Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Hydrogen vs. Battery

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Daimler gave up on fuel cells???? That's what you wanted to hear. But it's not what the article says.

For passenger vehicles that's pretty much what it means...

'The fuel cell for hydrogen-powered Stromer plays no central role for Källenius in the drives of the future. This technology could be of particular interest to commercial vehicles, but in the next ten years we will concentrate on the battery in passenger cars, according to the former Daimler board member responsible for corporate research and Mercedes development chief.'
 
1. Curtailment: I don't know why we keep arguing about EVs helping in curtailment. It's just painful to charge for long hours
I know right! It can take my Model S up to eight hours to fully charge if I've depleted it. And I miss it every single time because I'm asleep, and *PRESTO*, it's just "full" in the morning. Very upsetting.

2. Fuel cell cars have longer ranges and 5 minute fueling time, which makes them lot more appealing than electric cars.
EXACTLY! Unfortunately After driving for ~4 hours I'm forced to stop at a convenient point along my route, and have to spend 30-40 minutes supercharging while I eat. Too bad there's no option for me to drive 45 minutes each way off my main route in order to enjoy a 5 minute fill up. Provided the station isn't cycling. And isn't empty.

3. Neither BEV nor FCEV is a solution for today. Hybrids are.
Tell me about it! In the 6-1/2 years I've had my BEV I've only been able to put on 150,000 miles of commutes, daily & weekend driving, and road trips. Totally impractical! And to think I thought that it would be worth it just because the operating/fueling expense is a fraction of my previous vehicle.

4. The problems and solutions differ from region to region. One shoe does not fit all.
You tell 'em! With the billions of driving scenarios out there, there's bound to be at least one where's HFCV's are more appropriate, ya know??

In the meantime, another big hydrogen station opens in San Francisco, with 100% renewable hydrogen.
That's good for fueling another 500-700 cars in the area.
Awesome! Is that annually?
 
Last edited:
spielt keine zentrale Rolle does not equal give up

FCEVs don't play a central role at any car maker. It's just a necessary safety step to have a platform in case it prevails.

Neither do BEVs (except Tesla); the point is that FCEVs won't play a central role in their ZEV transition. They're focusing on batteries not fuel cells because they want something that will work.
 
Last edited:
Neither do BEVs (except Tesla); the point is that FCEVs won't play a central role in their ZEV transition. They're focusing on batteries not fuel cells because they want something that will work.

Daimler just released their FCEV and can wait 5 years to see how it plays out since things are happening slowly
Germany expands hydrogen infrastructure - electrive.com
Plan for 80 hydrogen fuel stations for Ireland by 2030

VW was forced to enter the BEV business, but even they are careful. For example they were ok with lower efficiency in the Audi E-Tron by using induction motors instead of permanent magnets, since these latter need rare metals and they expect some shortage or at least price volatility there. For some reason all the Germans are careful making steps in EV world.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: mblakele
Oh noes, H2 gang... major automaker HONDA just put hydrogen on hold!. :eek:

At the same time, diesel, hydrogen, and plug-in hybrids are on the way out. Katsushi Inoue, Honda Europe’s President, said.

“Maybe hydrogen fuel cell cars will come, but that’s a technology for the next era. Our focus is on hybrid and electric vehicles now.”


Honda works on second EV, quits diesel, and puts hydrogen on hold
.
 
Last edited:
  • Love
  • Informative
Reactions: JRP3 and mblakele
Oh noes, H2 gang... major automaker HONDA just put hydrogen on hold!. :eek:

At the same time, diesel, hydrogen, and plug-in hybrids are on the way out. Katsushi Inoue, Honda Europe’s President, said.

“Maybe hydrogen fuel cell cars will come, but that’s a technology for the next era. Our focus is on hybrid and electric vehicles now.”


Honda works on second EV, quits diesel, and puts hydrogen on hold
.

Forgot to add... Honda sees the writing on the wall now, and is moving to adapt. Smart. :cool:

Fuel cells for passenger cars make no competitive sense. Their two former advantages over BEVs – range and refueling time – have been cut down to near-meaninglessness by long-range BEVs and ever-faster DC charging, such as Tesla's V3 Superchargers. These two trends will only continue... longer and longer range for BEVs, and faster and faster charge times.

Passenger fuel cell vehicles are thus left with very little to hang their hat on... and are many years behind BEVs in fueling infrastructure, investment, and mindshare.

IOW, it's over, ladies and germs. Some dead-enders will continue to bellow otherwise... but no doubt the dinosaurs too made a great deal of noise just prior to dying out. :eek:

If I was an FCV fanboi, I'd shift my focus to trucking, shipping, and other heavy transport. Who knows, maybe the situation is better for fuel cell in those markets. Though possibly not.
.
 
Last edited:
Because 2020 is when the new fleet fuel economy standards hit, so they want the sales to come in 2020 instead of 2019. Unlike the credit systems elsewhere they don't have advance credit, so the sales will wait.
In 2020, efficient vehicles count double, and they only need to count 95% of their overall sales. Everything's been targeted to 2020 for cars.
2021 will bring in the tightened commercial vehicle requirements in the EU, so that's when the newer electric cargo vans will arrive in earnest. That'll be interesting to watch. With more low emission zones and more delivery, there should should be a lot of interest.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SageBrush
Perhaps the (very few) FCV owners out there can fart repeatedly to produce some hydrogen, since many of the stations aren’t. :oops:
.
Nah! With new stations, we are doing fine. But if you need some stench to go with your fart app, I will make sure to eat an extra burrito.. :)

Explain this to me.... why.... why not just use CNG? Ta
.
That's the same thing as with BEVs. CNG was too easy, so let's do BEVs. Let's put millions of chargers and spend billions to solve some made up issue.
You are also stuck in TODAY, when I already said many times that it is a solution of the future. If we have plenty of renewable electricity that it has to be stored or curtailed, then splitting some water molecules is better. Today you are just seeing the technology maturity phase and trying to draw conclusions based on that.

