Alex on Autos ... less bad

Are you glad that there is one available to drive and get reviews about, if for no other reason than to make fun of it's inefficiency and higher cost of operation? Can't help wondering how much Musk has to do with so many devout followers of the genius having that perception with scientific looking numbers attached.

On the other hand with the melting rates of permafrost, glaciers and sea ice, raising at rates faster than previously calculated, I wonder just how much H20 as a by product would be acceptable to the science of sea level rise and the economists dealing with future planning as it relates to human produced climate change.

Me personally, I'm in no way convinced electrifying the automotive industry is the answer to the social issues related to cars and their convenience / necessity, much less other industries, as they're scaled to the cleaner fuels.

Lots of other nasty possibilities abound for a future on the present track we find ourselves on ATM, but at least there is one hydrogen fuel cell car available to test drive and read reviews about.

 

Even pure electric vehicles can be contributing to global warming etcetera, depending on their electricity source.

Think the best long-term chance is to curb our incessant traveling. Oh, and a little more birth control wouldn't hurt.

 

why is everyone so concerned about the future? today has enough troubles of its own

 

I and many others developed our opinion on hydrogen cars long before Musk opened his mouth. Dr. Steven Chu wanted to cut funding for hydrogen cars while he Secretary of Energy under Obama. Cheap natural gas at the time blunted to too expensive argument back then, but only a little.

There are other hydrogen FCEVs available. The Clarity FCX was available for lease before the Leaf and Volt came to market. The costs of the cars, infrastructure, and fuel is why hydrogen cars are still basically an experiment, while plug ins are gaining on traditional hybrid market share, if they haven't already surpass them.

ICE cars actually admit a good amount of water vapor. Being more efficient, the difference with a FCEV probably isn't that great. A more pressing concern in cold climates is that FCEVs work at lower temperatures, so there is more liquid water draining onto roads to become ice.

 

But, than he did open his mouth! How many more do you think have joined in on the current fuel cell inefficiency band wagon since than. I'm well aware I'm in a minority here at PC concerning the importance of fuel cell technology, especially as quantum mechanics makes it more difficult for the majority of humans to understand exactly what's going on around them in their/our environment.

Which is part of my point concerning Economics and Government subsidies directed at battery innovation. Which is IMO, a good thing. Although. as many others contend may not make enough of a difference at reducing human contributions to climate change, species extinction rates and other not insignificant issues. While the masses are depending on their governments and scientists to solve and expand on the current state of the standards of living as we have come to know them over the centuries..

The original FCX was being displayed just after prius and insight were released. There was also a Fit EV for lease ONLY around 2010. I've never heard of a Clarity fuel cell, although I have to admit I hadn't been paying that much attention to Clarity while I deal with one of it's predecessors. Good cars if they get proper service and - parts availability which their gassers get much more of due to volume.

The final extent of my position is what the market bares in EV production, accessories and price points.
We could do a whole lot better at reducing some or our major problems with just a tiny bit of forethought.
Although the economics of fixing our major issues always seem to have catches and loopholes attached.
And probably will always be doomed to those failures being sighted currently from the past.
.

 

First of all, fuel cells do not have to run on hydrogen, and hydrogen fuel can be used in engines. Hydrogen and fuel cells have become tied together in discourse because hydrogen is what the majority of those developing fuel cells. Musk's comments do not help in keeping them separate.

The inefficiency being criticized isn't with the fuel cells. It is with the making of the hydrogen, and getting it into a format that will give a hydrogen FCEV a reasonable range while also providing a refuel time close to that of gasoline and other liquid fuels. Plug in cars don't go farther on a unit of green electricity than FCEVs because of the fuel cell's efficiency. They do so because a lot of that electricity is wasted in compressing and chilling the hydrogen.

Then hydrogen's nature makes shipping it expensive. While supporters talk about its energy density per mass, its energy density per volume is poor, even when a liquid. Truck and train tankers can only be so big. Pipelines need to be bigger or able to handle higher pressure to equal the energy through put of a natural gas line. Which increases cost that is already higher to do hydrogen's size and potential corrosiveness.

