Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

[GRA]

Trucks!

Chevrolet's next fuel-cell concept is unlike any you've seen before - Roadshow - CNET
https://apple.news/AQUTpBG4NOY2jHHCHPlzSaQ

Also see this post from last November: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14744&p=444231&hilit=tardec#p444231

 

[GRA]

Via GCC:

Ten H2 and fuel cell companies received DOE SBV round 2 awards

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/08/20160831-sbv.html

These selected projects are aimed at reducing the costs and improving the performance of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies, such as finding ways to lower costs of membrane electrode assemblies (MEAs), a critical component of fuel cell stacks and electrolyzers. Some of these collaborations will explore using lower cost materials, reducing the quantity of pricey raw material required, and developing better and more precise methods in manufacturing MEAs.

The ten companies receiving Round 2 SBVs for hydrogen and fuel cells projects include:. . . .

 

[ydnas7]

can't make this up

Australian dollar, $55 million for 20 Hydrogen Hyundais, and one H2 station.
http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/open_government/inform/act_government_media_releases/corbell/2016/act-government-brings-hydrogen-energy-storage-to-canberra
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

once a manufacturer is selling outside of California or their home market (Japan/Korea) the price of Hydrogen and Cars is gone into plaid.
Ever wondered why?


FWIW
$55 million buys outright about 500 Tesla S-60 in Canberra. No subsidies in Australia

500 Tesla or 20 H2 Tucson, now thats a great choice.

Outside of CARB states, Hydrogen is far more expensive than free Teslas.

 

[GRA]

Via GCC:

PowerCell Sweden receives order from Chinese company for PowerCell S2 to be used as an EV range-extender

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/09/20160902-powercell.html

The PowerCell S2 fuel cell stack is designed for efficient power generation in the range of 5 to 25 kW. . . .

Also GCC:

Ceres Power and Cummins win DOE award to develop SOFC systems for data centers

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/09/20160902-ceres.html

. . . Ceres Power will benefit from up to US$2.6 million of the total US$4.9-million project, which includes contributions from Cummins, US DOE and other parties, subject to final contract.

Ceres Power and Cummins will develop a novel 5kW Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) modular system targeting high electrical efficiency (60%) and scalable to meet multiple distributed power applications up to 100 kW. The initial target application will be the data center market; however, wider applicability to other markets such as commercial combined heat and power will also be considered. . . .

Also GCC, lab results with the usual caveats:

SLAC, Stanford team develops new catalyst for water-splitting for renewable fuels production; 100x more efficient than other acid-stable catalysts

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/09/20160902-slac.html

. . . The new catalyst outperforms known IrOx and ruthenium oxide (RuOx) systems, the only other OER catalysts that have reasonable activity in acidic electrolyte. Because it requires less of the rare and costly metal iridium, the new catalyst could bring down the cost of artifical photosynthetic processes that use sunlight to split water molecules—a key step in a renewable, sustainable pathway to produce hydrogen or carbon-based fuels that can power a broad range of energy technologies. . . .

In case anyone missed the Mirai thread, Toyota sold/leased 371 of them in California in August, a 613% increase (from 52) month over month. It will be interesting to see if this is a one time fluke or a sustainable level of sales.

 

[WetEV]

Toyota sold/leased 371 of them in California in August, a 613% increase (from 52) month over month. It will be interesting to see if this is a one time fluke or a sustainable level of sales.

And in other news, over 2000 iMievs have been sold in the USA to date. A car that can be owned anywhere, not just near a million dollar hydrogen fueling station.

The cheapest car to own in the USA.

 

[GRA]

Toyota sold/leased 371 of them in California in August, a 613% increase (from 52) month over month. It will be interesting to see if this is a one time fluke or a sustainable level of sales.

And in other news, over 2000 iMievs have been sold in the USA to date. A car that can be owned anywhere, not just near a million dollar hydrogen fueling station.

The cheapest car to own in the USA.

Okay, if you want to play silly statistics, how many iMiEVs were sold last month? 25. How many this year? 65. How many months this year of single digit sales? 6. Where would the Mirai rank in August if it were included on IEVS' PEV monthly sales chart? 10th, ahead of the 500e, A3 e-tron, Spark, and of course the iMiEV among many others. Should anyone draw major conclusions from a single month of sales, which may be no more than a momentary spike due to outside factors? Of course not, that would be idiotic. Now, can we get back to H2 and FCEVs?

 

[WetEV]

Toyota sold/leased 371 of them in California in August, a 613% increase (from 52) month over month. It will be interesting to see if this is a one time fluke or a sustainable level of sales.

