-
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
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
What's the significance?
Currently, 20 stations are down or partially down...
Station Status | Station Status
mblakele
FSD Beta (99)
Curious George
Member
Good question! The significances are:
- It brings some supply to the north bay area around San Francisco. So a little better for @ohmman 's neighbor with the Mirai.
- It has two nozzles, doubling the throughput. The compressor capacity is still little bit of unknown.
- New stations are going to be like this; high capacity based on liquid hydrogen. Many of the existing ones, which used gaseous hydrogen delivery, were cheaper to build but a truck could only bring ~150 kg, enough for 40-50 cars.
- Also, only one supplier for gaseous hydrogen, which is the cause of the current crisis. For liquid hydrogen, there are multiple suppliers.
- A single liquid hydrogen carrier truck can haul 4000-6000 kg of hydrogen; good for 1000-1500 cars! This lowers the trucking cost a little, but there are some energy penalty for liquefying the hydrogen.
This change is needed as number of cars have grown, and so refueling is going to the next stage!
Liquid H2 is what's keeping couple of stations (Mountain view and San Ramon) alive, each with 350 kg of supply per day.
This doesn't solve the current shortage as the small stations based on gaseous delivery remain in trouble, and a single supplier air products is causing the supply disruption. But the new ones coming up around them should solve this issue in future. It's a matter of when, not if.
Yes, a mere 2 hour and 32 minute, 112.8 mile roundtrip for a fill-up. Let me check my car on my app and see if I should add some juice without getting up from my desk... nope. Looks good.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Do you not understand efficiency? Or do you just not care...
On another note the LHV vs HHV debate made me realize something I should have seen. 39kWh is the minimum energy required to produce 1kg of H2 while 33kWh is the most energy available in H2 to a fuel cell. This is if both are 100% efficient. So at the ideal limit of thermodynamics H2 is ~84% efficient. Now you want to transport it as a liquid? So the max is <60%. And that's NOT 'real world'.... that's best case. That's what I mean by a 'thermodynamic nightmare'....
Just use CNG..... save $$$ AND energy.
Curious George
Member
What city are we talking about here? I thought, you mentioned Mill Valley. The map of earth is showing it to be 26 miles away from the station. San Rafael, etc are closer (22 miles).
But your point is taken. it is not ideal for "local" fill ups. Still better than nothing (situation before). Unless, someone drives/commutes that way anyway and then it is pretty good.
Real advantage will be when you have to sit around at a supercharger in a smelly place near a ranch, while the Mirai driver gets back on his way in no time.
I’m in Sonoma. Mill Valley was/is the closest station to him.What city are we talking about here? I thought, you mentioned Mill Valley. The map of earth is showing it to be 26 miles away from the station. San Rafael, etc are closer (22 miles).
But your point is taken. it is not ideal for "local" fill ups. Still better than nothing (situation before). Unless, someone drives/commutes that way anyway and then it is pretty good.
Real advantage will be when you have to sit around at a supercharger in a smelly place near a ranch, while the Mirai driver gets back on his way in no time.
What a disaster. The nearest station to my house has been closed for weeks. Second nearest is also closed.
A friend of mine is leasing a Mirai right now. May see him tomorrow. I bet he is glad he kept his ICE car.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Reuters: Hydrogen hurdles: a deadly blast hampers South Korea's big fuel cell car bet.
Hydrogen hurdles: a deadly blast hampers South Korea's big fuel cell car bet
Hydrogen hurdles: a deadly blast hampers South Korea's big fuel cell car bet
Curious George
Member
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Agreed... why pay for public charging when you can just charge at home.
But I take your point. H2 is certainly better for people that want to sell H2... and gasoline. Just not better for drivers... or really anyone else.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Ha! BNEF is talking about BEV price parity in 3 years, and dropping. Which begs the question, will FCEVs ever catch up to BEVs?
I do not understand these EV price projections.
- If demand is high but batteries are scarce how would the price drop?
- If batteries are widely available, why would anyone invest in H2 other than airplanes and ships (assuming weight is still a problem)?
- If batteries are scarce but price drops, that signals low demand. Why would the demand be low if EVs match ICE prices?
Australia, who is sitting on massive Nickel/Cobalt reserves invests in H2: http://www.renewablessa.sa.gov.au/c...th-australias-hydrogen-action-plan-online.pdf
What do they see?
Interesting stuff about miners, they do their on investigation about chemistries, what might and what might not work and proceed with the projects based on them:
Lowering cobalt content in lithium-ion batteries outweighed by surging battery demand
quoting it:
Benchmark Minerals analyst Caspar Rawles recently spoke about alternatives to lithium-ion batteries saying they are at several years away.
“There are things like advanced lithium-ion batteries, which use little cobalt and could be here in a couple of years,” Mr Rawles noted. “But we’re really getting toward the physiochemical limit of what those materials can do.”
“To me, the next generation is something like solid-state batteries with the solid anode, but they’re a long way off,” he pointed out.
“Other things, like sodium-ion batteries, are still on the lab scale and you need to get from lab to research to pilot testing, to cathode testing to battery testing. We’re looking at least 10 more years for that,” Mr Rawles added.
Meanwhile, billion-dollar global materials technology and recycling group Umicore’s chief executive officer Marc Grynberg was even more blunt about removing cobalt, saying it was “not going to happen in the next three decades”.
“It simply doesn’t work,” he added.
According to Northern Cobalt’s (ASX: N27) managing director Mike Schwarz the recent moves by big manufacturers seems to back up Mr Grynberg’s line of thought.
“Before we started developing our Wollogorang cobalt project in northern Australia we spent a considerable amount of time analysing the market factors,” he said.
“When you take into account the many supply issues and the drop-off in exploration during the mining downturn, we are almost certainly looking at a global shortage of cobalt at some point in the next few years.”
“Manufacturers have also seen this coming and are approaching mining companies with big off-take agreements for up to 10 years. We see a lot of potential in this space over the next few years.”
Merrill
Merrill
Honestly I do not understand anyone putting this amount of time, effort and money into this technology when you could do so much with other green energy.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
This is your conceptual error. Batteries aren't 'scarce'. Supply chains are stressed because of exponential growth but that's not necessarily 'scarce'. For every doubling of output there is also a ~20% drop in cost sue to 'economies of scale' and with fierce competition no one is going to raise their price or they'll just lose business.
Similar threads
