Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

[GRA]

I'm somewhat hesitant to link to this ABG article, because I think the writer uses some idiotic reasoning (many of the commenters pointed out the same), but in the interest of providing the widest possible view of fuel cell cars both positive and negative, here you go:

"Surprise Costs Have A Cost: Why we turned down the Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell"

http://green.autoblog.com/2014/08/19/surprise-cost-turn-down-hyundai-tucson-fuel-cell/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's a more valuable article from GCC:

"U. Mich study: natural-gas-based ICE, BEV and FCV all show promise for environmental benefits relative to conventional ICE"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/08/20140819-lastoskie.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[jsongster]

I'm somewhat hesitant to link to this ABG article, because I think the writer uses some idiotic reasoning (many of the commenters pointed out the same), but in the interest of providing the widest possible view of fuel cell cars both positive and negative, here you go:

"Surprise Costs Have A Cost: Why we turned down the Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell"

http://green.autoblog.com/2014/08/19/surprise-cost-turn-down-hyundai-tucson-fuel-cell/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's a more valuable article from GCC:

"U. Mich study: natural-gas-based ICE, BEV and FCV all show promise for environmental benefits relative to conventional ICE"

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2014/08/20140819-lastoskie.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Once again the dealers are torpedoing the movement. I sincerely hope that Tesla's movement to eliminate these useless middlepersons succeeds.

 

[DaveEV]

Once again the dealers are torpedoing the movement. I sincerely hope that Tesla's movement to eliminate these useless middlepersons succeeds.

You didn't read the comments, did you? The author went into the dealer assuming that the $499/mo included tax/title fees. But no-one advertises lease rates including tax/title fees. The dealer does not appear to be at fault here.

 

[GRA]

Once again the dealers are torpedoing the movement. I sincerely hope that Tesla's movement to eliminate these useless middlepersons succeeds.

You didn't read the comments, did you? The author went into the dealer assuming that the $499/mo included tax/title fees. But no-one advertises lease rates including tax/title fees. The dealer does not appear to be at fault here.

Or the license fee either. Personally, I think the guy should have disqualified the Tucson for himself at a far earlier stage, as most of the points he raises about currently existing limitations (most of which will be eliminated by October of 2015), if important to him, should have taken it out of contention long before he started worrying about the price. But the reasoning about the 'extra costs' being the deal breaker is just ludicrous - it's not as if the dealer was trying to add additional dealer markup, undercoating, $500 doc fees, or any of the other sleazy games that auto dealers play, just the normal government fees that apply to any car purchase. Judging by his statements, the author has never bought or leased a new car before and made time payments.

 

[smkettner]

The dealer did not seem to be the issue to me.
It was the hassle of getting hydrogen.

 

[GRA]

The dealer did not seem to be the issue to me.
It was the hassle of getting hydrogen.

The latter would be a good reason for the author to reject the car early on, if that was a major issue. Indeed, reading how far this guy was going to have to go to get a fill, my thought was that this wasn't a good option for him at this time unless it was on his commute route. This guy would be happiest with an Outlander PHEV if it were available now, or an A3 E-Tron Sportwagen ditto. But here's the article title and sub-head:

"Surprise Costs Have A Cost: Why we turned down the Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell"
"Dealer Added $70 A Month To Advertised Price, Which Tipped The Scales" [Emphasis added]

The $70/month in question is due to tax, license and title, not dealer add-ons.

Here's more examples of this bozo's poor reasoning:

"Hyundai originally said the Tucson FCV had a range of 300 miles. They later backtracked and said 265 miles was more realistic. Either way, we weren't going to be driving the Tucson from Los Angeles to its namesake city in Arizona. In fact, during the timeframe of the three-year lease, my travel would pretty much be restricted to Los Angeles, Ventura and Orange Counties, with Santa Barbara (100 miles from my home) and San Diego (120 miles) as stretch goals."

Not true, as numerous stations will be coming on line by 10/2015.

"In the summer of 2014, only four stations were open within 30 miles of our house. There were only about seven open in all of Los Angeles and Orange Counties, which together contain 19 million people. No such stations existed in Ventura or San Diego Counties "yet" as the hydrogen proponents like to say. There were no interchange stations in areas like Fresno, that would allow FCVs from LA to fuel up for the trip to San Francisco, or vice-versa. Even driving to Las Vegas, just 275 miles or a single tankful away for most of today's gasoline cars, was still in the realm of science fiction, with no hydrogen stations along the route."