And in other news, over 2000 iMievs have been sold in the USA to date. A car that can be owned anywhere, not just near a million dollar hydrogen fueling station.

The cheapest car to own in the USA.

Okay, if you want to play silly statistics,

The iMiev is both far cheaper and far more capable than the FCEVs. Looks nicer, is fun to drive. This is not silly.

In 2012, an iMiev was driven across the USA as part of a world trip. When are there going to be hydrogen stations across the USA so that a FCEV can make the trip, and who is going to pay the cost of building them? And in Kazakhstan? Sure, electric cars need plug-ins, but plugs-in are far easier and cheaper to build than hydrogen stations, not to mention far more available today.

“If an electric car can travel around the world, then anyone can use it to go grocery shopping”
http://www.bluebird-electric.net/blueplanet_ecostar/Cannonball_EV_Runs/Odyssey_World_Electric_Tour_Citroen-C-Zero_2012.htm

Oh, and the fuel cost was roughly $300. What would be the cost of hydrogen for such a trip if it wasn't massively subsidized? Oh, not only the fuel, but paying for the fueling stations as well.

Should anyone draw major conclusions from a single month of sales, which may be no more than a momentary spike due to outside factors? Of course not, that would be idiotic.

Exactly. Which is why I mentioned sales to date, not one month's sales.

Now, can we get back to H2 and FCEVs?

Sure. Find any niche that a hydrogen car can do better than a gasoline car.

There are two niches that electric cars do better than gasoline cars, even not counting the environmental benefit.
1) The commuter car. Cheaper than gasoline for total cost of ownership at current low gasoline prices, more convenient, quieter and better to drive. This niche is expanding in size as batteries get cheaper and last longer.
2) The fast car. "Ludicrous Mode", soon with "Maximum Plaid". BMW and similar competitors are taking notes and building clones.

 

[GRA]

And in other news, over 2000 iMievs have been sold in the USA to date. A car that can be owned anywhere, not just near a million dollar hydrogen fueling station.

The cheapest car to own in the USA.

Okay, if you want to play silly statistics,

The iMiev is both far cheaper and far more capable than the FCEVs. Looks nicer, is fun to drive. This is not silly.

Cheaper, sure. Far more capable? Get real. Looks nicer is setting a pretty low bar, as only the Tucson has reasonably normal looks. I'd maybe rate the iMiEV and Clarity about equal, depending on the aspect and how much the production car may differ from the prototypes. I wouldn't call either attractive, and the Mirai is certifiably fugly.

In 2012, an iMiev was driven across the USA as part of a world trip. When are there going to be hydrogen stations across the USA so that a FCEV can make the trip, and who is going to pay the cost of building them?

When/if there's a need or desire to do so (presumably after completing I-5 and I-95), and either the government or the manufacturers will do it, unless the cost of the stations and H2 has come down enough to make them profitable (which public charging still isn't). Toyota has already subsidized the building of 19 stations in California, and at an average spacing of 210 miles, could reach the east coast (where they're also subsidizing some along the Boston - Washington corridor) with another 12, although 14 to 16 would provide better coverage of major major metro areas (future sales concentrations). Add in money from Honda (also subsidizing some stations now), Hyundai and any other FCEV manufacturers to that list.

Just as I didn't think early completion of a transcontinental route was necessary for Tesla except for PR, I feel the same way about H2; if you can afford the car, you can afford to fly and rent, and your time's valuable enough that is the only thing that makes sense beyond a few hours drive time (for business). I'd much rather see the inkblot method used, which is essentially what's happening in California - first build the H2 infrastructure in major metro areas where you know the demographics are favorable to you, plus along/at common weekend destination routes from them, then add one or two stations to connect the clusters. So, Greater LA, the Bay Area and Sacramento came first, they were connected by Harris Ranch, and Truckee provided fueling at/along a weekend destination/route (Lake Tahoe/Reno). San Diego plus Boston - Washington will be next while the above areas continue to densify and expand, then likely Portland, Seattle, Denver-Boulder, Twin Cities and Madison, WI, Chicago, Miami etc.

Should anyone draw major conclusions from a single month of sales, which may be no more than a momentary spike due to outside factors? Of course not, that would be idiotic.

Exactly. Which is why I mentioned sales to date, not one month's sales.

Uh huh, and Mirai sales YTD are 641 (plus a couple of hundred IIRR last year), more than doubling in a single month from 270. But again, so what?

Now, can we get back to H2 and FCEVs?

Sure. Find any niche that a hydrogen car can do better than a gasoline car.

