybrids and electrics should be measured using the same stick.
Until hybrids are available for sale, not just lease, don't start the clock.
FCVs are a bit different. Perhaps we shouldn't "start the clock" on them until they are available for sale, not just lease.
However, the amount of taxpayer money being funneled into infrastructure argues for not delaying the clock.