Toyota Sends Hydrogen Stations to Dealers for Sold-Out Mirai

Sure, I think hill was saying people withtout outlets probably don't live by those planned hydrogen stations (targetted toward expensive neighborhoods in the US) and can't afford a mirai. In 5 years the US may have 100 stations all near expensive neighborhoods. Maybe in 10 years fcv and hydrogen will be more affordable, but its not going to go help move into neighborhoods plug-ins don't work before then.

Refueling is no problem in phevs, although these are not appropriate for everyone, perhaps only 40% of the population in the US It is a problem in BEVs, but even today in china we have 15 minute fueling on a 350kw system. This is expesnive for batteries but there is a big infrastructure at 135 kw and even bigger at L2 when you just need a top off of miles to get back to home or work.

Hydorgen infrastructure is proving more expesnive than governments thought a year ago, so California, Germany, and Japan have all talked about infrastructure taking longer than just plans a year ago. Japan though does have plenty of infrastructure to demonstrate the mirai and clarity gen II. That should be enough for Toyota and Honda/GM to do a better next generation.

This is a tired line. No proposed hydrogen station is not grid tied. Even the biogas hydrogen plants use a great deal of electricity. Why slow the transition from oil to electricity by pretending hydrogen using grid tied solar or wind for compression or electrolysis is greener than an individual fueling their vehicle with grid tied solar or wind? 16 states have even decided to label SMR hydrogen used in a fuel cell as green. Do you think that is more renewable than net solar?

Since these batteries are needed in hybrids and fcv, it probably is more of a key technology than hydrogen or fuel cells. That being said world wide market for plug-ins is over 500,000 already, so it shouldn't take much more government money. The tech has enough commercial profit to be private sector now.

Hydrogen and fuel cells still need a lot of R&D money, and enough for a demonstration. The demonstration is not going well right now. I hope it gets back on track. It currently has much higher subsidies than plug-ins in the US and Japan. The demo going poorly means they need to fix some of the tech, not that a new bill in congress (yes there is one) should increase that extra subsidy even more. These things are in the demo phase, and these hiccups show that clearly. They aren't ready for commercialization.

 

What is it electricity last year was 67% fossil. Electricity actually can move much faster than hydrogen (half the speed of light or faster for electricity, at most the speed of sound for hydrogen but its pretty slow in pipelines relatively). That makes it much cheaper to move electricity than hydrogen, and as an added kick the losses are electrical, either directly on the grid, or through compessors to move the hydrogen). No you can't move it orders of magnitude faster.

Now battery charging, that has a speed limit, because of the battery chemistry. Tesla and bmw looks like its at about 150 kw. Porsche and chinese busses seem to have batteries that are about 300 kw. Think that rate to 75% then you probably slow down or damage the battery. If a car gets 100 mpge, then on a 300 kw charger you can fill a battery at 900 miles an hour, or 300 miles in 20 minutes if you have a 135 kwh battery, then you slow down to get the next 100 miles in the battery. This is slower than hydrogen, but for most people charging most miles at home or work, its fast enough. Tech probably is affordable in only 10 years, today's is half that speed, but we can build the chargers today for when the battery costs go down. Most probably would be as happy with a cheaper 200 mile battery, that would charge 150 miles in 10 minutes.

Electric infrastructure or hydrogen will both have fossil. Today electrical is much less expensive, mainly from that advantage that most can be be charged slower at home at night when electricity is less expensive.

Hydrogen does have advantages if you are willing to pay for that infrastructure. WIthout the infrastructure though, who cares. If you live in Nevada or Colorado or florida who cares if the guy in a $2M house in LA can refill his mirai faster, you couldn't fill up a fcv without building your own station. You probably either don't like plug-ins or do, but its doubtful that you are inspired in decades you may have a hidrogen station.

 

Many of us have stated that a BEV won't work for everyone, but that they don't have too to have an impact. Then we also point out the existence of PHVs, which the hydrogen lobby likes to pretend don't exist.

Grid tied is the best bang for the buck.

It appears batteries will win over hydrogen plus fuel cell for peak renewable storage at this point.
Home fuel cell units already get the same subsidy that home solar and wind get, even though they use natural gas.

Good thing plug in owners aren't stuck, standing by their car all night, in the rain, while the car recharges then. Hydrogen and gasoline both need a fast fill because in involves a trip out of the person's usual day.

And hydrogen isn't the only option for this. We can make methane from electricity, and from there diesel or methanol. Both of which can be used in a fuel cell already. On top of storing renewable energy, the process can actually take CO2 out of the atmosphere.