Again? They're ZEVs which can run on 100% renewably produced H2. How many times does this need to be repeated? If we can produce enough sustainable drop-in, carbon-neutral biofuels to run all our ICEs we can forget about H2, but I doubt that will happen.

There are two niches that electric cars do better than gasoline cars, even not counting the environmental benefit.
1) The commuter car. Cheaper than gasoline for total cost of ownership at current low gasoline prices, more convenient, quieter and better to drive. This niche is expanding in size as batteries get cheaper and last longer.
2) The fast car. "Ludicrous Mode", soon with "Maximum Plaid". BMW and similar competitors are taking notes and building clones.

I've said numerous times that I agree given certain conditions (like convenient, cheap charging, which most of the world's urban inhabitants lack now and for the foreseeable future).

 

[GRA]

The rumor mill, via ABG:

Daimler will fight Tesla with 'at least' six electric cars
First EV would reportedly hit the market in 2018.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/04/daimler-mercedes-plug-in-electric-hydrogen-cars/

It looks like Daimler's plans to fight Tesla are even more ambitious than first thought. Reuters sources understand that the German automaker is working on "at least" six electric cars, and might introduce as many as nine. The exact roster isn't public, but Daimler's central Mercedes-Benz brand had previously talked about making two sedans and two SUVs. Automobilwoche tipsters claim that the focus will be on crossovers and SUVs, although there would also be compact cars and sedans.

The Reuters scoop also hears that there will be a plug-in hybrid SUV that relies on a hydrogen fuel cell when its 30-mile electric range runs out. That would theoretically give you the added range of a fuel-based car without the environmental impact of gasoline. . . .

 

[RegGuheert]

The rumor mill, via ABG:

Daimler will fight Tesla with 'at least' six electric cars
First EV would reportedly hit the market in 2018.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/04/daimler-mercedes-plug-in-electric-hydrogen-cars/

It looks like Daimler's plans to fight Tesla are even more ambitious than first thought. Reuters sources understand that the German automaker is working on "at least" six electric cars, and might introduce as many as nine. The exact roster isn't public, but Daimler's central Mercedes-Benz brand had previously talked about making two sedans and two SUVs. Automobilwoche tipsters claim that the focus will be on crossovers and SUVs, although there would also be compact cars and sedans.

This is the real story here: BEV startup steals establishment auto giant's lunch money with two well-crafted offerings. Said giant is forced to join the 21st century and throws a bunch of designs against the wall, hoping something will stick. Whether they understand enough about the market transition which is currently occurring remains to be seen.

H2 FCVs, OTOH, do not threaten ANY existing class of vehicles.

The Reuters scoop also hears that there will be a plug-in hybrid SUV that relies on a hydrogen fuel cell when its 30-mile electric range runs out. That would theoretically give you the added range of a fuel-based car without the environmental impact of gasoline. . . .

Why anyone would want to field a vehicle with a significantly worse environmental impact than gasoline cars is beyond me. Fortunately the vast majority of consumers are bright enough to see that BEVs move the needle in the CORRECT direction and choose them over FCVs in significantly larger numbers. This is why Daimler feels the need to respond to Tesla Motors.

 

[WetEV]

Far more capable? Get real.

Far more capable. Open your eyes. Look at a map of the world, draw a circle of radius half the range of a hydrogen car around the hydrogen fueling stations currently operational. That is the places hydrogen cars can go. Now draw circles around every Plugshare listed L1 or L2 charger half of the range of an iMiev. Add in circles around your house, your mom's house, your friends, etc. Add more circles around campgrounds and hotels with outlets. And so on. That is the places an iMiev can go. While there are likely a few places a hydrogen car can go that an iMiev can't (as I'm sure you will mention each one again and again), far more of the map of the world is covered by iMiev circles now, and even after spending a billion dollars on 700 hydrogen stations (isn't that about the worldwide total to date?) for the tiny number of people willing to lease or buy $60k+ cars.

Looks nicer is setting a pretty low bar

Yes, a very low bar. Both ways. But you can't avoid any point, but are compelled to respond, right?

In 2012, an iMiev was driven across the USA as part of a world trip. When are there going to be hydrogen stations across the USA so that a FCEV can make the trip, and who is going to pay the cost of building them?

When/if there's a need or desire to do so (presumably after completing I-5 and I-95), and either the government or the manufacturers will do it, unless the cost of the stations and H2 has come down enough to make them profitable (which public charging still isn't).

