Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

[walterbays]

What we want to know is addressed in the paper between pages 41-54. "Fuel Cell Vehicle Performance" starts on page 41; "Fuel Cell Hybrid Vehicle Performance", particularly relevant as one of the vehicles modeled was an SUV, starts on page 47. For instance, fuel efficiency decreases 19% on the US06 cycle at 3km (9,843 ft.).

I think the original concern expressed wasn't with efficiency loss at high altitudes but with little capacity for regenerative braking due to a small battery. My old Prius battery used to fill up very quickly on the way down, but at least I still had engine braking, and a BEV would have much more regenerative braking. An FCEV would have to rely almost entirely on friction braking which is dangerous if they overheat. abasile is probably right that we'll just have to wait for driver reports on how it works in practice.

 

[GRA]

What we want to know is addressed in the paper between pages 41-54. "Fuel Cell Vehicle Performance" starts on page 41; "Fuel Cell Hybrid Vehicle Performance", particularly relevant as one of the vehicles modeled was an SUV, starts on page 47. For instance, fuel efficiency decreases 19% on the US06 cycle at 3km (9,843 ft.).

I think the original concern expressed wasn't with efficiency loss at high altitudes but with little capacity for regenerative braking due to a small battery. My old Prius battery used to fill up very quickly on the way down, but at least I still had engine braking, and a BEV would have much more regenerative braking. An FCEV would have to rely almost entirely on friction braking which is dangerous if they overheat. abasile is probably right that we'll just have to wait for driver reports on how it works in practice.

Regen braking was one of the topics, although we quickly expanded to include others. But you're right, we need to have someone try this and see how it goes. As long as they can dump the electricity somehow and handle the heat, running the motor backwards for regen if the battery's full shouldn't be a problem, and there are owner workarounds (e.g. defrost/AC on high), not that such games should be needed in this century (I used to do the old 'turn the heater on' trick in the Peugeot to get me to the top of shorter grades before the car overheated). Whether Hyundai actually implemented something like that remains to be seen.

 

[GRA]

Via GCC:

"US Hybrid awarded contract to deliver plug-in fuel cell shuttle bus to Hawaii County Mass Transit Agency"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/06/20140619-ush.html#more" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and

"Intelligent Energy joins H2USA"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/06/20140621-ie.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[TonyWilliams]

I was doing a little hydrogen historical research (you know the claims.. just 10 or 15 more years). Obviously, with President Bush officially pushing for a hydrogen future in 2003, you'd expect the "government grant recipients" to come out of the wood work with glowing predictions of a hydrogen nirvana by now, in addition to a glossing over of the myriad of issues surrounding hydrogen.

This article doesn't disappoint. Naturally, it completely discounts pure EV's at all, and even the budding new "hybrids" get a good brush off. It does rightfully address the cost of electricity as being key, and that the electricity should come from renewables, but just can't manage to put that cheap renewable electricity in a battery instead of splitting fossil fuels at 1/3 the electrical efficiency, plus the fossil fuel:


http://www.rmi.org/Knowledge-Center/Library/E03-05_TwentyHydrogenMyths" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Page 33 of 49 Twenty Hydrogen Myths 17 February 2005 Copyright © 2003 Rocky Mountain Institute. All rights reserved. http://www.rmi.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


"Myth" c. We should improve batteries and increase the required electricity storage capacity (battery- electric driving range) of hybrid cars.

California has largely abandoned its mandate to introduce battery-electric cars (2003) because battery technology, as RMI predicted, was overtaken by hybrid technology, which will in turn be trumped by fuel cells. Battery-electric cars are a valid concept for niche markets, but (as Profes- sor P.D. van der Koogh of the Delft University of Technology remarked) are “cars for carrying mainly batteries — but not very far and not very fast, or else they would have to carry even more batteries.” Although batteries’ energy density, life, and cost can be considerably improved, it is still probably easier to make a good fuel cell than a good battery, and the comparative advantage of the technologies that compete with batteries is probably more likely to expand than to shrink.

Regulators that, like the California Air Resources Board, have rewarded automakers for increasing the “zero-emission range” (battery capacity) of their hybrids are distorting car design in an undesirable direction, increasing the car’s weight and cost in a way that doesn’t well serve their strategic policy goals. However, such recent CARB concepts as requiring hybrids to have at least 8 kW of electric drive capacity and at least 60-volt traction motors are helpful, because they’ll force real hybrid technology, rather than rewarding just a routine shift to 42-volt electrical systems that permit the starter/alternator to provide a minor torque supplement.

******

You have to give the hydrogen (always in the) future folks a good slap on the back for lacking vision for batteries, but having near miracles predicted for hydrogen.

For the record, since Dec 2010, there have been battery electric cars (hybrid with gasoline and pure battery electric) that use 400 volt systems and now up to 85kWh batteries.

