1st Fuel Cell to Market: Not Toyota

Hey, did you hear there's expected to be 100 Hydrogen stations in CA ... by 2024 ? Woohoooo

They (Toyota) better be concentrating on a really good 4th Gen Prius

 

One of my favorite technical terms is "reality testing." So attempts to make a 'database' that replaces memory based data transfers with I/O packets runs orders of magnitude slower. My other is something my Dad used to say,"two things will make a man unhappy: not getting what he asked for and getting what he asked for." So providing a non-trivial number of fuel-cell vehicles may be what it takes to 'b*tch slap' reality into fuel cell advocates.

"Hybrid" alone does not make a car efficient. A battery alone is enough to bring on Prius-like, mileage. The industry has found this experimentally with some of the earliest hybrids of which many have become rapidly forgotten (i.e., belt assisted and two-mode.) The same is likely true for hydrogen powered, fuel-cell vehicles . . . not quite ready for prime time.

Bob Wilson

 

This FCV will be a hybrid using Hybrid Synergy Drive. On their road map, there is a plugin FCV so you can charge it at home for short trips using electricity and then use hydrogen for long distance drives.

H2 doesn't go stale (like gas), in the tank so there is no need to use it once in a while for maintenance.

I see a huge opportunity for FCVs. It has some disadvantages but many advantages.

 

What elements of their system are HSD exactly? Anything shared with the system in their hybrids? Wouldn't it be a Lexus hybrid drive?

You'll just have to swap out the tank itself at some specified, but still unknown, time.

 

You are rightly more accurate. LHD and HSD are the same thing.

Motor, power inverter, battery, regen brake and the "brain" that choose the most efficient path should be reused, obviously tuned for hydrogen instead of gas.

Since fuel cell stack generates electricity, there is no need for MG1, PSD nor the exhaust and heat recovery hardware for it.

Everything in Gen3 HSD has been electrified -- AC, water pump, steering, etc. It is ready for HSD/LHD to add another fuel choice.

I hope Diesel come next but emission control hardware for it is still expensive and still not at the clean level needed.

 

Toyota has been labeling their fuel cell vehicles as being Hybrid synergy drive since the fuel cell bus. Possibly even earlier.
I want to know what part of the vehicle is the hybrid part?

"Our exclusive Hybrid Synergy Drive® is a full Hybrid System . That is, it uses two motors in harmony with each other - a battery-powered electric motor and a petrol-driven combustion engine." - Toyota Hybrid Synergy Drive Hybrid technology How hybrid works
A fuel cell vehicle has only one motor. So there isn't any hybridization there.

Is it because there are two sources of electricity on the car? Without a plug, all the electricity comes from the hydrogen and fuel cell. Bi-fuel gasoline and CNG vehicles are more of a hybrid in that regard.

Is it due to the fact that the power follows a path like a serial hybrid? Eliminating the chemical energy to mechanical to electric makes the system more efficient. Wouldn't that make a car with a rechargable battery pack and an Al-air battery a hybrid also? Such a car would have an easier time claiming to be a hybrid powered by water.

Is it also a hydraulic hybrid?

What about Toyota's fuel cell is different than Hyundai's, Honda's, MB's, etc.? How is it more closely related to a Prius and hybrids than what its competitors are calling fuel cell electric vehicles?

 

FUD? It would be compressed in a bullet proof crash tested carbon fiber tank.Talk about leak... a self-discharged battery pack would leak out more electrons. During refueling, a lot of electrons (15%) get lost too. It takes less than half the energy (per mile driven) to refuel hydrogen (faster by order of magnitude) than electricity.I am not bashing EVs, just trying to balance the discussion. There are advantages to FCV that you guys are dismissing while overlooking EV shortcomings.

A hybrid of two power sources. Battery-powered and hydrogen fuel cell-driven.It will still be a parallel-series hybrid. There won't be mechanical in parallel but instead two electrics.

 

It's true that BAS has provided only minor mpg improvements but there is nothing inherently poor about the efficiency improvements in the 2-mode transaxle design. The vehicle designs that used it were "performance hybrid" vehicles much like various HSD-based cars from Lexus rather than an "efficiency hybrid" tuned with a matching engine for maximum mpg.

Back in December 2012 I made a comparison of improved efficiency of the regular vs. hybrid Cadillac Escalade and the regular 350 vs hybrid 450h LX Lexus crossover.

