AndyH
Well-known member
Because it's not just about 'fleet owners' - it's farmers, small business owners, etc. as well as private owners. Billy Jo Bob's Central Valley organic farm won't be installing H2 equipment for their 10 acre lettuce patch. We absolutely need public infrastructure. Fleets will take care of themselves as they do now - but that's additional infrastructure.RegGuheert said:Many (most?) here have agreed from the beginning that H2 might make sense for fleet owners. So why should we develop the infrastructure for passenger cars? Let the fleet owners bear the much lower costs for infrastructure that will be needed to fuel their fleets.AndyH said:Reg - the point that you missed, and that others here continually miss, is that FCEV provide capabilities that NO current or near-future BEV can provide - including the ability to travel more than 200 miles with a load (think pick-up truck, service van, etc.) and the ability to heat the cabin without a range penalty.
Yes, the tech is secondary...or tertiary... What's primary? Capability! Nobody - no auto maker, no infrastructure contractor, and no politician is out to take share away from the couple dozen BEVs on the road - the 'soft target' is the installed base of ICE.RegGuheert said:It sure is. People will choose the best tradeoff for their application between cost and utility. The technology is secondary.AndyH said:Stop stop stop making this BEV VS. FCEV as that's absolutely NOT the situation.
I've highlighted the limiting factors here. FCEVs aren't limited to being a small city car for the folks that live close to work.RegGuheert said:There is also a huge opportunity cost involved in the development and deployment of H2 vehicles and infrastructure that will retard adoption of BEVs. Why hold up the optimum solution (for commuting, at least) by funding the development of a sub-optimal solution? It makes no sense to me.
Not many here are middle class, according to the surveys we did when the board was younger. The LEAF is priced above the majority of buyers here***, and the limited range and battery degradation problem make it a non-starter. A FCEV, on the other hand, doesn't have either the range or degradation penalty.RegGuheert said:I don't think anyone claimed the Tesla S is. But the LEAF certainly is middle-class friendly. I think many owners here fit that description.AndyH said:As to vehicle price - I don't recall anyone saying that either a Tesla S or a FCEV are middle-class friendly today.
The price will cross over once we get some numbers on the road. The industry's got everything in place for economy of scale to work - that'll guarantee a cross-over. Again - most of the price of a BEV is the battery - and they're well down (95% down?) the price curve. There's just not much room for prices to fall - we're into the partial percentage evolution now for lithium. Fuel cell stacks, on the other hand, still have more than 50% to go - there's plenty of room for prices to fall. These initial FCEVs cost a bit more than a Model S but have more range and faster 'charges' - they're not yet got the years in the market that Tesla's got.RegGuheert said:Agreed the price of fuel cell stacks will come down faster than the price of batteries. But, as I said, that does not mean it will ever cross over. For some applications it may, but for the daily commuter, I seriously doubt it. And batteries are already where they need to be for some applications (without subsidies) and any improvements will simply expand the market space.AndyH said:But what is expected is that the price of a fuel cell stack will drop in price farther and faster than a battery pack. This makes sense as the technologies are at different points in their development curve.
But the cost per mile to fuel a BEV will almost certainly ALWAYS remain below that of a FCV.
Price per mile is irrelevant as there is no ZEV competition for even these initial FCEVs.
edit... ***
Sorry, horribly unclear writing. The "here" I intended was Texas for sure, probably the central US at least. Earlier this week I helped a fellow disabled vet fix her van. She cannot afford a newer vehicle yet cannot afford to pay someone to repair the older vehicles she can buy. She must tightly control her driving because the van, needing work, gets horrible fuel economy. A used Leaf could meet 100% of her driving needs even with a 60% capacity battery - but even a used Leaf is well outside her price range. As I've said before, those that can drive a Model S or have a Leaf as a 2nd car should absolutely enjoy! But it's a mistake to assume that because ~100K drivers in the world can acquire an EV that our electrified transportation problem is solved.