Do you honestly believe that people will want to replace the electrical wiring in their home for hydrogen lines?

 

Why in the name of Phil, the Prince of Insufficient Light, would anyone want, they don't need, to charge their car that fast at home?
You realize if home hydrogen refilling ever made it out of R&D, it too would be a slow charge, right?

Um, methane can easily be renewable. Many farms are also green power providers but fermenting methane for generators. It can also be made with renewable electric, as Audi is already doing on a pilot plant scale.

 

Ah. There is no way I could tell that from your response. Definitely toyota is backing first element which plans hydrogen stations in weathy neighborhoods with people living in single family homes (own or rent doesn't matter for outlet) and multiple cars per household. These overwelmingly have access to plugs, so plugs is a non starter here.

I really have no idea who the target market of fcv. The 3000 mirai hand raisers in the US haven't been reported for demographics. The 34 mirai and approximately 300 other fcv delivered is too small a sample, Do you know who fcv are targetted for, and how big this market is? I'm willing to let the car companies to try and develop one, but haven't heard any demographics for fuel cells other than from UC-Irvine.

The most recent big project was 64 km between spain and france, 2000 MW, 64km with transformers for 700 million euro. In 1 hour this can move about 60,000 GGE (33.7) of electricity. I have no idea how much copper, but a lot less material and space than a hydrogen pipeline to move the same amount of power, and it doesn't have the latenancy. If you are moving hydrogen 64 km through a thick pipe, you need to fill the pipe before it reaches the end.

Well there you have it, I would use 7% for transmission losses, but half the transmission loss of hydrogen.

The charging losses are part of the mpge calculation, and losses from hydrogen to electricity is much less efficient (60% through fuel cell) than charging and discharging a battery.

Why would anyone do that? No one is proposing putting a gas station in every home. 90% of bev electricity and 100% of phev electricity can be charged slowly you only need these stations for long trips (phevs use gas stations for these long trips). Now if you have air conditioning or a plug-in it is worth upgrading to 200 amp service (all the hot places seem to do this).

I have always supported R&D and a demo. These false arguments make me think in 2015 hydrogen is much less likely to work in the US than in 2009 when he clarity came out, before the model S and volt.

 

Who cares when the fuel will be renewable and carbon neutral. Getting to 100% renewable hydrogen will be a long process. There is no reason to assume that other renewable fuels will not also make progress during that time.

Most of the emissions from cars are from old ones still on the road. There are actually a few carbeurated ones still being used as daily drivers by those without other options. Technically, there is no reason for diesels to not get as clean as gasoline cars. Then Volvo already has a fuel cell powered by diesel. No reason there that a fuel cell couldn't also be made to run on renewable gasoline or alcohols. There are already fuel cells that use methanol directly without autoreforming. These will also reduce any emissions that remain through better efficiency.

Remember, I am not against fuel cells, just hydrogen.

This is a factor of electric generation and utilitization. If 100% renewable hydrogen is a possible future, so is 100% renewable electric and liquid fuels. By that time the PHV ICEs will also likely be replaced by liquid powered fuel cells.

Besides, a plugin owner has options in reducing their fossil electric use. If you want to drive a FCEV, you have to be wealthy, and move to Southern California.

Ugh. The federal battery incentive was as mostly about growing the traction battery industry, and it has done that, and it will help out hybrids and FCEVs too. I'm sorry it wasn't based upon your priorities, but it is also a political issue that I started a thread to discuss without worry of overstepping the bounds here.

I was using just an expression; the buck isn't money, but is linked to it.

The goal is to reduce electric generated CO2 emissions. A home could go 100% off grid and practically eliminate its carbon emissions there. In addition to the PV array, that needs to be oversized, it will need a battery or some type of energy storage. For the extra cost, we have one home with no carbon emissions, and its neighbors are still using the same old grid.

Or the home can go grid tied solar. It is lower cost, so more are able to do it. Any excess made during the day goes into the grid, off setting fossil electric used by those that don't have solar for whatever reason. The home reduces their emissions, and also some of the grid's, for less cost. The home still uses fossil electric at night, but if home photolyzing and hydrogen storage is possible, it will be possible, and likely cheaper, to do some centrally for this home's night time energy use.

Which all can be done with a renewable liquid fuel and a PHV. When viable, a fuel cell can replace the ICE. In case of methanol as the fuel, the tailpipe emissions are as harmless to the locale as a H2FCEV's

If the carbon in the liquid fuel came from the atmosphere in the first place, being emitted as no net effect. CO2 emissions doesn't have a negative impact on the local environment.

So you would replace the wire in your house with hydrogen lines to the outlets. How well does hydrogen work in gas lamps?