On site production is an answer where possible, even if it gives up the efficiency bonus a large scale plant. It isn't a global solution though. For blue and green hydrogen to be solution, we don't just need it for cars. We also need it to replace what a lot of fossil hydrogen is already being used for. Local production alone won't work everywhere. So we'll need to to ship hydrogen from places where blue production and carbon sequestering is, and locations with excess renewable electricity. The hurdles to shipping hydrogen around the globe are so high that turning it into ammonia, shipping that, then stripping the hydrogen off at destination is being seriously developed.

I'm for fuel cell research. As I said, hydrogen is not the only fuel for them. They could become an ICE replacement for a range extender, using whatever renewable fuel we've settled on.

The car companies with a heavy stake(not just financial) in FCEV cars are pushing for commercialization assistance. The success of plug ins have them worried. The PEM fuel cell tech they have been been developing does not lend itself to using other fuels. Onboard reformers are an option, but anything less than high purity hydrogen reaching the fuel cell will shorten its life. So they have been pushing for governments and others to pay for hydrogen infrastructure. The expense of which is why it is still so limited in California. Then there is the possibility of a new hydrogen storage standard coming along to require spending on upgrades. It has already happened when the tank pressures went from 7000psi to 10,000psi. The Mirai's tanks are designed for even higher pressures that some stations in Japan can deliver.

There were some other compliance EVs available in California too, and the Fit EV was available in 11 states or so. I see the Leaf and Volt introduction date as a more important milestone because they were seriously sold nationwide by their companies, and not just a third party conversion.

In addition to the Clarity PHEV, there were a FCEV and BEV version. Honda views it as a FCEV, with the other options as a way of supporting the FCEV model. The BEV was lease only in California, like the FCEV, and has been cancelled. Mainly because it had less than 100 miles of range. The Clarity is a stop gap model to answer the Mirai. Honda is going to be more focused on the next FCEV made with the GM partnership.

Part of the experiment label I used for FCEVs is because fuel cells still haven't hit reliability milestones set decades ago. They lose output overtime. Like battery capacity, the amount of loss varies. The target was an average loss of less than 10% over 150k miles. The most recent fuel cells go around 120k miles before exceeding the 10% mark. Perhaps the new Mirai will best that.

It takes time to grow the supply infrastructure. Toyota had to take steps to ensure a battery supply for hybrids. As from Tesla, car companies are only starting to do that. Between people being ignorant of how much range they need in an EV, incentives, and people willing to take the chance on one being of means to afford it, the car companies are going to start with more expensive models. The is the usual path of new technology and also new features in cars. Luxury models get them first where the margins are better before heading down to the entry models.

FCEVs will face the same issue. Since no has actually stated what the fuel cell in the car costs, it could be longer for them.

 

That is so, but I was thinking we are going to need a green hydrogen source for other things, like fertilizer. Like it is now, green hydrogen plants will be built near where the gas is needed, so the need to chill and compress mass quantities isn't there. If they go in where existing fossil hydrogen reformation plants are, much of the pipeline infrastructure is already in place.

R&D is going into what are essentially reverse fuel cells. Supply water and electricity, and they spit out hydrogen and oxygen. One researcher has cells that make ammonia directly. If they get out of the lab, the energy requirements for electrolyzing water go down.

 

Swampy politics and lies from the hydrogen lobby restored the funding then made it bigger.
California Air Resources Board Pushes for Restoration of DOE Funding for Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles; Tackles the Four Miracles - Green Car Congress

Due to the greater government funding and extra 4 years we would expect this great fuel cell tech to exceed the levels promised in 2017. Instead we have 20%. This is a market failure. What does CARB say now and toyota, give us more money it will work. This ignores that fact that a crossover like the rav4 prime not only is less expensive to produce and more desirable, but actually given california's hydrogen mix will actually produce less ghg in california if it is charged half the time compared to the mirai.

Japan has 160 hydrogen stations and still doesn't have many hydrogen vehicles on the road. The chicken and egg thing does not apply if you give away free fuel and people still don't want the cars.

Hydrogen works well on space craft and fork lifts. Let's just understand the market failure of personal vehicles. Time to pull the plug on the experiment in the US. It takes time because of politics, but 2025, just call it a loss and good faith R&D effort. Porsche is working in Chile to produce green gasoline, hydrogen is a step in the process from renewable electricity. Try and ship the hydrogen and you need people to want the cars and pay for shipping the hydrogen, much more expensive than shipping gasoline or methanol.

 

what is the definition of insanity?