-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Hydrogen vs. Battery
- Thread starter siry
- Start date
Weird how a video of a guy in a bedroom seems to carry more weight than an letter or written email.
My main comment:
vfx 2:30pm (5/21/2009)
To the original challenge. Greg thinks Chu is a common citizen. The man is a scientist. He looked at Hydrogen from a scientific perspective and said: CHU Quote "...the way we get hydrogen primarily is from reforming [natural] gas. That's not an ideal source of hydrogen. You're giving away some of the energy content of natural gas, which is a very valuable fuel. So that's one problem. The other problem is, if it's for transportation, we don't have a good storage mechanism yet. Compressed hydrogen is the best mechanism [but it requires] a large volume. We haven't figured out how to store it with high density. What else? The fuel cells aren't there yet, and the distribution infrastructure isn't there yet. So you have four things that have to happen all at once. And so it always looked like it was going to be [a technology for] the distant future. In order to get significant deployment, you need four significant technological breakthroughs. That makes it unlikely"
Does not sound like he's going to be a "hey neato" rube that will fall for your disinformation tactics.
And to the driving challenge, why does distance per fillup matter? Every time Chu wakes up he has a full 100 mile range. Sure the Cube is probably a low end 20K boxy car and the by all reports the FCX is a 70K luxury car but which is the American consumer going to need most?
My main comment:
vfx 2:30pm (5/21/2009)
To the original challenge. Greg thinks Chu is a common citizen. The man is a scientist. He looked at Hydrogen from a scientific perspective and said: CHU Quote "...the way we get hydrogen primarily is from reforming [natural] gas. That's not an ideal source of hydrogen. You're giving away some of the energy content of natural gas, which is a very valuable fuel. So that's one problem. The other problem is, if it's for transportation, we don't have a good storage mechanism yet. Compressed hydrogen is the best mechanism [but it requires] a large volume. We haven't figured out how to store it with high density. What else? The fuel cells aren't there yet, and the distribution infrastructure isn't there yet. So you have four things that have to happen all at once. And so it always looked like it was going to be [a technology for] the distant future. In order to get significant deployment, you need four significant technological breakthroughs. That makes it unlikely"
Does not sound like he's going to be a "hey neato" rube that will fall for your disinformation tactics.
And to the driving challenge, why does distance per fillup matter? Every time Chu wakes up he has a full 100 mile range. Sure the Cube is probably a low end 20K boxy car and the by all reports the FCX is a 70K luxury car but which is the American consumer going to need most?
I like the way you have turned the usual price comparison thing on its head there.
This also misses the point that 10 minute EV recharge has been demonstrated, whereas filling up an FCX reportedly takes over 20 minutes.
And how much range could you *really* get from a Model S, if the front trunk were used and money no object? 500 miles? It'd still be a fifth of the price of an FCX. They should build one and prove the point.
By the way: Finding the local angle: DOE's hydrogen funding cut will hurt South Carolina
This also misses the point that 10 minute EV recharge has been demonstrated, whereas filling up an FCX reportedly takes over 20 minutes.
And how much range could you *really* get from a Model S, if the front trunk were used and money no object? 500 miles? It'd still be a fifth of the price of an FCX. They should build one and prove the point.
By the way: Finding the local angle: DOE's hydrogen funding cut will hurt South Carolina
I wouldn't tout the "10 minute recharge" too much.
Those 'demos' were done with smallish packs by Tesla standards.
Filling up a ~60kWh pack in 10 minutes is tougher than filling ~30kWh pack.
Also, there seems to be some indication that those sorts of quick charges are inefficient and hard on the batteries, so I don't see it as becoming the 'normal' way to recharge EVs anytime soon.
(Perhaps someday ultracaps and improved grid will change this, but for now, ubiquitous 10 minute recharge is as much of a pipe dream as hydrogen highway).
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Even with the Nissan EV, I'm not that worried. This is talking about everyday driving and in terms of everyday driving; even with a smaller battery pack, I don't think an EV will necessarily lose out to a hydrogen fuel cell car.
The reason why a car like the Nissan EV is a better choice is because the comparison is between more similar cars. The Tesla has more range but it's definitely not as practical as an SUV. The Nissan is closer in that it has more seats and better cargo space. Sure ideally we have a 300 mile li-ion EV SUV to compare if money was no object, but so far no one is looking to build such a thing, even if it is technically possible.
Well, it needs twice the power. Aerovironment did the demo with a 250kW charger, but they plan a 500kW version (slide 11 here).
I'm coming to the opinion that it isn't that big a deal. 500kW would be the level installed into a small block of (3 or 4) light industrial units, for example, so to set this up at say 4 locations between SF and LA would seem pretty trivial (much more so than making, transporting and storing H2 at the same 4 locations).