 

[AndyH]

Tony - we linked the RMI paper in this thread twice before.

For the record, RMI's an independent group and is not a 'pro-hydrogen' group. They've been known to report accurately in the past, and they have sufficient access to appropriate information and have staff capable of understanding the data they collect.

By the way - H2 is here around the world, it's no longer 10-15 years away.

 

[AndyH]

http://www.greencarreports.com/news...gh-pressure-hydrogen-fueling-station-in-socal

Info on a H2 stations Honda deployed in Torrance, CA. Their new pressure/temperature monitoring algo cuts refueling time in half to about 3 minutes.

 

[JeremyW]

Wow. Look at all that equipment needed for ONE pump.

 

[GRA]

Wow. Look at all that equipment needed for ONE pump.

Sure, there's a few additional items, but don't forget that at a gas station much of the equipment is underground. I'm guessing the biggest piece is the H2 tank. I know one of the H2 stations put everything except the dispensers on the roof of the carport over the pumps. Besides, what do you care? It's not as if you're going to install one of these at your house; it's the station owner's problem.

Re H2 home refueling, while I don't see this happening on anything approaching a large scale, I'll point out that in the early days of ICEs, before gas stations were ubiquitous, it wasn't uncommon for even middle-class homes to have a built-in underground gas tank near the garage. Because gas was considered so hazardous, garages were generally made of fireproof materials, and separate from the house. As people got more familiar with gas and the need for at home storage decreased, garages were more typically made of wood frames, as they continue to be.

Here's today's H2 news, via GCC:

"NREL and GM announce multi-year R&D partnership to reduce cost of automotive fuel cells"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/06/20140625-nrel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and

"USC team finds Li-Al nanoparticles produce hydrogen from water with high rate and yield; potential for industrial scaling"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/06/20140627-usc.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As with all announcements of laboratory _battery_ breakthroughs, such as this one:

"USC team develops novel organic redox flow battery for large-scale energy storage"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/06/usc-team-develops-novel-organic-redox-flow-battery-for-large-scale-energy-storage.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

assume this is fairy dust until it is commercialized (if ever).

 

[AndyH]

Wow. Look at all that equipment needed for ONE pump.

Recall first that this installation is manufacturing the 'fuel'. Then start with a gasoline pump and work back to the crude oil input. Pound for pound or volume to volume, I'm thinking you'll notice the difference.

 

[RegGuheert]

Personally, I think many of the concerns about H2 fires and/or explosions may be overblown (an explosion from a tank compromised in a crash excepted), but there is one area of H2 fire safety that I don't think has been covered in this thread.

So far, all the pictures of hydrogen fires in this thread have been taken at night. There is probably a reason for that. Hydrogen fires during the daytime are much more dangerous. The reason? You cannot see it and you cannot feel it until you are in, or very close to, the fire. Here are a couple of pictures and comments from H2BestPractices.org:

Notice how invisible the hydrogen flame is in the left-hand photograph!

- Hydrogen burns with a pale blue flame that is almost invisible during daylight hours, so fires are almost impossible to see with the naked eye.
- Hydrogen fires have low radiant heat, so you can't sense the presence of a flame until you are very close to it (or even in it).

So it seems that a hydrogen fire during the daytime could be the worst case, since it may be undetectable, causing someone to get burned who otherwise would be able to avoid the fire.

 

[AndyH]

Personally, I think many of the concerns about H2 fires and/or explosions may be overblown (an explosion from a tank compromised in a crash excepted), but there is one area of H2 fire safety that I don't think has been covered in this thread.

So far, all the pictures of hydrogen fires in this thread have been taken at night. There is probably a reason for that. Hydrogen fires during the daytime are much more dangerous. The reason? You cannot see it and you cannot feel it until you are in, or very close to, the fire. Here are a couple of pictures and comments from H2BestPractices.org:

Notice how invisible the hydrogen flame is in the left-hand photograph!

- Hydrogen burns with a pale blue flame that is almost invisible during daylight hours, so fires are almost impossible to see with the naked eye.
- Hydrogen fires have low radiant heat, so you can't sense the presence of a flame until you are very close to it (or even in it).

So it seems that a hydrogen fire during the daytime could be the worst case, since it may be undetectable, causing someone to get burned who otherwise would be able to avoid the fire.

It has been addressed in this thread, actually. You're correct that H2 burns with a pale blue flame when it burns alone. But in the case of both a vehicle and fueling station fire (and even airship...) there are other materials in the mix that make the flame highly visible.

edit...nobody else did, so I will. Here's 'proof' from an earlier post by drees:
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/08/30/how-safe-is-hydrogen-filling-station-explodes-w-video/
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlyCPbmO7Ts[/youtube]

 

[donald]

June 26, 2014 2:33 am JST
Toyota's fuel cell vehicle to hit Japanese market by March

http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Companies/Toyota-s-fuel-cell-vehicle-to-hit-Japanese-market-by-March" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The price will be set at around 7 million yen ($67,987) before taxes. But to "limit the consumer burden to around 5 million yen," Toyota plans to ask the government to offer subsidies, according to an official.