The government meaning the taxpayers. I doubt it, long term. Manufacturers meaning will add to the price of cars being sold, or reduce profits, or even more likely from the taxpayers. Again, I doubt it. Sorry, but I don't see how the economics can possibly work as hydrogen is and will be far more expensive than electric power for the foreseeable future. Hydrogen stations are far more expensive than public charging stations, and will be for the foreseeable future.

Should anyone draw major conclusions from a single month of sales, which may be no more than a momentary spike due to outside factors? Of course not, that would be idiotic.

Exactly. Which is why I mentioned sales to date, not one month's sales.

Uh huh, and Mirai sales YTD are 641 (plus a couple of hundred IIRR last year), more than doubling in a single month from 270. But again, so what?

iMiev sales to date worldwide are about 38,000. Far more popular because it is a far more realistic car for most people to own.

Now, can we get back to H2 and FCEVs?

Sure. Find any niche that a hydrogen car can do better than a gasoline car.

Again? They're ZEVs which can run on 100% renewably produced H2. How many times does this need to be repeated? If we can produce enough sustainable drop-in, carbon-neutral biofuels to run all our ICEs we can forget about H2, but I doubt that will happen.

Sure, from the legal standpoint, hydrogen cars are a ZEV. That is, after all, the reason why manufacturers are hyping them. The manufacturers get more ZEV credits from hydrogen cars than from BEVs. BEVs, unlike hydrogen cars, sell in places without ZEV credits.

There are two niches that electric cars do better than gasoline cars, even not counting the environmental benefit.
1) The commuter car. Cheaper than gasoline for total cost of ownership at current low gasoline prices, more convenient, quieter and better to drive. This niche is expanding in size as batteries get cheaper and last longer.
2) The fast car. "Ludicrous Mode", soon with "Maximum Plaid". BMW and similar competitors are taking notes and building clones.

I've said numerous times that I agree given certain conditions (like convenient, cheap charging, which most of the world's urban inhabitants lack now and for the foreseeable future).

Most of the world's urban inhabitants lack hydrogen fueling, and will for the foreseeable future. It would be far cheaper and safer to build out public charging than building out hydrogen fueling stations. After all, what is the cost of a home L1 charger? A few hundred dollars, including installation? Somehow that seems like a solvable problem, unlike hydrogen fueling stations.

 

[GRA]

Far more capable? Get real.

Far more capable. Open your eyes. Look at a map of the world, draw a circle of radius half the range of a hydrogen car around the hydrogen fueling stations currently operational. That is the places hydrogen cars can go. Now draw circles around every Plugshare listed L1 or L2 charger half of the range of an iMiev. Add in circles around your house, your mom's house, your friends, etc. Add more circles around campgrounds and hotels with outlets. And so on. That is the places an iMiev can go. While there are likely a few places a hydrogen car can go that an iMiev can't (as I'm sure you will mention each one again and again), far more of the map of the world is covered by iMiev circles now, and even after spending a billion dollars on 700 hydrogen stations (isn't that about the worldwide total to date?) for the tiny number of people willing to lease or buy $60k+ cars.

We define capable in different terms. You're talking about the overall area coverage, and I'm talking about the individual vehicle's coverage. We agree that there are more outlets around the world than H2 stations, and short range BEVs can be used within their radius in more places now, But on an individual basis, the H2 car can serve a far greater area around each station than a short range BEV can, and in those countries or areas where fueling stations have been installed in reasonable numbers, the individual FCEV has far more utility. All motorized vehicles depend on 'fueling' infrastructure for their capability - without it, they're just expensive shades for the ground, or planters.

Looks nicer is setting a pretty low bar

Yes, a very low bar. Both ways. But you can't avoid any point, but are compelled to respond, right?

And you're not?

In 2012, an iMiev was driven across the USA as part of a world trip. When are there going to be hydrogen stations across the USA so that a FCEV can make the trip, and who is going to pay the cost of building them?

When/if there's a need or desire to do so (presumably after completing I-5 and I-95), and either the government or the manufacturers will do it, unless the cost of the stations and H2 has come down enough to make them profitable (which public charging still isn't).

The government meaning the taxpayers. I doubt it, long term. Manufacturers meaning will add to the price of cars being sold, or reduce profits, or even more likely from the taxpayers. Again, I doubt it. Sorry, but I don't see how the economics can possibly work as hydrogen is and will be far more expensive than electric power for the foreseeable future. Hydrogen stations are far more expensive than public charging stations, and will be for the foreseeable future.