City Combined Highway
43% 31% 28% (Escalade)
78% 43% 12% (LX 350/450h)

Official: GM Quietly Drops Hybrid Pickups; Are SUVs Next? | Page 2 | PriusChat

 

Disadvantages:

• high cost of fuel cell
• high cost of fuel (compared to electricity, per mile)
• still uses fossil fuel to produce hydrogen (unless you use even more expensive electrolysis from solar/wind)
• very few places to refuel (arguably many millions of places to recharge an EV...but at least tens of thousands of L2 chargers)
• refueling stations are expensive to build (EV rechargers are very cheap)
• power capacity fades as FC gets older
• maintenance requirements for FC unknown and certainly must be by the dealer (and very few of them)
• unknown performance during warmup period and in very hot/cold climates
• early models appear to have no ability to recharge battery from wall -- especially bad for mpkg on short trips, such as 1-2 miles

Advantages:

• fast refuel time compared to EV
• waste heat usable for cabin heating
• Range is good (but not especially greater than a Tesla which probably has a similar or lower price)
• zero tailpipe emissions (same as an EV)
• NG used to produce hydrogen is a domestic fuel supply (same as electricity for an EV, but EV can be many sources)

What else am I missing?

Mike

 

Hydrogen is a small molecule, and it can cause problems with some materials. That is why building a pipeline network will be more costly than the natural gas one. Reforming natural gas onsite of the refueling station is possible. It is just that a smaller plant such as is used is less efficient, and it will mean abandoning any CO2 sequestering.

Liquid hydrogen tanks do require venting, but it seems everyone has decided on compressed. I wouldn't worry about those tanks leaking, but they are a magnitude or two more than a liquid fuel tank. A CNG tank that holds around 10 GGE costs around $2000. A compressed hydrogen needs to contain 2.5 times higher pressures. So it will cost more and likely weight more than the CNG 100 pounds. It will also likely have a shorter service life.

There will be a loss of gas while refueling a hydrogen car. That's just the nature of dealing with pressurized gasses. Another bit of nature is that a car might have to wait while the station tanks repressurise from having filled other cars. The largest stations available could fill 40 to 50 cars in a day. Hyundai is hoping that their station will be able to service 20 cars by October.
Hyundai updating hydrogen station in California to refuel 20 vehicles a day with renewable H2
http://www.airliquideadvancedbusiness.com/file/otherelement/pj/b7/59/cd/7e/al_plaquette_hydrogene_uk434602932671885752.pdf

We aren't dismissing BEV's shortcomings. It is just that owners are showing that they aren't insurmountable ones. Yes a Tesla S will longer to drive from Pa to NC. I very well might choose a gasser depending on the need for the trip. But I could take the Tesla if I wanted too. And I can do so now. Without waiting for the government to foot the bill for infrastructure.

For everyday driving there is no shortcomings with a Tesla. I might not even have to plug it in everyday. My electric is largely nukes, and I can install PVs. Many locals allow the installation or buying of cleaner electricity. Daily trip planning may be an issue with the more affordable BEVs, but these FCEVs aren't affordable. You could get 3 Leafs for the cost of Toyota's FCEV, and strageticly park them around town for your use.

BEVs take the largest efficiency hit in the cold, but they all do. Many are heating their BEVs with near zero carbon emissions electricity now. So, they use more energy. It isn't dirty fossil fuels from hostile places. Natural gas is domestic, but it isn't carbon free.

We aren't even dismissing FCEV's advantages. Many think a plug in one would be great. But there isn't a plug in one coming to market, and the ones pushing FCEVs aren't being honest on the economics or open on the technical specifications. If it were allowed, how much would a kilogram of hydrogen cost for a car in California? How long will the fuel cell and/or fuel tank last? Seeing how it is lease only, there won't even be reliable user data on service life for awhile.

 

The cost of fuel cell stack came down to 1/10th of what it was 5 years ago. It is projected to go down another 1/10 in the next 5 years. It is not as cheap as BEV yet but give it a little time.

Hydrogen station is more expensive than a SuperCharger but it can refuel many more vehicles (every 5 mins vs 50 mins).

I think the reason SuperCharger cost is "lower" is because they are selling the Solar RECs, while misleading drivers to think they are charging from the solar panel.

The best and most efficient way to make hydrogen is from domestic natural gas. There is no need to import PV panels or wind mills. It is also the fastest refueling path. Once you turn NG into electricity, you run into recharge bottleneck, with the current infrastructure and battery tech.

