It was announced several German manufacturers and Japanese manufacturers plan to bring out new Hydrogen electric cars by 2020. We know the Model S got the Germans attention with several CEO's commenting about Tesla. So the M3's 274000 in the first 3 days - must be a slap in the face right? Surely CEO's of the Japanese and German manufacturers would of already discussed Tesla's M3 success by now and im confident they already adjusting there future R&D strategy to target Tesla. Hydrogen wasn't doing to well before the M3 reveal and now that Tesla have proven BEV's are the future why would you invest 100's of million into Hydrogen? Smart thing would be Hydrogen to be canceled first and a % of R&D taken away from Fossil fuel cars and go in BEV's with a top team. After wise in 10 years from now the stubborn manufacturers that don't do that can join the Blackberry stubborn club don't you think?.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I wish this would be the case.
But many companies have spent too much money to give up at this point.
Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Audi, BMW, Mercedes.... their Fuel Cell development is still very much alive.
Toyota has publicly stated their full support for FCV over pure EV.
Despite all the negative about hydrogen fuel, it does address one major obstacle for EV adoption - range anxiety.
There will always be a group of customers who cannot get over their range anxiety, and FCV can cater to that group of customers.
But many companies have spent too much money to give up at this point.
Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, Audi, BMW, Mercedes.... their Fuel Cell development is still very much alive.
Toyota has publicly stated their full support for FCV over pure EV.
Despite all the negative about hydrogen fuel, it does address one major obstacle for EV adoption - range anxiety.
There will always be a group of customers who cannot get over their range anxiety, and FCV can cater to that group of customers.
Instead of 'range anxiety' they will get 'range panic'
Not even close.
California Hydrogen Activities
Hydrogen highway (Japan) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Toyota and others think long term.
EV are a temporary solution since they still are in part powered by sources of "dirty energy" like coal and nuclear and still have longer charging times (especially applicable for a mass market that doesn't have access to their own overnight charging).
Fuel cells may take a while, but people said the same about EVs.
California Hydrogen Activities
Hydrogen highway (Japan) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Toyota and others think long term.
EV are a temporary solution since they still are in part powered by sources of "dirty energy" like coal and nuclear and still have longer charging times (especially applicable for a mass market that doesn't have access to their own overnight charging).
Fuel cells may take a while, but people said the same about EVs.
California is run by the Hydrogen Groupies, and California is one of the largest car markets in the world.
Lithium batteries killed the Hydrogen Car, but our state will not acknowledge it.
Range Anxiety? No current automobile powerplant has more range anxiety than hydrogen. You can't fill at home, there are very, very few public refueling stations, and refueling stations are too expensive for anyone but the government to purchase.
Lithium batteries killed the Hydrogen Car, but our state will not acknowledge it.
Range Anxiety? No current automobile powerplant has more range anxiety than hydrogen. You can't fill at home, there are very, very few public refueling stations, and refueling stations are too expensive for anyone but the government to purchase.
Not sure in this case it is range anxiety. It is charge anxiety or something.
EVs work very well today for people who can charge their car overnight and only need to worry about range on a long trip - and that worry is effectively gone.
But for everyone else who can't charge over night, people without garages, people living in apartment complexes, rental units, etc, what do they do? Charge on the weekend at a friend's house or at a supercharger? And when you have 300k - 500k people doing the same, how will that all work?
And where do you think the hydrogen comes from? Hint. CH4 + H2O <-> CO + 3H2 Equally (if not more so) dirty as coal- Steam reforming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Electrolysis is pointless - Same dirty electricity, and far less efficient than just charging batteries directly.
Lots of fuel cell discussion here already, such as Toyota 'Mirai' Fuel Cell Sedan
It gets worse. There was an article crowing about a Toyota Mirai going 100,000 km all around an area of Europe, and they say they refueled the car 400 times. That's 250 km (or about 156 miles) per fill-up. That's a lot more stops for hydrogen than a 90D would take for supercharging for a comparable distance. And hydrogen "fuel" economy drops like a rock once you start going interstate speeds.