As he should know since he cites the CAFCP website, one of the earlier new stations to open will be in Coalinga (actually at Harris Ranch, I believe) for exactly the same reason Tesla put an SC there, to allow LA-SF trips along I-5. Why anyone would go over to Fresno on such a trip is beyond me. It's true that there will be some H2 stations needed along SR 99 to make trips to Sequoia/Kings and Yosemite easier ( I'd put them in Manteca, Fresno and Bakersfield first, followed by Merced and Tulare), but those can follow the more critical need for first providing hometown and regional refueling. OTOH, Tahoe will be well served by stations in Sacramento and Truckee at a fairly early date.

 

[smkettner]

It is our culture to blame the money but we know it is something else.

 

[GRA]

It is our culture to blame the money but we know it is something else.

If that's the case, you'd think most people would hesitate to publish an article in a major EV forum that showcases their own poor reasoning skills and/or ignorance. We're not talking about some newbie coming here to ask questions.

 

[RegGuheert]

The dealer did not seem to be the issue to me.
It was the hassle of getting hydrogen.

The latter would be a good reason for the author to reject the car early on, if that was a major issue.

No doubt. OTOH, his reasoning for rejecting BEV seemed dead-on in my estimation.

Anyway, thanks for posting the link. The fact is that now that these vehicles are in the hands of actual consumers, they will get the same kind of real-life criticism that all vehicles get from their owners regardless of whether or not they should have known better. BEVs have been going through that phase for years and there is still a lot of product maturing yet to happen (and BEV newbies to be trained). But FCVs are just now starting out.

I wonder what other types of gripes/anecdotes we will hear about. Here are a few of my predictions:

1) It took me X hours to refuel my FCV today due to X, Y or Z.
2) I ran out of hydrogen and I had to be towed home.
3) The hydrogen refueling station I stopped at was not working and I had to drive X miles to refuel.
4) I think hydrogen is leaking out of my FCV. How can I tell?
5) All the hydrogen leaked out of my FCV overnight.
6) I forgot to turn off my FCV at the airport for a week on vacation and it used X hydrogen.
7) How stupid is it that I cannot plug in my FCV?
8) My fuel cell is degrading faster than Hyundai told me it would and my power has dropped significantly.
9) I leased the FCV for me but my wife loves it and commandeered it for herself.
10) My wife refuses to drive the FCV.
11) My FCV quit on the highway and the following trouble lights are now lit.
12) The dealer does not know how to service my FCV/offered an oil change/otherwise sucks.
13) My FCV is generally great, but for X, Y, or Z, it's not up to the task.
14) I wrecked my FCV and the shop cannot get this/that part.
15) I went on a trip and when I returned my FCV was dead. (12V battery issues)
16) Regen is too weak/too strong.
17) Traction battery is too small to get me up my local mountain at full speed.
18) I got the manufacturer to buy back my FCV under the lemon law.
19) My FCV is not as nice as the Prius I traded in because of X, Y and Z.

Of course some of these thing are growing pains, but as we know with BEV compliance cars, sometimes these pains will persist because of the limited production and availability or just poor reliability.

One common BEV issue which I don't expect to see is this:
- I leased this FCV for my commute and I can no longer make it.

But I also expect to hear about a couple of issues that few people, if anyone, has foreseen. This is the case for all new technologies, and I do not expect FCVs to be immune.

And there will also be lots of praise for FCVs:
- I love my FCV! It's the most wonderful thing ever!

It should be interesting to watch this unfold. (I will not be a participant, even if I had wanted to be.)

Does anyone have any other predictions of future FCV owner experiences?

 

[WetEV]

8) My fuel cell is degrading faster than Hyundai told me it would and my range has dropped significantly.

I'd suspect that "My fuel cell is degrading faster than Hyundai told me it would and my power has dropped significantly" is far more likely.

 

[RegGuheert]

8) My fuel cell is degrading faster than Hyundai told me it would and my range has dropped significantly.

I'd suspect that "My fuel cell is degrading faster than Hyundai told me it would and my power has dropped significantly" is far more likely.

Good point! Corrected.

 

[evnow]

If that car was available here I'd consider the car only if the fueling station was very close to my home (like 2 or 3 miles). Anything else would be inconvenient on a weekly basis. Sicce convenience of fueling is apparently one of the benefits of FCEV - it is weird that there are so few fueling stations and thus it is so inconvenient to fuel the car. Unlike Leaf which I just recharge every night at home (if needed - now-a-days I recharge only when SOC goes below 50%, usually once in 2 days).