For that price, it is difficult to argue for FCV when a Model S is at a similar price.

 

[GRA]

June 26, 2014 2:33 am JST
Toyota's fuel cell vehicle to hit Japanese market by March

http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Companies/Toyota-s-fuel-cell-vehicle-to-hit-Japanese-market-by-March" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The price will be set at around 7 million yen ($67,987) before taxes. But to "limit the consumer burden to around 5 million yen," Toyota plans to ask the government to offer subsidies, according to an official.

For that price, it is difficult to argue for FCV when a Model S is at a similar price.

http://www.ibtimes.com/tesla-motors-japanese-officials-automakers-betting-fuel-cell-vehicles-can-take-elon-musk-1613686" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't discount the possible effect of Japanese chauvinism.

 

[donald]

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has derided fuel cell vehicles in the past...“Hydrogen is suitable for the upper stage of rockets, but not for cars,” he told a crowd of German Tesla fans in Munich last fall.

I'd have to admit, of the very few people on the planet who are, by experience, practically qualified to make such a comment, you'd have to figure Elon to be one of them!

I think he's being a little unfair, though. FCEVs are fundamentally BEVs with a range extender. Less confrontation and more co-operation might work to a mutual benefit here... I see a rosy future for plug in FCEVs with a sub 100 mile range and a rarely-used fuel cell REx. The range extending benefits of running a catalytic system that can generate heat as a side product in winter use would have clear benefits. You might even decide that it is a basis for what power the fuel cell could be - you need around 3kW for toasty heat, and if fuel cells run around 50-60% efficient, a ~4kW fuel cell could supply all the heat you need while maximising thermal efficiency from the H2.

 

[RegGuheert]

I think he's being a little unfair, though. FCEVs are fundamentally BEVs with a range extender.

Not without a plug, they aren't. Neither the Hyundai Tuscon FCEV nor the Toyota Fuel Cell Sedan have a plug. As a result, these vehicles are NOT BEVs with a range extender.

 

[donald]

They are fundamentally BEV Rex, but without a plug, hence why I suggested there's a rosy future for plug-in FCEVs.

 

[GRA]

They are fundamentally BEV Rex, but without a plug, hence why I suggested there's a rosy future for plug-in FCEVs.

Agreed. At the moment, PHFCEVs are mainly buses and delivery vehicles, as links in this thread have shown.

 

[RegGuheert]

They are fundamentally BEV Rex, but without a plug, hence why I suggested there's a rosy future for plug-in FCEVs.

Agreed. At the moment, PHFCEVs are mainly buses and delivery vehicles, as links in this thread have shown.

By this logic, my Honda Civic Hybrid and a Toyota Prius are simply BEVs with range extenders. :roll:

BTW, the Nissan LEAF entered the market 13 years after the Toyota Prius...

 

[donald]

By this logic, my Honda Civic Hybrid and a Toyota Prius are simply BEVs with range extenders. :roll:

Well, if it can run on battery alone then, yes, I'd say that make it is a battery vehicle when it is doing so. Clearly the Civic isn't a battery car, but I'd say your Prius is a battery car when the engine is off. That's why they could add a plug and a bigger battery to it to make it a plug-in.

In any case, there are prototype 1,000 mile aluminium-air battery cars that are recharged by replacing the aluminium, and battery swap cars that could, in theory, never need a plug-in.

I think you are drilling into semantic complications where none were intended. FCEVs need larger batteries, than hybrids, of several kWh to successfully deliver the power of a fuel cell (that would otherwise be disproportionately sized) via the batteries whereas current hybrids can all deliver power directly from the engine, and I'd say where you can distinguish a 'battery car' from something else is if you can do a modest journey with battery only. The only reason I can see for FCEVs not to have a plug-in is to dissuade users from plugging-in, lest they realise BEV is a better option for them, and stop buying hydrogen!!

In any case, I generally regard a fuel cell as a battery already. It is a hydrogen-air battery.

 

[GRA]

Via GCC:

"DOE seeking input on commercialization of fuel cells as range extenders for battery-electric vehicles"

"The US Department of Energy (DOE) has issued a Request for Information (RFI) (DE-FOA-0001145) to solicit feedback from industry, academia, research laboratories, government agencies, and other stakeholders on issues related to the technical and economic feasibility of commercializing fuel cell range extenders for available battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) in the US market.

"DOE’s office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (EERE) is specifically interested in information on BEV makes and models where an after-market modification to extend the vehicle range using a Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM) fuel cell system would be most feasible."

Full article here:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/07/20140704-doe.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;