There are still a lot of unknown but it is just the beginning with plenty of opportunity for improvement. Why not support it instead of shooting it down before it can take off? Have a little Prius spirit.

 

No one really knows how much those things cost 5 years ago, but we have toyota's estimate that the whole powertrain -> stack, batteries, motors, hydrogen tanks dropped 95% in the last decade from $1M down to $50K -95%, but you still need to build the rest of the car. Costs have not come down nearly as fast as the fuel cell lobby promised. Toyota is trying to sell the tings for 8 Million yen in japan in december, the rest of the car cost money too. Honda and toyota are now projecting 3 million yen to 5 million yen, or about $30K-$50K in the early 2020s. My guess is they will be at the upper end of that range. Given the track record of the lobby overpromising and under delivering, I wouldn't put any credence in the stack dropping in cost by 90%. The platinum and paladium are too expensive for that to happen in PEM, unless they swith to alkaline fuel cells, and carry oxygen or figure out how to stop carbon dioxide poisoning.

Tesla is pocketing some subsidies from the government, but the hardware is much less expensive. The Hydrogen stations are subsidized 100%. Refueling networks for tesla's are much less expensive because when built only 5% of the cars power will come from the charging stations. Charging hardware and solar panels are going down in price.

Tesla is building more subsidized solar than the recharging network is using. The solar is subsidized but it certainly is real and part is being used to charge the cars, part is being sold to the grid. Without the network there would be less net solar on the grid.

There is no electricity bottle neck. Toyota is pressing the renewables on its webite.
Toyota Fuel Cell Cars: Introducing Toyota's Fuel Cell Technology
Definitely if you favor natural gas over renewables then fuel cell cars, once you use the government to pay for all the infrastructure should be roughly as efficient as plug-ins.

I thought the prius was getting improved with a bigger battery and a plug. you own one.

This toyota fcv, is a compliance car, and toyota is asking for taxpayer money. I agree we should see what they come up with, but they keep hyping the damn things and making false claims.

 

PiP lowered carbon footprint over a regular Prius from 222 -> 220 g/mi, not much but an improvement. This is while displacing gas consumption with electricity which is a good thing. You get electric miles and lower emission.

Next gen PiP should do better but it is getting difficult as low hanging fruits are gone. Cleaning up the grid should do a lot. SiC transistors will reduce loss in the electric path.

10% improvement in ICE thermal efficiency will further help. I want to see next gen PiP get below 200 g/mi. It doesn't matter how big the battery, what EV speed it can go, etc. The bottom line to measure progress is the life cycle carbon footprint.

Per Toyota's calculation, FCHV also has similar carbon footprint and they are working on both to have the ultimate eco cars that runs on multiple fuels without refueling bottleneck.

Honda and Toyota are doing both FCV and PHV. Both Accord PHV and PiP are rated 220 g/mi.

Nissan is doing EV and some FCV but not PHV. Leaf is rated 200 g/mi with range limitation.

GM and Ford are focusing on PHV but not FCV. Volt is rated 250 g/mi and ELR rated 290 g/mi with a lot of work needed. Ford Energi models are rated 270 g/mi.

Hyundai is focusing on FCV but not PHV. EPA has not calculated carbon footprint for it yet.

Tesla is only doing EV. They may have convinced you that Model S is cleaner than a Prius. EPA rated Model S as 250 g/mi where a Prius that runs on gas is rated 222 g/mi. Different class of car but I am just pointing out because Tesla did compare emission to the Prius.

Only Leaf and PiP made meaningful progress and I am glad to see them as top 2 plugins sold.

 

What was the cost 5 years ago?

Every 5 minutes until the station storage tank pressure drops too low. Then drivers have to wait. Then there is the station's production rate. The Hyundai station is doubling the number of cars it can fill per day from 10 to 20. Air Products claims they can make a station that can produce 200kg of hydrogen a day. That's 40 to 50 FCEVs a day.

A supercharger station with 8 chargers can easily handle 160 cars over a day. More when most opt to do just a 20 minute charge for half capacity. Not enough, another charger or two can be installed more cheaply than upgrading a hydrogen station. The charger costs Tesla what, $10k to $20k each. It is taking $3 million to upgrade that Hyundai station.

Not that the fast refueling time is great for a range extender, but we are now looking at Al-air batteries for that purpose in 2017 or so. Which will be easier to install country wide; hydrogen refueling stations or pumps for distilled water?