Similar things were said about Tesla before they built out the supercharging network.
And not everyone can charge their car from home - unless they have a really long extension cord to go from their third floor walk up to the street. Then you have to worry that someone won't unplug that extension cord and use it to charge their electronics.
Seems that the high cost can also include the extraction of hydrogen at the fuel station, so it is a bit of an apples-to-orange comparison with gas or electric.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
How? PHEVs don't have any range issues today. I know you used the term "EV" but nobody is trying to get us to switch today to only BEVs - all policy work is for adoption of PEVs. BEV-only will be the long-term solution once the infrastructure is built, but PHEVs are an integral part of the policy plan to get there. And they work today.
Hydrogen, on the other hand, won't work unless you build a network of extremely expensive H2 stations.
So no, H2 does not address a major PEV obstacle. But PHEVs do address a major obstacle to adopting H2.
I am not sure if the worry about range on a long trip is "gone".
Here in Canada, the superchargers are few and far apart. If we need to do long trips in cold winter days, we have to do a lot of planning and drive at like 100km/hr (I never drive at this speed in an ICE car) and hope that there is no strong head wind or major traffic jam, and that the charging station is operational. Not everyone is willing to change driving style to get the range needed.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
If you don't know where H2 comes from, you should look it up. That argument ends up favoring EVs over H2 cars.
There are at least two threads on these forums that cover this in minute detail, so no need to rehash it here.
Last edited:
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
It's true that the words were similar. But the meaning was not.
There is an order-of-magnitude difference in the price per refueling station. And another order-of-magnitude difference in the number of stations needed. DC charging infrastructure costs can be included in the price of the car, and so can be built as the cars are built. That is not true for H2 stations. I was at a talk by the lead H2 researcher at a national lab recently, and while he was positive on the vehicle end of the technology, he had no idea how infrastructure might be addressed.
PHEVs work today. BEVs don't work for everybody yet, but they work for far more people than there are BEVs being built.
Don't get me wrong, I support H2 research, and I think there are places like fleets and outposts where it may well make sense. But PHEVs are already a better solution for passenger cars, and BEVs are well on their way.
Last edited:
Yes, hydrogen is just reformed natural gas. It's actually no better for the CO2 levels to run a H2 fuel cell car than just running CNG.
If you don't know the actual costs of the different fueling stations and know how to do an apples to oranges comparison (hint EV stations get electricity delivered to it) or you don't know the meaning of order of magnitude, you should look it up.
This was discussed before so no need to rehash it.
Except Tesla made the commitment to build out charring infrastructure. Its disappointing to see these well capitalized companies like Toyota expecting hydrogen infra to be built out on the back of the tax payer. Although at $2 to $2.5M per fueling point, I can understand why.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
hmm..
H2 refueling station is one order of magnitude more expensive than a DC supercharger,
and ~ 90% of EV charging is at home. That is another order of magnitude.
So for now, H2 refueling stations are ~ 100x more expensive than DC superchargers.
H2 refueling station is one order of magnitude more expensive than a DC supercharger,
and ~ 90% of EV charging is at home. That is another order of magnitude.
So for now, H2 refueling stations are ~ 100x more expensive than DC superchargers.
Snowdog
Member
It isn't long term thinking. It's archaic thinking.
Toyota and others are convinced people will always want to visit fueling stations, to fill up their cars.
They think 1950's model will predominate in 2050's. But replacing gasoline with Hydrogen.
In reality, the whole model of personal transport is shifting so radically, that filling up cars will be an anachronism.
Self driving EVs are the real long term game. They will just scoot off to charge themselves. A lot less people will own them, they will just call for one as needed, for much less than ownership costs.
Toyota got stuck in the past, and eventually will face a reckoning.
Snowdog
Member
Also expect more dissent and defections from the hydrogen camp as reality sets in:
Daimler says batteries have edge over fuel cells: Euro am Sonntag
Daimler says batteries have edge over fuel cells: Euro am Sonntag
Similar threads