I don't see governments supporting public charging long term either, and companies have already had over 5.5 years to figure out how to make them profitable while providing electricity cheaper than gas, and have signally failed to do so. The jury is still out on the profitability of both public charging and H2, but the former's a lot more mature tech and still hasn't been able to make it work - at least H2 has a lot more room on the learning curve, and a known successful business model IF they can get the costs where they need to be.

Exactly. Which is why I mentioned sales to date, not one month's sales.

Uh huh, and Mirai sales YTD are 641 (plus a couple of hundred IIRR last year), more than doubling in a single month from 270. But again, so what?

iMiev sales to date worldwide are about 38,000. Far more popular because it is a far more realistic car for most people to own.

The fact that it's been on sale for longer, is cheaper to buy and is far more acceptable to consumers in some countries with conditions very different from the U.S. might have just a teensy bit to do with it, don't you think? Let's see how things look when the Mirai's been on sale for the same length of time, corrected for the price difference.

Sure. Find any niche that a hydrogen car can do better than a gasoline car.

Again? They're ZEVs which can run on 100% renewably produced H2. How many times does this need to be repeated? If we can produce enough sustainable drop-in, carbon-neutral biofuels to run all our ICEs we can forget about H2, but I doubt that will happen.

Sure, from the legal standpoint, hydrogen cars are a ZEV. That is, after all, the reason why manufacturers are hyping them. The manufacturers get more ZEV credits from hydrogen cars than from BEVs. BEVs, unlike hydrogen cars, sell in places without ZEV credits.

Yet they don't except in miniscule numbers, without credits and/or subsidies (same as FCEVs).

There are two niches that electric cars do better than gasoline cars, even not counting the environmental benefit.
1) The commuter car. Cheaper than gasoline for total cost of ownership at current low gasoline prices, more convenient, quieter and better to drive. This niche is expanding in size as batteries get cheaper and last longer.
2) The fast car. "Ludicrous Mode", soon with "Maximum Plaid". BMW and similar competitors are taking notes and building clones.

I've said numerous times that I agree given certain conditions (like convenient, cheap charging, which most of the world's urban inhabitants lack now and for the foreseeable future).

Most of the world's urban inhabitants lack hydrogen fueling, and will for the foreseeable future. It would be far cheaper and safer to build out public charging than building out hydrogen fueling stations. After all, what is the cost of a home L1 charger? A few hundred dollars, including installation? Somehow that seems like a solvable problem, unlike hydrogen fueling stations.

Location, location, location. Installing even L1 charging at every parking spot will take decades, and will probably be far more expensive and disruptive than installing H2 stations at existing gas stations. But both should go ahead, until one or both can serve everyone. It won't happen before mid-century at the earliest, and maybe not for 50 years.

 

[GRA]

Lab research so usual caveats, via GCC:

Sandia fuel cell membrane outperforms market; temperature range and durability

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/09/20160907-sandia.html

. . . By increasing the operational flexibility, this class of fuel cell can simplify the requirements for heat and water management, and potentially reduce the costs associated with the existing fully functional fuel cell systems, the researchers said. . . .

Another problem is that material costs for the current membrane of choice can be approximately $250-$500 per square meter. The US Department of Energy (DOE) would like to see $5 to $20 a square meter, Fujimoto said. . . .

These cells can operate above the boiling point of water (80-160C), allowing a decrease in the size of radiators and heat exchangers.

 

[WetEV]

Far more capable? Get real.

Far more capable. Open your eyes. Look at a map of the world, draw a circle of radius half the range of a hydrogen car around the hydrogen fueling stations currently operational. That is the places hydrogen cars can go. Now draw circles around every Plugshare listed L1 or L2 charger half of the range of an iMiev. Add in circles around your house, your mom's house, your friends, etc. Add more circles around campgrounds and hotels with outlets. And so on. That is the places an iMiev can go. While there are likely a few places a hydrogen car can go that an iMiev can't (as I'm sure you will mention each one again and again), far more of the map of the world is covered by iMiev circles now, and even after spending a billion dollars on 700 hydrogen stations (isn't that about the worldwide total to date?) for the tiny number of people willing to lease or buy $60k+ cars.

We define capable in different terms.

Sure. Lots more people can use BEVs than can use hydrogen cars. Lots more people can afford to use BEVs, as they cost $40,000 less.

Looks nicer is setting a pretty low bar

Yes, a very low bar. Both ways. But you can't avoid any point, but are compelled to respond, right?

And you're not?

I'm not required to get the last word in every conversation. Oh, I know that is a good debate tactic.

When/if there's a need or desire to do so (presumably after completing I-5 and I-95), and either the government or the manufacturers will do it, unless the cost of the stations and H2 has come down enough to make them profitable (which public charging still isn't).

