Eletric vs Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle

[HTSS_TR]

Which one will be a major alternative to traditional gasoline/diesel vehicle in the future ?

Toyota think that EV is a dumb idea because the limit battery power and recharge time, they bet on Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle because they think it is the alternative clean energy of the future.

Toyota plan to sell about 3,000 Mirai at $57,500 from now until end of 2017(about 2.5 years) to mostly Californian.

Quote:
Two decades of development and production experience with batteries for hybrid-electric vehicles has convinced Toyota that they pose a fundamental "physics problem," said Craig Scott--the carmaker's national alternative-fuel vehicle manager--in a recent interview with Forbes.

"Nobody makes more batteries than Toyota," Scott said. "We've been doing batteries longer than anyone in the automotive business."

The company has sold more than 7 million hybrids since the first-generation Prius went on sale in Japan in 1997.

Note that the vast majority of electrified Toyota vehicles use nickel-metal hydride battery packs, not the lithium-ion chemistry found in production electric cars.

Toyota does not think simply building larger battery packs--a la Tesla Motors--is a viable solution for mainstream models.

Scott did not directly address the challenges of planning, building, and paying for a pervasive hydrogen fueling infrastructure in the Forbes interview.


https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/toyota-neg...-110000466.html

For pure EV, owners can recharge the battery at home(at average 15 cent per kWh) or free at destinations such as work, shopping centers, hotels ...

For Hydrogen Fuel Cell, owners must go to hydrogen fueling stations and as of now less than 20 stations in the country,most of them in California. The state of California is not small, owners in some area have to drive more than 100 miles to fill up their tank, at what cost is unknown.

 

[JHZR2]

IMO the best setup would be a reasonable range capable ev with a small diesel generator to help reduce battery depletion and always serve as a highly efficient in situ charger.

Fuel cells are great, but dealing with hydrogen is an issue. There are technologies capable of in place reformation and shifting to hydrogen. What is really needed is a bit of efficiency improvements in high temperature pbi/phos acid fuel cells so that poisoning isn't as much of an issue. The. Run off of cng or gasoline...

 

[OneEyeJack]

I wonder if government agencies and regulations will decide the issue by inserting themselves in the process and negating the forces of a free market.

Senator Harry Reid has stated many times that incentives for EV's should be increased. He has stated his preference for EV's because he claims they cause no pollution at all and would reduce are need for oil that makes people sick. He has a good idea if electricity comes from magic beans.

 

[RedOakRanch]

Hydrogen is made with electricity and EV needs batteries. Batteries are more convenient that Hydrogen filling stations I think.

 

[hansj3]

We all ready have the distribution infrastructure in place for electric. Can the same be said of hydrogen? If a smart grid gets enacted electric cars can feed into the ebb and flow, providing protection against brown outs what else can hydrogen do?. Electric is safer in a crash, one relay will shut off power, batteries are in the frame lowering the center of gravity and protecting them.

Electric may not be obtained from the cleanest power sources, but power is lost making hydrogen
As much as I like manual transmissions electric will be the future of passenger vehicles. Trucks however may have natural gas for their future

I'd love to see an electric car with a diesel range extender. With the ability of powering the car while under way, possibly running while parked to charge the pack when away

 

[weasley]

EV with range extender is already a reality - eg BMW i3. Yes, it's a gasoline, but it is optimised for running as a range extender and is therefore very efficient.

EV is hobbled by battery charge times and limited range. Hydrogen is a good idea, but the infrastructure and handling are an issue and H2 is not a primary power source, it still has to come from somewhere and is effectively just a chemical battery (ie it moves potential energy from one place to another).

Plug-in hybrids are a reasonable stop-gap; use cheap grid electricity where you can and the engine for longer trips.

For me the main issue with EVs is they can not do a long journey. It's all very well that they can cover most people's daily commute or mileage needs, but that time I need to drive it coast-to-coast, it isn't happening. OK, I can rent a car for this, but this is additional cost and isn't convenient. My ideal solution is an EV into which you can install a long range engine as a module. This module can sit at home, perhaps performing some energy delivery tasks around the house (mobile power, garden use, power-cuts etc) but when needed it hooks up to the car and allows you to go a long way.

 

[d00df00d]

Hydrogen fuel cell advantages over batteries:

1. Faster charging
2. Lighter weight


Disadvantages:

1. MUCH more energy involved in producing and purifying hydrogen
2. Sealing is basically impossible
3. Leakage is basically undetectable
4. Flame is invisible and extremely hot, so accidental fires would be very bad
5. Hydrogen gets absorbed into metals and embrittles them


Toyota is betting that people will want an "eco" car without the perceived inconvenience.

Tesla is betting on the better technology, and that people will eventually understand there's no real inconvenience when your car has 200-300 miles of range and you plug it in every night.