I know right! It can take my Model S up to eight hours to fully charge if I've depleted it. And I miss it every single time because I'm asleep, and *PRESTO*, it's just "full" in the morning. Very upsetting.
Wow, so you are not charging the car with clean electrons flowing out of your solar panels? I was told differently by some pundits.
My answer was for CO2 reduction. Both EVs and FCEVs have point of use ZEV advantage, which no one disagrees.

EXACTLY! Unfortunately After driving for ~4 hours I'm forced to stop at a convenient point along my route, and have to spend 30-40 minutes supercharging while I eat. Too bad there's no option for me to drive 45 minutes each way off my main route in order to enjoy a 5 minute fill up. Provided the station isn't cycling. And isn't empty.

Tell me about it! In the 6-1/2 years I've had my BEV I've only been able to put on 150,000 miles of commutes, daily & weekend driving, and road trips. Totally impractical! And to think I thought that it would be worth it just because the operating/fueling expense is a fraction of my previous vehicle.
So you should go soothe the anger of owners in the range loss thread. They are pi**ed as hell because they feel they were lied about the 30 min charging. It will be easy for you to explain why slower charging is no issue at all. I mean, who doesn't want to hang around at super chargers for an extra hour or two with family & friends while on a long trip? ;)
For the record, some FCEVs drivers have also put similar annualized miles as yours, even with the limited refueling network, just in CA.

Oh noes, H2 gang... major automaker HONDA just put hydrogen on hold!. :eek:

At the same time, diesel, hydrogen, and plug-in hybrids are on the way out. Katsushi Inoue, Honda Europe’s President, said.
“Maybe hydrogen fuel cell cars will come, but that’s a technology for the next era. Our focus is on hybrid and electric vehicles now.”

Honda works on second EV, quits diesel, and puts hydrogen on hold
.
Funny. Honda already had a city EV, called Fit EV. Demand was so through the roof and they were making such a boatload of money, that they killed it few years back.
Let's hope people buy this one. The cane whipping of people by the European govts may keep this alive little longer than the Fit EV. If anything, city cars are what are most suitable for EVs.

Clarity BEV demand is also through the roof in US. It sold a grand total of 35 in just Sept. /s
Things are often not how they are made to look like.
But I am glad that Fred finally found something to write about fuel cell cars.
 
That's the same thing as with BEVs. CNG was too easy, so let's do BEVs. Let's put millions of chargers and spend billions to solve some made up issue.

No... it's not the same with BEVs. And what issue is 'made up'?

CH4 => BEV
100kWh CH4 => Electricity (60kWh) => Transmission losses (53kWh) => ~160 miles of driving

CH4
100kWh CH4 => 38mpg CH4 Honda Civic => ~100 miles of driving

CH4 => H2 Fuel Cell
100kWh CH4 => Steam reforming (75kWh) => H2 Liquifaction (49kWh) => Transport (44kWh) => ~80 miles of driving


With a BEV you get more use by turning the CH4 into electricity... you get LESS by turning it into Hydrogen. I can drive MORE miles by making CH4 into electricity... LESS by making it into H2..... WHAT SENSE DOES IT MAKE TO TURN IT INTO H2?????? It's INSANE!!!!!

Even if the H2 is made from 100% wind or solar there's a market for H2... you have the choice of selling the H2 to displace CH4 or you can be a moron and burn it..... As long as we're getting H2 from CH4 it makes ZERO sense to burn the H2 as fuel....... Just.... just burn the CH4 as fuel!

Yeah... it is TODAY. TODAY it makes ZERO sense to burn H2 as fuel... the benefit of BEVs is a more efficient use of limited clean energy. If you have 100kg of H2 and need fuel the most efficient option is to sell it and buy ~1000kg of CH4 and use THAT as fuel! Explain what you see as the benefit of burning the H2 instead of selling if for ~10x more CH4. Depending on where you look H2 is ~10 - 20x more valuable than CH4.... why burn H2? CH4 is the better fuel.

Split water... make clean H2.... that is AWESOME.... sell it and buy CH4.... you increase the economic usefulness >10 fold. Cleaner. More efficient. WAY better and less insane. SOMEDAY the demand for H2 will be fulfilled. We're ~10B kg/yr away from that day. SOMEDAY it will make sense to burn it as fuel.

TODAY; WHAT IS THE BENEFIT OF BURNING H2 instead of CH4??????
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: scaesare
Might be because their industrial economy is so dependent on manufacturing ICE that they've spent the better part of the last century developing.... think maybe they don't want that to change?

Australia is becoming more important.

Australia May Be The Saving Grace For The Rare Earth Metals Market | Seeking Alpha

"There’s a precedent of China using rare earth elements as geopolitical leverage. In 2010, Beijing blocked their exports to Japan in a dispute over the detention of a Chinese fishing captain. The move ultimately failed, as it had the effect of forcing Japan to build up its own rare earth supply chain. "

"From 2013 to 2018, Australia’s annual output of rare earths exploded more than 1,600 percent, from around 1,000 tonnes to 19,000 tonnes."
 
So seems like it does not include the CO2-e of the battery pack.

That is known as a well to wheel analysis (WTH).
The same analysis is applied to hybrids. so e.g. the environmental costs associated with fracking are not included.

If you argument distills down to to a shrill what about the battery ?!\! then you really should re-evaluate your position since batteries are recyclable and the studies that first tried to estimate energy use in the mining component are deeply flawed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mblakele