The government meaning the taxpayers. I doubt it, long term. Manufacturers meaning will add to the price of cars being sold, or reduce profits, or even more likely from the taxpayers. Again, I doubt it. Sorry, but I don't see how the economics can possibly work as hydrogen is and will be far more expensive than electric power for the foreseeable future. Hydrogen stations are far more expensive than public charging stations, and will be for the foreseeable future.

I don't see governments supporting public charging long term either, and companies have already had over 5.5 years to figure out how to make them profitable while providing electricity cheaper than gas, and have signally failed to do so.

Wrong standard. As most charging in the home or work, public charging is more about convenience than cost. This will become more true with time, as ranges increase.

Uh huh, and Mirai sales YTD are 641 (plus a couple of hundred IIRR last year), more than doubling in a single month from 270. But again, so what?

iMiev sales to date worldwide are about 38,000. Far more popular because it is a far more realistic car for most people to own.

The fact that it's been on sale for longer, is cheaper to buy and is far more acceptable to consumers in some countries with conditions very different from the U.S. might have just a teensy bit to do with it, don't you think? Let's see how things look when the Mirai's been on sale for the same length of time, corrected for the price difference.

Corrected for the price difference? What exactly do you mean?

Yes, iMiev is far more acceptable to consumers than overpriced hydrogen cars.

Again? They're ZEVs which can run on 100% renewably produced H2. How many times does this need to be repeated? If we can produce enough sustainable drop-in, carbon-neutral biofuels to run all our ICEs we can forget about H2, but I doubt that will happen.

Sure, from the legal standpoint, hydrogen cars are a ZEV. That is, after all, the reason why manufacturers are hyping them. The manufacturers get more ZEV credits from hydrogen cars than from BEVs. BEVs, unlike hydrogen cars, sell in places without ZEV credits.

Yet they don't except in miniscule numbers, without credits and/or subsidies (same as FCEVs).

Without credits or subsidies, BEVs are better choices for some drivers. Sure, a small fraction with 70 mile ranges, but the fraction that would be happy with a BEV will grow with increasing range. And the fraction that are real BEV candidates that actually own a BEV will grow with time. More convenient, less expensive.

Without credits and subsidies, hydrogen is both less convenient and more expensive. Sure, the latter might change with changing technology. But I don't see how the low cost of a BEV, the cheapest car in total ownership cost in much of the USA, is going to be beat by hydrogen power. Less convenient, more expensive.

I've said numerous times that I agree given certain conditions (like convenient, cheap charging, which most of the world's urban inhabitants lack now and for the foreseeable future).

Most of the world's urban inhabitants lack hydrogen fueling, and will for the foreseeable future. It would be far cheaper and safer to build out public charging than building out hydrogen fueling stations. After all, what is the cost of a home L1 charger? A few hundred dollars, including installation? Somehow that seems like a solvable problem, unlike hydrogen fueling stations.

Location, location, location. Installing even L1 charging at every parking spot will take decades, and will probably be far more expensive and disruptive than installing H2 stations at existing gas stations. But both should go ahead, until one or both can serve everyone. It won't happen before mid-century at the earliest, and maybe not for 50 years.

I'm not even close to convinced the L1/L2 charging is more expensive per car than hydrogen. Free Tesla Model S 100P's are currently cheaper than hydrogen filling per car supported. When it gets down to free iMievs for everyone, let us know. Then reduce the cost by a factor of 10, and hydrogen is still 10 times more expensive than L1/L2 charging.

 

[lorenfb]

Without credits or subsidies, BEVs are better choices for some drivers.

But I don't see how the low cost of a BEV, the cheapest car in total ownership cost in much of the USA,

The first statement is your opinion. The second statement is factually incorrect, i.e. both Honda and Toyota provide
models which indicate the opposite.

 

[Firetruck41]

Without credits or subsidies, BEVs are better choices for some drivers.

But I don't see how the low cost of a BEV, the cheapest car in total ownership cost in much of the USA,

The first statement is your opinion. The second statement is factually incorrect, i.e. both Honda and Toyota provide
models which indicate the opposite.

First statement may be an opinion, but pretty hard to argue against, unless you can not imagine any possible scenario where the BEV is a better choice.

