-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Electric V Hydrogen
- Thread starter Techno-phile
- Start date
Blue heaven
Fair Dinkum Tesla
Toyota appear to be pushing their Mirai HFCV onto local councils recently, tomorrow one will be taking centre place at the Future Vehicle Expo hosted by the City of Mandurah. unfortunately for Toyota the Mirai will be surrounded by privately owned full electric vehicles with real world driving over many 100s of thousands of kilometres. I have no problem with Hydrogen being used for heavy industry but for passenger cars its a pointless exercise.
A couple of privately owned electric Kona's will be on display that will hopefully get the attention of City councillors, plus a variety of Tesla's supplied by the Tesla owners club of Western Australia Tesla Owners Club Western Australia
A couple of privately owned electric Kona's will be on display that will hopefully get the attention of City councillors, plus a variety of Tesla's supplied by the Tesla owners club of Western Australia Tesla Owners Club Western Australia
Icey
Member
People complain about the EV infrastructure not being there (and we all know that is bollocks), There is no way this will ever take off.. Buses, Trucks, even trains I think its a great idea!
Toyota are currently in denial about backing the wrong horse! At some point they will have to admit defeat and I think with China now pushing them down the BEV path they are finally getting close to throwing in the towel, lol.
Mark E
Member
Even if H2 gets started it’ll be killed by EVs, due to the dramatic inefficiency and inconvenience of H2. It’ll cost at least 3-4x as much to drive a H2 car, and the capital cost is still likely to be more as well.
I actually think that it doesn’t even make sense for heavy vehicles eitther. The Tesla semi has enough range for 6-8 hours of driving just on batteries, and it’d be easier to electrify sections of railway to allow recharging via overhead wires while travelling.
I actually think that it doesn’t even make sense for heavy vehicles eitther. The Tesla semi has enough range for 6-8 hours of driving just on batteries, and it’d be easier to electrify sections of railway to allow recharging via overhead wires while travelling.
Hopefully hydrogen will be a fizzer. probably more of a bang like the refueling station that recently exploded.
The way I see it is that it needs to be processed (just like oil)
It needs to be transported to refueling sites just like oil
It's highly volatile (worse than petrol)
I think it is big oil (or similar multinationals) pushing it so that they can keep
existing infrastructure and charge what they like for their fuel.
The way I see it is that it needs to be processed (just like oil)
It needs to be transported to refueling sites just like oil
It's highly volatile (worse than petrol)
I think it is big oil (or similar multinationals) pushing it so that they can keep
existing infrastructure and charge what they like for their fuel.
I prefer to generate electricity at home for my own use so hydrogen is out and battery is in, but hydrogen is good for some specialized applications.
Imaging in the future Australia generates so much renewable energy, spare electricity is used to split water for hydrogen then canned it for export, this is clean fuel unlike fossil fuel.
The job now is make the process as efficient as possible.
Imaging in the future Australia generates so much renewable energy, spare electricity is used to split water for hydrogen then canned it for export, this is clean fuel unlike fossil fuel.
The job now is make the process as efficient as possible.
Blue heaven
Fair Dinkum Tesla
Thats one of the biggest issues surrounding EV’s. The public have this perception that cars need to line up at a petrol station and fill in under 10 minutes including payment. Many people cannot grasp the notion that you fill a tesla from home when not using the car, You do it regularly but its 10 seconds each time.
Brando
Active Member
electric trains work fine
Have never seen a wire vs battery comparison - I suspect wire would win.
If you are talking TCO... probably still yes but it is an interesting question. Overhead gantry wiring for trains is expensive to install and maintain, and occasionally gets downed if not maintained properly bringing the whole train network to a halt. Batteries of course have different maintenance routine and costs.
Batteries could work in lower density areas where long runs of overhead electrification would be too expensive, and just have short overhead wiring at stations (and for say 1km on the departure side) to (i) recharge the batteries while the train is stopped at the station and (ii) power the acceleration of the train as it leaves the station. Once up to speed, the batteries don’t need to do a lot of work before the next station. And slowing down 400 tons of train can capture a lot of energy too
Brando
Active Member
Seen battery train on restoration project, coastal run and short enough to charge at each end or overnight (I forget).