As much as I hate heavy vehicles, my money's on Tesla.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
I wonder if government agencies and regulations will decide the issue by inserting themselves in the process and negating the forces of a free market.

Senator Harry Reid has stated many times that incentives for EV's should be increased. He has stated his preference for EV's because he claims they cause no pollution at all and would reduce are need for oil that makes people sick. He has a good idea if electricity comes from magic beans.


Don't you know that electricity is just magically made in the wall of your house when you plug into a socket?

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
I wonder if government agencies and regulations will decide the issue by inserting themselves in the process and negating the forces of a free market.

Senator Harry Reid has stated many times that incentives for EV's should be increased. He has stated his preference for EV's because he claims they cause no pollution at all and would reduce are need for oil that makes people sick. He has a good idea if electricity comes from magic beans.


Reid is interested in EVs because Nevada has for a while hosted a number of battery companies, and it is a core area they are tying to build capability in.

The fact that we dont have fuel cells in a lot of applications, and auto vendors have pulled certain hybrids from the market indicates to me that your first item is wrong.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: hansj3


Electric may not be obtained from the cleanest power sources, but power is lost making hydrogen
As much as I like manual transmissions electric will be the future of passenger vehicles. Trucks however may have natural gas for their future

I'd love to see an electric car with a diesel range extender. With the ability of powering the car while under way, possibly running while parked to charge the pack when away


Only if you use low temperature electrolysis. And even then, not governed by Carnot, and given renewable and/or high efficiency power plant generated electricity, its not THAT far off a high teens/low 20%s efficient IC engine based vehicle.

Doing proper reformation of hydrocarbons yields fuel cell systems with high efficiencies that are actually superior at part load. Load is managed in a FC vehicle because there is still storage at the power electronics. The only challenge is cost and poisoning of the fuel cell, which can be managed in larger systems, but is tougher for cars.

 

[hattaresguy]

Hydrogen is not much better than ICE, its simply another fuel that has to be processed and transferred around.

Electricity is much more efficient.

Secondly part of the reason ICE cars overtook all others in the teens and twenties was the massive infrastructure investment in gas stations. Musk is doing this with his charging stations, Toyota is not.

Other than the charging stations which are popping up we already have most of the infrastructure in place for electric cars. Augmented with Musk's SolarCity on every roof and their you go.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Hydrogen is not much better than ICE, its simply another fuel that has to be processed and transferred around.

Electricity is much more efficient.

Secondly part of the reason ICE cars overtook all others in the teens and twenties was the massive infrastructure investment in gas stations. Musk is doing this with his charging stations, Toyota is not.

Other than the charging stations which are popping up we already have most of the infrastructure in place for electric cars. Augmented with Musk's SolarCity on every roof and their you go.

Tesla claimed supercharger stations are free, actually it was $2,000 option with base car with 60kWh and included in higher models. For some owners they may be able to use existing outlets in their garage to charge their EV's, so that they may never need to charge it elsewhere, if their daily drives are less than 150-200 miles.

Toyota can't build hydrogen filling stations, because it costs upward $1 mil each station. There is no way you will have as many hydrogen stations as gasoline. As of now, a vast majority California don't have hydrogen filling station within 10-20 miles where they live, outside California forget it.

 

[badtlc]

Until organic batteries make it to the real world, the electric car is about the worst product out there for transportation as far as transportation products go.

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Hydrogen is not much better than ICE, its simply another fuel that has to be processed and transferred around.

Electricity is much more efficient.

Secondly part of the reason ICE cars overtook all others in the teens and twenties was the massive infrastructure investment in gas stations. Musk is doing this with his charging stations, Toyota is not.

Other than the charging stations which are popping up we already have most of the infrastructure in place for electric cars. Augmented with Musk's SolarCity on every roof and their you go.


Which completely overlooks the detrimental impact electric cars have on the environment.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Hydrogen is not much better than ICE, its simply another fuel that has to be processed and transferred around.

Electricity is much more efficient.

Secondly part of the reason ICE cars overtook all others in the teens and twenties was the massive infrastructure investment in gas stations. Musk is doing this with his charging stations, Toyota is not.

Other than the charging stations which are popping up we already have most of the infrastructure in place for electric cars. Augmented with Musk's SolarCity on every roof and their you go.


Which completely overlooks the detrimental impact electric cars have on the environment.

No, it doesn't. It's just a comparison between hydrogen fuel cell and batteries.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
For some owners they may be able to use existing outlets in their garage to charge their EV's, so that they may never need to charge it elsewhere, if their daily drives are less than 150-200 miles.

Which accounts for, what... 95% of people? More?


Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Toyota can't build hydrogen filling stations, because it costs upward $1 mil each station.