 

I entered my address at the Mirai site. I might be one of those 3000

First, those lines are likely aluminum. That's what is used for the high power ones in the US.

Second, the hydrogen latency also takes effect if the pressure needs to come up for demand.

 

you mean like the coal that Toyota will use for their hydrogen Reformation?
Too bad we won't be able to turn all that hideously toxic coal ash into clean hydrogen. Oh I forgot - we don't have to think about that because there are theoretically clean ways to create hydrogen - even though there are no plans in the foreseeable future to implement them because they would cause the expensive hydrogen process to be even more ungodly. Call it FUD, bur reality is what it is.

 

Toyota and government of Japan call the Australian coal hydrogen clean and green. And really I couldn't disagree compared to electricity in Japan or China. Its just black compared to california electricity.

The plan, buy cheap coal in australia, use steam reformation to create hydrogen, CO2, Sulfuric acid, nitrogen prooducts, and mercury. It sequesters most of the CO2 in the ground (90%) and probably assign the other 10% in australian electricity. See no ghg assigned Japan. The land and water pollution stay in Australia, so none of that reaches Japan. Remember if its fuel cell we have to count differently. Its then compressed or liquified with australian electricity, put on diesel powered ship and sent to japan. I assume they do this instead of shipping the coal to japan is less visibility of the coal and the associated pollution, although this makes the hydrogen more expensive.

With the fragile japanese grid, why not, but this doesn't work in other countries that care about pollution.

Just remember, today hydrogen is made majority from fossil fuel, and that is the plan for these first 600 hydrogen stations in Japan, California, and Germany. Sure it could be renewable, but that is much more difficult than switching plug-ins.

Yes extruded cables using aluminum for conductors is what is built, but I figured copper versus aluminum is not much of the problem with the reasoning. That's why I dropped costs. Stainless as used in hydrogen pipelines is cheaper than aluminum, but after you include the higher quantity, cost of compresssors, maintenance, digging, etc they don't compare.

With the slow speed, you need short hydrogen pipelines as you need to build ahead and fill the pipe. That's why most are less than 100 miles. Once you hit the destination, you have to build that last mile, something already done for most of the grid. Natural gas makes sense in large system of pipelines as most is used for heat (building heating and cooking). Converting to electricity then to heat is much less efficient.

This is why NREL suggests building hydrogen manufacture close to its use. Perhaps in a populated city with hundreds of thousands of fuel cell cars and oil hydrogen needs would build pipelines (Only San Francisco, LA, Houston come to mind in the US). Really pipelines aren't going to get used, and transport cost is a disadvantage not an advantage of hydrogen. The storage and compression and manufacture are much bigger problems though, so I wouldn't lead with that, its not even on the list of technical breakthroughs needed. I'm just suprised the number of hydrogen disadvantages touted as advantages.

 

you & me both! With Japan's ever-increasing incentives for burning fossil fuel to hydrogen - I'm guessing by the time our number comes up within the 3000 - we may get our hydrogen mobiles for free - not just the hydrogen;

Japan Could Give Away Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles | CleanTechnica
Now thats what I call incentives.

.

 

I just need a hydrogen station between Allentown and Philly.

 

Not from CARB's point of view. There viewpoint is FCV for everyone.

 

If they're only in one state, and that's a carb state - that pretty much says what it is.
.

 

Now Now, Japan doesn't get as many fcv as the US in the first few years, and toyota is sold out for 2016 there. Lots of government and business fleets have to wait until 2017. Its only in 2020 when toyota wants to lease 12,000 in japan that they may need to give the way for free. Until then there are 3000 for the US and 2700 for japan, Europe, and the rest of the world. Plenty of demand in japan for its quota.

If they were selling a million in a carb state it may just be the state. When it is 3000 in 3 years, the number needed to comply with zev regulations and not build more bevs, then of course its a compliance car.

 

between flinging around the 90% hydrogen efficiency and the 14% hydrogen loss efficiency - perhaps it's time to face reality. Tony Seba, lecturer on clean energy at Stanford University has drafted a simple to understand graph so the silliness of hydrogen's "ineficiency" statement above can be put to bed - hopefully for the last time.

Here's one of the articles one can find the context of these findings.

Why Hydrogen Cars are Less Efficient Than Electrics - The Green Optimistic
Of course this is making hydrogen through clean electricity - presuming you made your electricity from solar. You still have the nasty issues of natural gas - coal if your juice is made by those means
.

 

Is it possible to design a FCV to have all the performance attributes of the Model S (acceleration, handling, low CG, etc.)?