Not having overhead wires and poles considered a plus on tourist coastal route.
Not having overhead wires and poles considered a plus on tourist coastal route.
Producing Hydrogen from Ammonia????? As I understand it Ammonia is produced by first producing Hydrogen, usually from natural gas or methane and combine it with nitrogen extracted from the air by refrigeration with nitric acid production somewhere as an intermediate step to ultimately becoming ammonia. So now they are saying use a load of energy to produce hydrogen, then use even more energy to produce ammonia from that hydrogen, then use even more energy to split out the hydrogen again and then turn the hydrogen back into energy again. Sounds super efficient. And ammonia leaks aren’t at all hazardous.....or are they?
baillies
Member
I think it has more to do with Japan needing clean energy and having a (perceived?) lack of local clean energy sources now that Nuclear is not exactly popular there. I would have thought that with some solar, wind and probably a lot of offshore wind they could get a long way. I found an article complaining about a solar farm requiring clearing of a forrest, I actually agree that solar should not be installed on farms/forrests until all carparks, roofs and maybe railway lines are covered first.
It seems this may also be why hydrogen fuel cell cars/trucks are still popular with Japan manufacturers. Really hope they can get some better advice but then Australia is not a shining example of good political leadership on energy! Australia should really invest in getting the grid to 70+% before looking at exporting 'green' energy.
It seems this may also be why hydrogen fuel cell cars/trucks are still popular with Japan manufacturers. Really hope they can get some better advice but then Australia is not a shining example of good political leadership on energy! Australia should really invest in getting the grid to 70+% before looking at exporting 'green' energy.
Blue heaven
Fair Dinkum Tesla
Japan and South Korea needing clean energy is an important aspect, the possibility is to produce Hydrogen in the Pilbara region of Western Australia consuming an abundant supply of solar and wind then shipping direct to Asia, this full process needs to be tightly streamlined to have any chance of success, secondly the process has to be 100% non-fossil fuel produced or the purpose is defeated. The issue I have have is Hydrogen energy proponents are attempting to link any Hydrogen production with passenger vehicle use in Australia, this is a complete waste of energy compared to battery electric charged directly from renewables, the other issue I have is Hydrogen production in Australia will get heavily promoted as a green source of power from renewables, when push comes to shove it will get used as a method to slow down the closure of fossil fueled power generation.
Lastly, most battery electric vehicle owners are never going to give up all the advantages of BEV over HFCV due to experience, sadly many of the general public are still hooked on this 5 minute refueling mentalitiy, Toyota and the energy companies are going to throw a lot of publicity money at Hydrogen in Australia, there discussion will continue for some time yet.
Mark E
Member
Yes, you are reading it correctly. The ammonia step is just to make it easier to transport and adds yet another level of inefficiency. A large part of what is driving this are the fossil gas producers looking for a way to make their product look greener. Woodside's submission to the senate committee hearing on electric vehicles basically said as much.
Read it for yourself at https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=dc995710-1cd8-4148-8b02-fbb5f6ddfde9&subId=658034
Effectively they are pushing FCEVs and making misleading derogatory claims about BEVs. The most pertinent quote is below.
"Hydrogen can be produced from electricity or natural gas. Refer to Attachment A: Hydrogen Value Chain.
- The cheapest way to produce hydrogen is from Natural Gas. The process of steam methane reforming (SMR) reacts natural gas with high-temperature steam to separate hydrogen from the water and the gas. Industry terms this 'blue' hydrogen once carbon emissions are offset through bio- sequestration. Technologies are under development to separate the carbon as a saleable product.
- The alternative method for hydrogen production, though not yet economic, is to use electrolysis and renewable energy sources, such as solar or wind. In acknowledgement of its renewable energy source, this class of hydrogen is termed 'green' hydrogen."
Similar threads
- Article