I mean... that kind of supports the case against hydrogen, doesn't it?

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
For some owners they may be able to use existing outlets in their garage to charge their EV's, so that they may never need to charge it elsewhere, if their daily drives are less than 150-200 miles.

Which accounts for, what... 95% of people? More?

For Tesla owners, I think more than 95% have garage. Most outlets for cloth dryer can handle 20-30A, if needed they can be rewired to charge the battery overnight at around 3-5 kWh.

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Toyota can't build hydrogen filling stations, because it costs upward $1 mil each station.

I mean... that kind of supports the case against hydrogen, doesn't it?

As of now, Toyota plans to sell 3000 Murai to California buyers in about 30 months, from now till end of 2017.

Even with this low volume, I think it is a hard sell to potential buyers without more filling stations. Who want to buy a car then drive 100+ miles round trip to fill up the tank ? Unless there are station(s) within 5-10 miles no many potential buyers willing to fork over $50k for a Murai.

On the other hand, who wants to invest $1 mil for a hydrogen station without enough drivers filling their tank ? Unless more manufactures join the fuel cell vehicle, not many investors will invest money for new stations.

Tesla did their home work very well, they charged $2k for base model for access to superchargers, and included it to higher price models, then built superchargers along some interstate highway for long distance travels.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Hydrogen is not much better than ICE, its simply another fuel that has to be processed and transferred around.

Electricity is much more efficient.

Secondly part of the reason ICE cars overtook all others in the teens and twenties was the massive infrastructure investment in gas stations. Musk is doing this with his charging stations, Toyota is not.

Other than the charging stations which are popping up we already have most of the infrastructure in place for electric cars. Augmented with Musk's SolarCity on every roof and their you go.


Which completely overlooks the detrimental impact electric cars have on the environment.


Impact? Please define in real terms, not just post and run.

Electricity requires something to produce, which may well be fossil fuels... But combined cycle plants are far more efficient than IC traction engines, so it's a moot point on the basis of fuel burned to get a certain amount of work done.

Keep in mind, there is no lead, cadmium, acids, etc. in these batteries.

Yes, there is lithium (ions, NOT metal), graphite, copper, aluminum, some nickel and a trace of cobalt and some steel for the case.

So let's see... Whats in non EV cars currently?

Lithium? No, OK so there will need to be some mining of that. But we mine the raw materials for cars produced today, do we not?

Graphite? This is pretty benign, non toxic, etc.

Copper? check

Aluminum? check

Cobalt? check

Nickel? in some alloys

Steel? yup.



Perhaps check the cleanliness and process efficiency and steps of producing Li-ion batteries. Ill assume based upon your unsubstantiated responses that you've never set foot in a Li-ion plant or facility that makes raw materials.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Hydrogen is not much better than ICE, its simply another fuel that has to be processed and transferred around.

Electricity is much more efficient.

Secondly part of the reason ICE cars overtook all others in the teens and twenties was the massive infrastructure investment in gas stations. Musk is doing this with his charging stations, Toyota is not.

Other than the charging stations which are popping up we already have most of the infrastructure in place for electric cars. Augmented with Musk's SolarCity on every roof and their you go.


Not true.

I've built and operated fuel cell plants, operating off diesel fuel, returning 40-50% efficiency on the basis of lower heating value of the fuel.

There are a ton of industrial plants out there running at least in the 40% efficient range, generally using phosphoric acid fuel cells, some also using sofc or mcfc fuel cells.

The reality is that these plants don't have sufficient power density to fit in cars. Thus why pem or pbi phos acid stacks are key.

What everyone needs to realize is that hydrogen infrastructure need not be the solution - reformed hydrocarbons is a sound approach, and in reality is a likely candidate (and well known industrial process used the world over) for producing hydrogen even for fcvs.

The key benefit is that the fuel efficiency of a fc is much higher at very low loads, which is where most vehicles spend most time. A good diesel may have similar efficiency at some highish load point, but fcs are much higher across the power band, and can idle with no real fuel flow. Reformed systems have some start time considerations, but the reality is that fuel cells use power electronics and batteries for load leveling, so an ev mode with a fuel cell (extended/charger/prime mover) is smart.

Actually, I've looked at the Honda Accord hybrid, but if you read up about that drivetrain setup, it really is the best way, IMO... But looking to the future, different biases on the battery, and swap the engine with FC, etc.

 

[TiredTrucker]

After reading an article in the early 70's, where Popular Mechanics too a AMC Gremlin with a V8 and converted it to hydrogen power, I longed for some OEM to jump on this idea. Forget the fuel cell nonsense, a internal combustion engine running on hydrogen was what I wanted. The power output was pretty impressive in the PM article. Now it will probably never be a reality.