 

[GRA]

Far more capable. Open your eyes. Look at a map of the world, draw a circle of radius half the range of a hydrogen car around the hydrogen fueling stations currently operational. That is the places hydrogen cars can go. Now draw circles around every Plugshare listed L1 or L2 charger half of the range of an iMiev. Add in circles around your house, your mom's house, your friends, etc. Add more circles around campgrounds and hotels with outlets. And so on. That is the places an iMiev can go. While there are likely a few places a hydrogen car can go that an iMiev can't (as I'm sure you will mention each one again and again), far more of the map of the world is covered by iMiev circles now, and even after spending a billion dollars on 700 hydrogen stations (isn't that about the worldwide total to date?) for the tiny number of people willing to lease or buy $60k+ cars.

We define capable in different terms.

Sure. Lots more people can use BEVs than can use hydrogen cars. Lots more people can afford to use BEVs, as they cost $40,000 less.

Lots more people can afford to use FCEVs (in areas where there's infrastructure) than BEVs of similar range, as the FCEVs cost at least $32,000 less. And lots more people can afford to use ICEVs/HEVs/PHEVs, because they cost many thousands less than either. Haven't we done this round several times before?

Yes, a very low bar. Both ways. But you can't avoid any point, but are compelled to respond, right?

And you're not?

I'm not required to get the last word in every conversation. Oh, I know that is a good debate tactic. [
Yet, you did try. Your turn.

The government meaning the taxpayers. I doubt it, long term. Manufacturers meaning will add to the price of cars being sold, or reduce profits, or even more likely from the taxpayers. Again, I doubt it. Sorry, but I don't see how the economics can possibly work as hydrogen is and will be far more expensive than electric power for the foreseeable future. Hydrogen stations are far more expensive than public charging stations, and will be for the foreseeable future.

I don't see governments supporting public charging long term either, and companies have already had over 5.5 years to figure out how to make them profitable while providing electricity cheaper than gas, and have signally failed to do so.

Wrong standard. As most charging in the home or work, public charging is more about convenience than cost. This will become more true with time, as ranges increase.[/quote]
Only for people with home/work charging, and as I've pointed out numerous times, most of the world's urban driving population doesn't have that. Decades from now, maybe they will.

iMiev sales to date worldwide are about 38,000. Far more popular because it is a far more realistic car for most people to own.

The fact that it's been on sale for longer, is cheaper to buy and is far more acceptable to consumers in some countries with conditions very different from the U.S. might have just a teensy bit to do with it, don't you think? Let's see how things look when the Mirai's been on sale for the same length of time, corrected for the price difference.

Corrected for the price difference? What exactly do you mean?

Yes, iMiev is far more acceptable to consumers than overpriced hydrogen cars.[/quote]
I mean, correct for the 5x difference in EPA range, and equipment. You've refer to the Mirai as an econobox, and unlike the iMiEV it's most definitely not. It comes fully loaded with no options, and while it's certainly not a luxury car, it's several classes above the iMiEV.

Sure, from the legal standpoint, hydrogen cars are a ZEV. That is, after all, the reason why manufacturers are hyping them. The manufacturers get more ZEV credits from hydrogen cars than from BEVs. BEVs, unlike hydrogen cars, sell in places without ZEV credits.

Yet they don't except in miniscule numbers, without credits and/or subsidies (same as FCEVs).

Without credits or subsidies, BEVs are better choices for some drivers. Sure, a small fraction with 70 mile ranges, but the fraction that would be happy with a BEV will grow with increasing range. And the fraction that are real BEV candidates that actually own a BEV will grow with time. More convenient, less expensive.[/quote]
Again, more conveinent only applies to that fraction with access to guranteed charging at home or work, which is less expensive than buying gas. I know we've covered this numerous times already.

Without credits and subsidies, hydrogen is both less convenient and more expensive. Sure, the latter might change with changing technology. But I don't see how the low cost of a BEV, the cheapest car in total ownership cost in much of the USA, is going to be beat by hydrogen power. Less convenient, more expensive.[/quote]
I do see how it could, depending on the individual's circumstances and how things develop, and until we've reached much further along in development, want to proceed with every reasonably likely option.

Most of the world's urban inhabitants lack hydrogen fueling, and will for the foreseeable future. It would be far cheaper and safer to build out public charging than building out hydrogen fueling stations. After all, what is the cost of a home L1 charger? A few hundred dollars, including installation? Somehow that seems like a solvable problem, unlike hydrogen fueling stations.

Location, location, location. Installing even L1 charging at every parking spot will take decades, and will probably be far more expensive and disruptive than installing H2 stations at existing gas stations. But both should go ahead, until one or both can serve everyone. It won't happen before mid-century at the earliest, and maybe not for 50 years.

