JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Fuel cell researcher Ulf Bossel has a nice explanation of why hydrogen fuel cells don't make sense: http://phys.org/news85074285.html
-
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
Actually, the professor said we need some "primary source" and this can be anyone from an electric car owner/user to an expert in the field. And then, we have to conduct research on secondary sources, which would be the research papers. That's why I was asking for the name and the e-mail.
Thank you for the link JRP3.
Thank you for the link JRP3.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
There is also a very extensive thread on the forum here which covers most of the issues. Hydrogen vs Battery I think.
Doug beat me.
Doug beat me.
Last edited:
Good Afternoon,
I am currently doing a technical report for a Communication's class on a comparison between hydrogen- and battery-powered vehicles, and I would like to kindly ask if someone could please help me by answering some of the following questions. If someone is able to answer these, please leave your name and e-mail for citation purposes, this is a requirement of the professor. He wants us to copy and paste this "Questions and Answers" in the Appendix of the report. Anyone can answer these questions, from owners to experts in the field.
Thank you all in advance.
1- How difficult do you think it would be to build the required infrastructure for both these technologies? (Charging stations and hydrogen fueling stations)
2- Do you think that it would need so much energy to transform hydrogen to its liquid state making it not a feasible idea?
3- What is your opinion about the environmental impact of both these technologies?
4- It is known that hydrogen is very prone to explosion. Do you thin this fact could affect its safety?
5- With the recent launch of the Tesla S do you think the industry will have the tendency to follow this path of electric-powered vehicles?
6- Do you think it will be possible to improve the amount of charge a battery can hold so that battery-powered cars can achieve a range of 400-600 miles in the next few years?
7- Comparing the refueling time of hydrogen cars with the recharging time of electric vehicles, hydrogen has a great advantage. Is there any way to improve the recharging time for electric vehicles? How?
8- Which of these technologies do you think will be the choice for government funding?
9- Which of these vehicles can more easily be sold at an affordable price for the end customer?
10- Overall, what do you think it is the best choice for the future? Hydrogen- or electric-powered vehicles? Why?
I am currently doing a technical report for a Communication's class on a comparison between hydrogen- and battery-powered vehicles, and I would like to kindly ask if someone could please help me by answering some of the following questions. If someone is able to answer these, please leave your name and e-mail for citation purposes, this is a requirement of the professor. He wants us to copy and paste this "Questions and Answers" in the Appendix of the report. Anyone can answer these questions, from owners to experts in the field.
Thank you all in advance.
1- How difficult do you think it would be to build the required infrastructure for both these technologies? (Charging stations and hydrogen fueling stations)
2- Do you think that it would need so much energy to transform hydrogen to its liquid state making it not a feasible idea?
3- What is your opinion about the environmental impact of both these technologies?
4- It is known that hydrogen is very prone to explosion. Do you thin this fact could affect its safety?
5- With the recent launch of the Tesla S do you think the industry will have the tendency to follow this path of electric-powered vehicles?
6- Do you think it will be possible to improve the amount of charge a battery can hold so that battery-powered cars can achieve a range of 400-600 miles in the next few years?
7- Comparing the refueling time of hydrogen cars with the recharging time of electric vehicles, hydrogen has a great advantage. Is there any way to improve the recharging time for electric vehicles? How?
8- Which of these technologies do you think will be the choice for government funding?
9- Which of these vehicles can more easily be sold at an affordable price for the end customer?
10- Overall, what do you think it is the best choice for the future? Hydrogen- or electric-powered vehicles? Why?
I think that's a bit strong. See post #4.
I would suggest that if you would like to use a forum member(s) comments as a primary source, then assemble the quotes you'd like to include and either (a) contact the authors in private messages on the forum or (b) build a single post with all the quotes and request that people reply to the thread confirming if they are comfortable with you using that quote. I think (b) is simpler but others might disagree.
I know we have a thread about this already, but I like tilting at this windmill.
1. Hydrogen requires fueling stations on par with gas stations. There are about 115,000 gas stations in the U.S. Hydrogen stations will be far more expensive to build, because they require high pressure tanks and powerful compressors. If a typical gas station build out is a few million dollars, expect hydrogen stations to be more. You are looking at many hundreds of billions of dollars to build hydrogen stations. Building a network to deliver hydrogen to the stations is another investment of similar magnitude.
A hydrogen vehicle in an area with no hydrogen fueling infrastructure is useless.
On the other hand electric vehicles that are on the market today satisfy the vast majority of the driving needs for most people who can charge them at home without any additional infrastructure. Most homeowners fit this category. To extend this to non homeowners, charging infrastructure needs to be added to their residences. This is in most cases a small matter of extending wires to where the care is parked.
To extend electric vehicles to be practical for all driving fast charging stations need to be added, but these can be added as demand grows, and several hundred locations would adequately cover the entire country geographically.