Using a Tesla S to go the 600+ miles to my parent's place will add 80 minutes by quick math to the trip. Even the a more realistic 60 minutes is a big extension to a long day of driving. I might take a gas car those 2 to 3 trips a year. For my every day driving, it only adds a minute at most to plug it in. That's not a bottleneck. That's taking a little extra time getting into the house. Which is better than pulling into a gas station, filling up, and then pulling back out into traffic once a week or so.

The Prius did cost more than a regular car at first, but the fuel savings could cancel that for many. It didn't arrive as a high price Lexus.

Does Toyota's calculation depend upon CO2 capture from the reforming process? That isn't happening, and it won't happen with station based reforming.

 

Sadly that's not true. Over on teslamotors' forum somebody calculated the solar panel on top of the Supercharger only provides enough power for 3 cars (if it's sunny... far less on cloudy days like today). So basically all the solar power is used-up and none for the grid.

Since each charger averages 8 cars/day that means over half of the energy is supplied by the grid (coal, natural gas, hydro, etc).

 

Yup, grid cleanup is real. Coal is now down to 37% in the US from just over 50% a few years ago. Many states, like California, have set renewable electricity targets in utility regulations.

Here are the numbers for PG&E which supplies most of Northern California where I live. They have not used more than 5% coal in recent years so much of this improvement probably comes from new renewables coming online. By 2020, generation emissions are estimated to be 290 per MWh (0.290 pounds per kWh).

These numbers do not include transmission loss which probably averages around 6-7% or GREET-based estimates for methane leakage etc.



The full document is:

http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/shared/environment/calculator/pge_ghg_emission_factor_info_sheet.pdf

 

Well sure can you tell me how to plug-into the national grid. Is there a switch on the fuse box. Remember toyota hasn't even started selling a prius phv in austin, when do you think they will sell fcv in indiana? Until they sell that fuel cell vehicle in Indiana, ans somehow get the government to pay for hydrogen there, lets ask the question if someone buys a fcv instead of a plug-in, will they produce more or less ghg? For every fcv sold in the US, the owner is likely to produce more ghg than if they bought a plug-in. The UC-Irvine study that toyota paid for and uses says exactly that, its only if you compare plug-ins to fuel cells where fuel cells won't exist can you make up an advantage.

Hyundai On Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Vehicles: Critiquing Its Claims (Page 2)

Bold italics mine.
In california, a 85kwh tesla S puts out 150 g/mi, a leaf 120 g/mi, a spark ev 110g/mi, and that is even not counting the large percentage (39%) that buy solar panels in california to fuel their plug-in. Even the volt and prius phv produce only 200 g/mi co2 in california.

That prius phv should produce roughly the ghg in california as the toyota fcv. The next gen phv likely will produce less. A bigger battery in the next gen phv will especially help those that live on green grids like caliornia, Washington, NY, or use solar or wind. All this at a much cheaper price than the fcv. If your target was really only ghg, then the prius phv looks like a better choice (lots of refueling options, 5 seats, can travel the country instead of only a handful of stations. Ofourse if you are going to spend more money on the toyota fcv, that tesla S or bmw i3 will produce lower ghg, better handling, and accelaration (probably toyota hasn't given us final cars to drive or price or mpge ;-))

Can we dispense with the ghg argument? I mean at least until someone actually plans to sell one in place of a plug-in that produces less ghg.

 

How do you plug tens of thousand of plugins into a single outlet? You can't.

To answer your question, you plug them into any outlet in the 50 states. They are spread out and the entire system is the grid. The mix is weighted by the carbon intensity of the source used to generate kWh of electricity.

I understand your point. You want to weight it by the sales.

The big picture is not even plugin sold nationally in all 50 states. It is actually that sold globally. What good is a plugin designed for California? Do you design a plugin for the carbon intensity of the fuel it runs? Or do you design it for one of the cleanest area? I hope I made my point clear.

I have not read it yet but I would think the difference is a wash. Can you provide a link?

The real question is, why are you guys not supporting both if they are equally good?

All I am pointing out here is a sense of bias. I own a plugin and I am not bias toward any fuel. I use gas when it is advantageous. Ditto for electricity. I find FCHV with the benefit of both and also able to use domestic fuel to create hydrogen. I support all these clean technologies.

Just because I support the technology doesn't mean I don't call out and critical of "bad apples". Fisker, CODA and Volt come into mind.

You may want to avoid it because it doesn't look good on EV but there is no better place to discuss than Priuschat.