I'm not even close to convinced the L1/L2 charging is more expensive per car than hydrogen. Free Tesla Model S 100P's are currently cheaper than hydrogen filling per car supported. When it gets down to free iMievs for everyone, let us know. Then reduce the cost by a factor of 10, and hydrogen is still 10 times more expensive than L1/L2 charging.[/quote]
Of course it's not cheaper now, if you're talking about mass quantities of cars. No one has ever said it would be. But where's the potential major step reductions in charging cost? Real mass production of EVSEs will lower the price somewhat, but electricity isn't going to get a lot less expensive no matter how it's produced, and it's not as if the rest of the electric infrastructure isn't mature. By comparison, making and storing renewable H2 is still at the infant stage, with lots of room for cost reductions. No, it will never be cheaper than a BEV if a BEV fully meets someone's needs. The issue is what it costs compared to the other options when a BEV doesn't meet someone's needs.

 

[GRA]

Via ABG:

Recharge Wrap-up: Peugeot eF01 folding e-bike, Australia orders Hyundai FCEVs

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/08/peugeot-ef01-folding-e-bike/

Australia has ordered 20 hydrogen powered vehicles from Hyundai. The Australian Capital Territory Government in Canberra will take delivery of the fleet of Hyundai's next-generation fuel cell vehicles (set to replace the Tucson Fuel Cell in 2018) for its Renewable Transport Fuels Test Berth project. As part of the program, the vehicles will be powered by hydrogen made with a Siemens Silyzer System with electricity from Hornsdale Wind Farm in South Australia. The Siemens refueler is capable of powering over 1,000 fuel cell vehicles each averaging 14,000 miles [Sic. Km, see Hyundai link] per year. Read more from Hyundai.

Link to Hyundai here: http://www.hyundai.com.au/hyundai-info/news/2016/august/hyundai-secures-order-for-20-next-generation-hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicles-in-australia

 

[ydnas7]

Via ABG:

Recharge Wrap-up: Peugeot eF01 folding e-bike, Australia orders Hyundai FCEVs

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/08/peugeot-ef01-folding-e-bike/

Australia has ordered 20 hydrogen powered vehicles from Hyundai. The Australian Capital Territory Government in Canberra will take delivery of the fleet of Hyundai's next-generation fuel cell vehicles (set to replace the Tucson Fuel Cell in 2018) for its Renewable Transport Fuels Test Berth project. As part of the program, the vehicles will be powered by hydrogen made with a Siemens Silyzer System with electricity from Hornsdale Wind Farm in South Australia. The Siemens refueler is capable of powering over 1,000 fuel cell vehicles each averaging 14,000 miles [Sic. Km, see Hyundai link] per year. Read more from Hyundai.

Link to Hyundai here: http://www.hyundai.com.au/hyundai-info/news/2016/august/hyundai-secures-order-for-20-next-generation-hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicles-in-australia

already noted

can't make this up

Australian dollar, $55 million for 20 Hydrogen Hyundais, and one H2 station.
http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/open_government/inform/act_government_media_releases/corbell/2016/act-government-brings-hydrogen-energy-storage-to-canberra
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

once a manufacturer is selling outside of California or their home market (Japan/Korea) the price of Hydrogen and Cars is gone into plaid.
Ever wondered why?


FWIW
$55 million buys outright about 500 Tesla S-60 in Canberra. No subsidies in Australia

500 Tesla or 20 H2 Tucson, now thats a great choice.

Outside of CARB states, Hydrogen is far more expensive than free Teslas.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

seriously, this is hilarious, I'm glad I don't pay for this (its ACT government, not the Australian government, both reside at Canberra). For that kinda of money they could secure 300MW of solar farms in Qld http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-solar-farms-to-be-built-with-50m-in-funding-20160908-grbiav.html

300MW of solar farms or 20 Hydrogen Hyundais.
at that ratio each of the initial H2 Hydrogen Hyundai has an opportunity cost of 15MW of solar.


GRA, think about it slowly. tell me, how many panels is required to make 15MW of PV solar. Then perhaps you might start to understand.

 

[lorenfb]

Without credits or subsidies, BEVs are better choices for some drivers.

But I don't see how the low cost of a BEV, the cheapest car in total ownership cost in much of the USA,

The first statement is your opinion. The second statement is factually incorrect, i.e. both Honda and Toyota provide
models which indicate the opposite.

First statement may be an opinion, but pretty hard to argue against, unless you can not imagine any possible scenario where the BEV is a better choice.

Right, it's a vacuous statement, i.e. one's opinion, that expresses nothing about the typical consumer's acceptance of BEVs. It's basically a dot on a venn diagram. Or like for some, still using a BB phone is preferable.