Hydrogen vs. Battery

[doug]

California's new zero-emissions automobile rules pass | Alaska Dispatch

CARB head Mary Nichols told reporters the rules include a midterm review in 2017-2018, in which car companies can present data on what consumers are buying, with the possibility that rules may be tweaked.

The oil industry, meanwhile, is concerned about mandates that will force some gas stations to offer hydrogen.

“We are OK with the idea of developing a non-mandated approach for small business owners who need some incentive to invest at the early stages of a new technology,” says Cathy Reheis-Boyd of Western States Petroleum Association.

But installing hydrogen-delivery technology costs about $1 million per station, and requiring 100 stations statewide to do it is too onerous. “We reject the idea of making them do it,” she says.

The cost of this is a drop in the bucket and these guys don't want to do it. So funny. Is 100 stations enough to promote mass adoption?

 

[W.Petefish]

California's new zero-emissions automobile rules pass | Alaska Dispatch



The cost of this is a drop in the bucket and these guys don't want to do it. So funny. Is 100 stations enough to promote mass adoption?

... so they are going with the "I reject your reality, and substitute my own" route eh?

 

[jcstp]

Maybe they should put it this way, for every 1000 sold alternative fuel vehicles, gas station companys should install 1 fast-charger for this alternative fuel! ;-)

 

[dpeilow]

Does this guy have a random BS generator? Twitter

 

[jcstp]

Military Leads Fuel-Cell Vehicle Parade In Hawaii | Earthtechling

 

[JRP3]

So pointless to use a fuel cell vehicle on a small island when an EV can cover it without a recharge.

 

[jcstp]

So pointless to use a fuel cell vehicle on a small island when an EV can cover it without a recharge.

Ok, Tesla, give the military a Model X to test! :biggrin:

 

[Robert.Boston]

Department of Energy Announces Up to $6 Million to Collect Performance Data on Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles

March 1, 2012

As part of President Obama's all-of-the-above energy strategy to reduce America's reliance on foreign oil, the Energy Department today announced up to $6 million available this year to collect and analyze valuable performance and durability data for light-duty fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs). The projects selected for funding will collect data from next-generation FCEVs as they are operated in real-world conditions to identify ways to lower costs and improve fuel cell durability and overall vehicle performance. This funding is part of the Department's commitment to U.S. leadership in advanced fuel cell research that aims to help industry bring more FCEVs into the mainstream market and provide American families with new choices for vehicles that do not rely on gasoline.

Full story

 

[dpeilow]

Think tank: Intelligent Energy makes fuel cell breakthrough, but being first doesn't make you a winner - Telegraph

 

[stopcrazypp]

Think tank: Intelligent Energy makes fuel cell breakthrough, but being first doesn't make you a winner - Telegraph

With not even a very rough estimate of pricing mentioned there is no basis to say this is a pricing "breakthrough". They are also not the "first real fuel cell business". Ballard was, but they left the market after coming to the conclusion the industry was going nowhere in terms of cars (so they moved to forklifts and stationary applications, where fuel cells do make some sense):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballard_Power_Systems

 

[JRP3]

Not to mention an affordable fuel cell is only one of the breakthroughs needed to make the concept viable.

 

[doug]

Honda opens solar hydrogen station in Japan's Saitama Prefecture - ABG

The station, which uses both juice from the grid and solar power, can produce 1.5 kilograms of hydrogen in 24 hours. That's enough to power an FCX Clarity for about 90 miles. In addition, Honda also added an electrical outlet to the FCX Clarity so that the car can function as a power source.

What a waste of energy.

 

[DuncanWatson]

Hydrogen is one of those things that I don't mind seeing research in but is nowhere close to ready. The cost of Fuel Cells is too high by a factor of 20 or so and the cost of producing hydrogen is too high. One day it may be something we use, but probably not for 50 years.

I don't mind seeing government research projects, but I don't like it when people try to pitch it as an alternative to BEVs since BEVs are ready, we just need to deploy.

 

[dpeilow]

If you think cost is the only issue, read this: efcf.com/reports/E21.pdf

 

[DuncanWatson]

If you think cost is the only issue, read this: efcf.com/reports/E21.pdf

I don't disagree with you. Free hydrogen is not cheaply liberated. It has significant costs that only major breakthroughs could alleviate.

 

[Doug_G]

I don't disagree with you. Free hydrogen is not cheaply liberated. It has significant costs that only major breakthroughs could alleviate.

Unfortunately you can't assume that these breakthroughs will ever happen, because they require fundamental developments in physics and/or chemistry. It's not simply engineering. And it's not just the production of hydrogen that has these sort of problems.

 

[DuncanWatson]

Unfortunately you can't assume that these breakthroughs will ever happen, because they require fundamental developments in physics and/or chemistry. It's not simply engineering. And it's not just the production of hydrogen that has these sort of problems.

Absolutely, which is why this is an area where pure research needs to happen. That is why I don't mind seeing pure research grants but do mind seeing DOT grants to auto corporations regarding hydrogen fuel cells.

 

[VolkerP]

If you think cost is the only issue, read this: efcf.com/reports/E21.pdf

Thanks for this link, a delightful read for me!
As the author puts it: "Does a hydrogen economy make sense? No, never." And he bases his conclusion on physical laws which cannot be overcome by engineering breakthroughs.

 

[stopcrazypp]

A hydrogen economy might make sense if you are a country that has a huge abundance of natural gas (the most efficient way to make hydrogen) or if you lots of extra renewable generation capacity (and no other viable form of energy storage besides from hydrogen nor do you have a matching load). Nuclear plants may also generate hydrogen relatively cheaply (although this hasn't really been done commercial in any big way).

But going forward, esp. in a renewable energy future (where the capacity in general matches the load and there are other cheaper forms of energy storage, like pumped storage), it doesn't really make sense overall.

 

[JRP3]

If you think cost is the only issue, read this: efcf.com/reports/E21.pdf

I don't disagree with you. Free hydrogen is not cheaply liberated. It has significant costs that only major breakthroughs could alleviate.

You are still focusing on cost.