Even when fast charging stations are added, most charging will still happen at home, so the number needed will be far smaller than liquid fueling stations.
No significant additional electrical generation is needed for EVs until replace the majority of cars in use today.
2. The "primary fuel -> hydrogen -> stored in the car -> making the car move" cycle for hydrogen cars is significantly less efficient than the "primary fuel -> electricity -> stored in the car -> making the car move cycle" for EVs.
3. A hydrogen system would cost vastly more to build. Using hydrogen to move the car is less efficient. Therefore hydrogen has a larger environmental impact.
4. Hydrogen would need to be stored at immense pressure. It is also extremely flammable. Containing that at acceptable safety levels will be expensive.
6. An extremly aerodynamic compact EV - the size cars were 40 years ago - with 600 mile range could easily be built with todays batteries.
7. Refueling hyrdogen cars quickly has not been demonstrated at any real world scale. It is energy intensive and expensive to compress the hydrogen. Electric vehicles could "recharge" faster than hydrogen can refuel with battery swapping. It is more expensive than recharging and is not necessary.
8. The right choice is building out charging infrastructure for EVs. The right way to do it would be with incentives and not direct funding.
9. A variety of affordable EVs are for sale to the consumer right now. No hydrogen cars for sale to the consumer currently exist - nor are they expected in the near future. Cost issues with hydrogen drivetrains have not been solved.
10. EVs, see answers above.
- - - Updated - - -
Actually a 500 mile range EV has already been "built".
If you took a 1999 GM EV1 and put the Tesla Model S 85kWh battery pack in it, it would have a range of well over 500 miles.
The battery packs are obviously not the same shape, but they are roughly the same weight.
Unfortunately GM crushed them all so we cant do it.
1. Hydrogen requires fueling stations on par with gas stations. There are about 115,000 gas stations in the U.S. Hydrogen stations will be far more expensive to build, because they require high pressure tanks and powerful compressors. If a typical gas station build out is a few million dollars, expect hydrogen stations to be more. You are looking at many hundreds of billions of dollars to build hydrogen stations. Building a network to deliver hydrogen to the stations is another investment of similar magnitude.
A hydrogen vehicle in an area with no hydrogen fueling infrastructure is useless.
On the other hand electric vehicles that are on the market today satisfy the vast majority of the driving needs for most people who can charge them at home without any additional infrastructure. Most homeowners fit this category. To extend this to non homeowners, charging infrastructure needs to be added to their residences. This is in most cases a small matter of extending wires to where the care is parked.
To extend electric vehicles to be practical for all driving fast charging stations need to be added, but these can be added as demand grows, and several hundred locations would adequately cover the entire country geographically.
Even when fast charging stations are added, most charging will still happen at home, so the number needed will be far smaller than liquid fueling stations.
No significant additional electrical generation is needed for EVs until replace the majority of cars in use today.
2. The "primary fuel -> hydrogen -> stored in the car -> making the car move" cycle for hydrogen cars is significantly less efficient than the "primary fuel -> electricity -> stored in the car -> making the car move cycle" for EVs.
3. A hydrogen system would cost vastly more to build. Using hydrogen to move the car is less efficient. Therefore hydrogen has a larger environmental impact.
4. Hydrogen would need to be stored at immense pressure. It is also extremely flammable. Containing that at acceptable safety levels will be expensive.
6. An extremly aerodynamic compact EV - the size cars were 40 years ago - with 600 mile range could easily be built with todays batteries.
7. Refueling hyrdogen cars quickly has not been demonstrated at any real world scale. It is energy intensive and expensive to compress the hydrogen. Electric vehicles could "recharge" faster than hydrogen can refuel with battery swapping. It is more expensive than recharging and is not necessary.
8. The right choice is building out charging infrastructure for EVs. The right way to do it would be with incentives and not direct funding.
9. A variety of affordable EVs are for sale to the consumer right now. No hydrogen cars for sale to the consumer currently exist - nor are they expected in the near future. Cost issues with hydrogen drivetrains have not been solved.
10. EVs, see answers above.
- - - Updated - - -
Actually a 500 mile range EV has already been "built".
If you took a 1999 GM EV1 and put the Tesla Model S 85kWh battery pack in it, it would have a range of well over 500 miles.
The battery packs are obviously not the same shape, but they are roughly the same weight.
Unfortunately GM crushed them all so we cant do it.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Cars were pretty big 40 years ago, I once owned a 1973 Ford Tbird that was a monster. Also, it would not be easy to build a 600 mile EV into anything resembling a functional car. I don't think you could fit an 85kwh pack in an EV1 no matter how you configured it.
"6- Do you think it will be possible to improve the amount of charge a battery can hold so that battery-powered cars can achieve a range of 400-600 miles in the next few years?"