 

[GRA]

If that car was available here I'd consider the car only if the fueling station was very close to my home (like 2 or 3 miles). Anything else would be inconvenient on a weekly basis. Sicce convenience of fueling is apparently one of the benefits of FCEV - it is weird that there are so few fueling stations and thus it is so inconvenient to fuel the car. Unlike Leaf which I just recharge every night at home (if needed - now-a-days I recharge only when SOC goes below 50%, usually once in 2 days).

It's not 'weird', it's the way it is at the moment when the infrastructure is just starting. You shouldn't consider the car if fueling it is out of your way, which is why they are targeting leases (and sales next year) to those areas within a six minute drive of an H2 station, and initially installing the latter in neighborhoods that are likely to be interested in AFVs. This has been covered many times over in the course of this thread, is laid out in detail in the various papers that have been linked to from CAFCP, CARB and others, so why bring it up again?

It's simple, if you'd consider it but there's nowhere convenient for you to fuel it at the moment, you shouldn't get one. Just as was the case in the early days of gas cars, steam cars and electric cars (and is still true outside of your home in most areas for BEVs). In my case, even if I could afford one I wouldn't get it until the H2 fueling station 1.7 miles from my place opens next year, and Hyundai has no plans to offer the Tucson in this area until local stations are available, just as Toyota and Honda plan to do.

 

[evnow]

This has been covered many times over in the course of this thread, is laid out in detail in the various papers that have been linked to from CAFCP, CARB and others, so why bring it up again?

Because I've not read and memorized every line of this 110 page thread

It's simple, if you'd consider it but there's nowhere convenient for you to fuel it at the moment, you shouldn't get one. Just as was the case in the early days of gas cars, steam cars and electric cars (and is still true outside of your home in most areas for BEVs). In my case, even if I could afford one I wouldn't get it until the H2 fueling station 1.7 miles from my place opens next year, and Hyundai has no plans to offer the Tucson in this area until local stations are available, just as Toyota and Honda plan to do.

Cool so they are waiting for millions of tax payer's money to be spent before selling a dozen or so cars to get the max gold credits. Wonderful scheme ...

 

[ydnas7]

The Tesla roadster was released in 2008, the Hyundai Tucson HFCV was released in 2014. Prices are comparable.
So Hydrogen is about 6 years behind Battery

but the Roadster was also CF and quick
The Tucson is steel and not quick

But CARB will make the automakers give a great deal on Hydrogen, but they will still be return to crusher leases.

Despite the finances and the regulations, BEVs will out-compete the Hydrogen vehicles - too expensive - too slow - too cramped - too inconvenient

Lutz was right, between 40+mile EREVs and 200+mile EVs with fast charges, there is no room for HFCV to catch up.

Even natural gas will out compete Hydrogen vehicles, and thats not saying much.


There is a big difference between making fewer than 1,000 cars per year and making more than 10,000 cars per year.
Any Hydrogen vehicle manufacturer selling less than than 1,000 Hydrogen Fuel Cells vehicles per year is at Roadster/ H2 Tucson cost
Any EV vehicle manufacturer selling less than than 1,000 EVs vehicles per year is selling at below cost.
Any EV vehicle manufacturer selling more than than 20,000 EVs vehicles per year is likely to be profitable
Any PHEV vehicle manufacturer selling more than than 20,000 EVs vehicles per year is likely to be profitable

 

[GRA]

The Tesla roadster was released in 2008, the Hyundai Tucson HFCV was released in 2014. Prices are comparable.
So Hydrogen is about 6 years behind Battery.

About 5, according to the ITS paper.

but the Roadster was also CF and quick
The Tucson is steel and not quick

But CARB will make the automakers give a great deal on Hydrogen, but they will still be return to crusher leases.

Despite the finances and the regulations, BEVs will out-compete the Hydrogen vehicles - too expensive - too slow - too cramped - too inconvenient[/quote
They're certainly too expensive now, and also down on power, but too cramped, too inconvenient? Compared to PHEV conversions like the Fords, they're certainly a lot less cramped, and as for inconvenient, to whom? Not the apartment dweller or house renter who can't charge at home. Not the person who has a single car and needs it to take trips as well as do their commute. Of course, if it's maximum convenience for the price they want, then they'll just stay with their ICE.

Lutz was right, between 40+mile EREVs and 200+mile EVs with fast charges, there is no room for HFCV to catch up.
I'm not aware that he said 200+ mile EVs with fast charges; AFAIA he said 300+ mile EVS ditto. At the moment, the only 300+ mile EV with fast 'charging' is an FCEV. The big question is whether BEVs or FCEVs get to affordability at that range first.

Even natural gas will out compete Hydrogen vehicles, and thats not saying much.

At the moment, sure.