And I assume that it very expensive to work on electrical feeds capable of delivering the required current. This isn't just a typical "contact an electrician" job but involves working with the bureaucracy of a power company and specialist electricians trained in those types of circuits .
Maybe some regulation changes could standardize and cut through red tape, but for now I suspect it is involved and expensive to set up charging stations with such capability.
The equipment itself is probably fairly pricey but I bet it is dwarfed by the hassle of getting all the required permits, permissions and doing the work to actually install and make it workable. Giving access to the public probably involves even more hurdles. Will this be self service? If not, what are the costs to keep a trained charging technician on site?
Heck, 10 minute recharge was demonstrated a decade ago, yet how many 250kW+ charge stations are out there now in public places now?
I am more bullish of the ubiquitous charge pedestal approach with level 2+ chargers at home and everywhere you go. We got hundreds or perhaps 1000s of those in the late 90s, so why not continue to move forward, but with the more modern, standardized charge cable connectors?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Recharging/swapping won't even be an issue as long as his driving habits are within the range of the vehicle. Blenco is trying to create a problem where none exists by trying to distract people with a non issue. Seems to be working as here we are discussing fast charging once again :wink:
With all that I just said, yes, some strategically placed quick charge stations - like halfway between SF and LA make sense to me. Perhaps a bit more sense than swap stations, but both ideas seem to be under development and unproven.
At this point I am guessing that the Daimler "pouch cells" are more amenable to quick charge (and pack swap) then Tesla's current 18650s, and I am also guessing that Model S plans may call for 18650 format laptop batteries in the 160 & 230 mile range versions, and "pouch cells" for the 300 mile pack. So you might only be able to get pack swap or quick charge with the 300 mile pack.
At this point I am guessing that the Daimler "pouch cells" are more amenable to quick charge (and pack swap) then Tesla's current 18650s, and I am also guessing that Model S plans may call for 18650 format laptop batteries in the 160 & 230 mile range versions, and "pouch cells" for the 300 mile pack. So you might only be able to get pack swap or quick charge with the 300 mile pack.
But the flip side is a bit true too. If you run down your longer range big pack car, and finally have to charge, it will take longer if you charge at the same current as a smaller pack car. One reason why Model S will have some pack variants with even more capacity than the Roadster is you still want a long range but in a bigger, heavier car. Lets say the standard "on the road" charger was plain Level 2 charging (7.7kW) like most of the US public chargers now. My RangerEV could get ~1/4 charge in 1 hour while I stop off shopping at Costco. A Tesla Roadster could get ~1/8 charge in 1 hour. A 300 mile range Model S (~75kWh) could only get ~1/10 charge in an hour. So, my point is, as EVs get more and more capacity in their packs there will be some desire to have higher and higher current charge spots due to the time to charge issue.
Tracking down install costs is tricky, but I did find this and this. It would suggest that the cost of install here is circa £100/kVA. This fits with a quote I have from my own work.
As for the PosiCharger being $300k, I'm not exactly sure what would drive that, but I'd imagine that volume has a lot to do with it.
I have my own ideas on whether those numbers and other costs make a viable business case (particularly on a freeway/motorway situation), but feel free to comment :smile:
As for the PosiCharger being $300k, I'm not exactly sure what would drive that, but I'd imagine that volume has a lot to do with it.
I have my own ideas on whether those numbers and other costs make a viable business case (particularly on a freeway/motorway situation), but feel free to comment :smile:
Plug-In Electric Cars Are Not the Future | Mobile Magazine
Part of me says this article is a joke. Anyhow, besides the misinformation in most of the post, the author apparently doesn't know what a hydrogen bomb is. Driving an H-bomb around... now that really would be something!
An op-ed piece on a mobile phone blog?
Furthermore, an op-ed piece on a mobile phone blog that comes out in favour of not charging overnight?
:S
Furthermore, an op-ed piece on a mobile phone blog that comes out in favour of not charging overnight?
:S
$300,000 is crazy for most businesses. It won't justify itself.
Another reason why I believe most people will build and design their EV and the charging infrastructure based on 240 volts at 40 amps. NEMA 14-50 outlets everywhere would be relatively cheap and easy.
Under $250 to install in any garage.
To make this work, we have to take advantage of the existing infrastructure. Most homes and small businesses cannot handle an outlet drawing more than 50 amps. For most cars, that will recapture 20 to 25 miles per hour that you are plugged in.
Sure, there might be super high powered chargers on highway stops, but the vast majority of the recharge infrastructure will be in parking lots of stores, parking garages and our own garages.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
100 cars a day for one year, at $10 each charge, gives you $356,000, plus the added business brought in by having a fast charge station. Just some random numbers but I can see where it could be profitable.
Similar threads