The answer to this is that you can do it today if it was necessary. The bigger question to this is why do you need it?
Some people think that it is important for electric cars to mimic exactly how a gas car works. This is untrue. Gas cars have been around for a very long time and so we, as consumers, understand their strengths and weaknesses very well and know what to expect from them. An electric car offers many conveniences that, once a consumer comes to understand them, can easily overcome any objections. Statistics show that most people do not take long trips by automobile any more. Most long trips are made by airplane in modern times. Why? Because of convenience. I can go online, book a flight, hotel, and rental car in less than 10 minutes for any destination in the world. An electric car is much more convenient within its range than a gas car. With overnight charging, an EV owner always starts the day with a "full tank." You never need to change the oil, replace an air filter, oil filter, or have a transmission problem. Using myself as an example, I have driven over 265 miles (the EPA on the 85 kWh Model S) in my current car on a trip exactly once in five and a half years. With solar panels you have the ability to power your vehicle from the convenience of your own plugs at home and become independent of outside energy. This is impossible with any other kind of vehicle. You can't get gasoline, deisel, natural gas, or hydrogen from your home - period.
So an EV is just different from a gas car. It's not better or worse because except for your personal preferences.
As far as I can tell, HFCV's offer one advantage over EV's, you have the convenience of a pump for refills. EV's have them beat in every other aspect except for that.
I hope this was helpful.
The answer to this is that you can do it today if it was necessary. The bigger question to this is why do you need it?
Some people think that it is important for electric cars to mimic exactly how a gas car works. This is untrue. Gas cars have been around for a very long time and so we, as consumers, understand their strengths and weaknesses very well and know what to expect from them. An electric car offers many conveniences that, once a consumer comes to understand them, can easily overcome any objections. Statistics show that most people do not take long trips by automobile any more. Most long trips are made by airplane in modern times. Why? Because of convenience. I can go online, book a flight, hotel, and rental car in less than 10 minutes for any destination in the world. An electric car is much more convenient within its range than a gas car. With overnight charging, an EV owner always starts the day with a "full tank." You never need to change the oil, replace an air filter, oil filter, or have a transmission problem. Using myself as an example, I have driven over 265 miles (the EPA on the 85 kWh Model S) in my current car on a trip exactly once in five and a half years. With solar panels you have the ability to power your vehicle from the convenience of your own plugs at home and become independent of outside energy. This is impossible with any other kind of vehicle. You can't get gasoline, deisel, natural gas, or hydrogen from your home - period.
So an EV is just different from a gas car. It's not better or worse because except for your personal preferences.
As far as I can tell, HFCV's offer one advantage over EV's, you have the convenience of a pump for refills. EV's have them beat in every other aspect except for that.
I hope this was helpful.
It is constantly forgotten that this is not a straight up advantage. In my 5000 miles with the Model S I have never needed to a charge away from home. Yes if I go on a road trip, I could fill up faster with a pump than a plug. But I have not - and I have saved myself at least a dozen trips to visit a pump.
- - - Updated - - -
I should have been more specific - I was thinking of econoboxes.
In the mid 70s most cars got a lot smaller. Cars have grown steadily since then. I know there have been exceptions the whole time.
The 18650s in the Model S are about 8-10 times more energy dense by volume than lead acid right? I know that smaller cells have more packaging and cooling overhead but I still think it could be done.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I'm just considering the fact that the S pack takes up most of the space between the wheel base and the width of the car, and the EV1 was tiny compared to the S. Also, I think you're over stating the volumetric advantage of lithium.
Wikipedia ( sorry its the best I could find ) says the EV1 battery pack was 10.6 cu feet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt
I can't find good dimensions for the Model S pack. I've seen 7 feet by 4 feet and 8 feet by 5 feet, both 4 inches thick. That is somewhere between 13.3 cu feet and 9.3 cu feet.
The Roadster pack is reported as being 940mm w x 584mm H x 560mm D which is 10.8 cu feet. ( I think that is high because it includes the notch )
If the wikipedia number is correct, it should be totally possible.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
VW says HFCV's not practical: http://green.autoblog.com/2013/03/16/volkswagen-chief-fuel-cell-vehicles-not-possible/
I hope it's the beginning of a movement where incumbent car makers stop playing game of fig leaf demo cars. Now that Tesla & Renault/Nissan are producing volume in serious numbers, they start to see that BEVs could eat into hybrid+ICE market share.
Elon is dragging them to the frontier by their... oh well you know.
Elon is dragging them to the frontier by their... oh well you know.
Any supposed advantage of the HFCV over the BEV is covered by the PHEV/EREV. There's now choice in the market place (with more to come) and consumers can pick what best suits their actual or perceived needs. I have a hard time coming up with a reason why someone would pick a HFCV over a PHEV.
Similar threads