There is a big difference between making fewer than 1,000 cars per year and making more than 10,000 cars per year.
Any Hydrogen vehicle manufacturer selling less than than 1,000 Hydrogen Fuel Cells vehicles per year is at Roadster/ H2 Tucson cost
Any EV vehicle manufacturer selling less than than 1,000 EVs vehicles per year is selling at below cost.

With the possible exception of Tesla, that should read "any EV manufacturer at the moment is selling below cost".

Any EV vehicle manufacturer selling more than than 20,000 EVs vehicles per year is likely to be profitable
Any PHEV vehicle manufacturer selling more than than 20,000 EVs vehicles per year is likely to be profitable

GM isn't profitable on the Volt (and didn't expect to be in the 1st gen) and Toyota didn't make a profit on the 1st Gen Prius either, so what are you basing the above claims of ''more than 20,000 EVs/yr is likely to be profitable'? I know of no EV manufacturer other than Tesla who is claiming a profit on their PEVs, and Tesla is only doing so non-GAAP.

 

[ydnas7]

FWIW

Nissan's Jose Munoz stated the Nissan LEAF vehicle is profitable. back in 2013 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/20/us-autoshow-nissan-idUSBRE9AJ05Z20131120" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mitsubishi's makes about 1.2-1.3m cars per year, they are currently ramping production from 30,000 Outlander PHEVs to 50,000 Outlander PHEVs http://carnews.beforward.jp/searchs/detail/entry_id=225984" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
that is a lot of cars for a company like Mitsubishi - they must be profitable. For FY2015 Mitsubishi is stating that EV/PHEV production ratio is to be at least 5%.

Tesla, Nissan, Mitsubishi all make profitable plugin vehicles

its simple, as long as Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles stay at less than 1,000 or 2,000 per year from a manufacturer, their cost is like a Roadster, but their performance is like a Tucson.

And thats without examining their infrastructure cost - free Teslas anyone?

 

[GRA]

FWIW

Nissan's Jose Munoz stated the Nissan LEAF vehicle is profitable. back in 2013 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/20/us-autoshow-nissan-idUSBRE9AJ05Z20131120" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Okay, thanks for that, that's one.

Mitsubishi's makes about 1.2-1.3m cars per year, they are currently ramping production from 30,000 Outlander PHEVs to 50,000 Outlander PHEVs http://carnews.beforward.jp/searchs/detail/entry_id=225984" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
that is a lot of cars for a company like Mitsubishi - they must be profitable. For FY2015 Mitsubishi is stating that EV/PHEV production ratio is to be at least 5%.

Tesla, Nissan, Mitsubishi all make profitable plugin vehicles

Yes, I'd say that the Outlander is doing quite well, although a lot of that was due to the now expired massive subsidies in the Netherlands. But 30 to 50k isn't 20k, is it?

its simple, as long as Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles stay at less than 1,000 or 2,000 per year from a manufacturer, their cost is like a Roadster, but their performance is like a Tucson.

A lot less than a roadster, more like a Model S. And Hyundai, at least is planning to produce 5k/yr of the Tucson for starters. Not that any of the companies expect to make a profit on their first gen production FCEVs.

And thats without examining their infrastructure cost - free Teslas anyone?

The infrastructure costs per vehicle can be calculated from the costs in the CAFCP and/or ITS studies referenced upthread. I forget what they amounted to, but IIRC 'free Teslas' is far too high, except initially.

 

[GRA]

This has been covered many times over in the course of this thread, is laid out in detail in the various papers that have been linked to from CAFCP, CARB and others, so why bring it up again?

Because I've not read and memorized every line of this 110 page thread

It's simple, if you'd consider it but there's nowhere convenient for you to fuel it at the moment, you shouldn't get one. Just as was the case in the early days of gas cars, steam cars and electric cars (and is still true outside of your home in most areas for BEVs). In my case, even if I could afford one I wouldn't get it until the H2 fueling station 1.7 miles from my place opens next year, and Hyundai has no plans to offer the Tucson in this area until local stations are available, just as Toyota and Honda plan to do.

Cool so they are waiting for millions of tax payer's money to be spent before selling a dozen or so cars to get the max gold credits. Wonderful scheme ...

Toyota is ponying up cash for 18 stations themselves (as has also been covered repeatedly), and there will be far more than 'a dozen or so' cars sold.

 

[TonyWilliams]

... and there will be far more than 'a dozen or so' cars sold.

So, let's see some numbers from the biggest automaker in the world in the world's most progressive state (California). This is as good as it will get... I'll go first:

2015: 500
2016: 1000
2017: 2500


Your turn.