GRA
Posts: 12105
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:24 pm

Both GCC:
EDAG Group and Hexagon Purus launch joint research project for a flexible battery/hydrogen storage system

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/0 ... -edag.html
In a joint research project funded by the HessenAgentur, the EDAG Group and Hexagon Purus (a specialist in composite high-pressure tanks and systems for installation in vehicles of all kinds) are investigating how a hybrid storage system can be implemented that can combine the advantages of both hybrid and battery drive alternatives.

The research project, scheduled to
run for 18 months, will develop a flexible storage system for the vehicle floor in which the latest generation of batteries and hydrogen pressure tanks can be installed in parallel. The customer should then be able to configure the respective number of storage individually.

The vehicle will be able to cover daily distances with battery electricity and long journeys with energy from a fuel cell powered by hydrogen tanks.

This solution, based on the “EDAG ScaleBase” scalable vehicle platform developed by the EDAG Group, offers advantages for vehicles used for business and private purposes. . . .

The inter-changeability of the storage units also enables resource-saving secondary use and meets the sustainability requirements of the EDAG Group and Hexagon Purus.


European Union adopts strategies for energy system integration and hydrogen; Clean Hydrogen Alliance

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/0 ... 09-eu.html

. . . The two strategies present a new
clean energy investment agenda, in line with the European Commission’s Next Generation EU recovery package and the European Green Deal.

Energy System Integration. The EU Strategy for Energy System Integration will provide the framework for the green energy transition. The current model in which energy consumption in transport, industry, gas and buildings is happening in silos—each with separate value chains, rules, infrastructure, planning and operations—cannot deliver climate neutrality by 2050 in a cost efficient way; the changing costs of innovative solutions have to be integrated in the way energy systems operate.

Energy system integration means that the system is planned and operated as a whole, linking different energy carriers, infrastructures, and consumption sectors. This connected and flexible system will be more efficient, and reduce costs for society. For example, this means a system where the electricity that fuels Europe’s cars could come from rooftop solar panels, while buildings are kept warm with heat from a nearby factory, and the factory is fueled by clean hydrogen produced from off-shore wind energy.

There are three main pillars to this strategy: . . . .

3. For those sectors where electrification is difficult, the strategy promotes clean fuels, including renewable hydrogen and sustainable biofuels and biogas. The Commission will propose a new classification and certification system for renewable and low-carbon fuels. . . .

Hydrogen strategy. In an integrated energy system, hydrogen can support the decarbonization of industry, transport, power generation and buildings across Europe. The EU Hydrogen Strategy addresses how to transform this potential into reality, through investments, regulation, market creation and research and innovation.

Hydrogen can power sectors that are not suitable for electrification and provide storage to balance variable renewable energy flows, but this can only be achieved with coordinated action between the public and private sector, at EU level. The priority is to develop renewable hydrogen, produced using mainly wind and solar energy. However, in the short and medium term other forms of low-carbon hydrogen are needed to rapidly reduce emissions and support the development of a viable market.

This gradual transition will require a phased approach:

From 2020 to 2024, the EU will support the installation of at least 6 gigawatts of renewable hydrogen electrolyzers in the EU, and the production of up to one million tonnes of renewable hydrogen.

From 2025 to 2030, hydrogen needs to become an intrinsic part of the integrated energy system, with at least 40 gigawatts of renewable hydrogen electrolyzers and the production of up to ten million tonnes of renewable hydrogen in the EU.

From 2030 to 2050, renewable hydrogen technologies should reach maturity and be deployed at large scale across all hard-to-decarbonise sectors. . . .
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3819
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm

GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:26 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 am
Back to automotive performance. Hydrogen cars today are wimpy. Changing that would open up the market place at the high end.

Do a NASCAR design. Build it. Test it. Words are easy. Deeds are hard.

"Fuel cells are slow." Change that.

An electric car has the record for the Pike's Peak Hill Climb. Make a fuel cell car that can at least compete.

Words don't convince. Deeds do.
(vaporware deleted)

Both vaporware at the moment and likely to remain so, but who knows.

But tell me, do you really believe that FCHEVs will fail in the market if someone doesn't build a super-zoomy version, and that it's impossible to do so? That's like saying that because the Prius has mediocre performance it will never sell in mass numbers, and no one can make a fast HEV. Toyota disproved the first, and Porsche the second.
Hydrogen is far more expensive than gasoline, and the cars are more expensive than ICEs. Probably can't fix that for a decade or more like three or more decades.

Hydrogen is far more expensive than electric power, and fueling hydrogen is less convenient than charging in your garage (most of the time).

Hydrogen is slow. Excluding vaporware, of course.

Quoting your source.
Battery electric vehicles still aren’t comparable with internal-combustion competition in terms of range and recharging, but they are pretty darned close and there’s no reason to believe it won’t equal out within the next 10 years.
If hydrogen doesn't have some reason to sell, it will not sell.

Cheap doesn't work. Not the cars, not the fuel. Probably never the fuel. The Prius was cheap on fuel, boring, but cheap. Market for cheap and boring... but fuel cells and hydrogen are not cheap, and there isn't much of a market for expensive and boring.

Low emissions, but BEVs are better.

Convenient, not hardly. Far more gas stations, and better DCQC coverage.

Range is mostly boring, especially as BEVs are getting better.

So what is left? Anything at all besides speed?

Speed could sell. Run some 200 mph laps with NASCAR. Or Indy cars. Or whatever. Win the Pike's Peak Hill Climb.

Vaporware doesn't sell.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 12105
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 pm

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:26 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 am
Back to automotive performance. Hydrogen cars today are wimpy. Changing that would open up the market place at the high end.

Do a NASCAR design. Build it. Test it. Words are easy. Deeds are hard.

"Fuel cells are slow." Change that.

An electric car has the record for the Pike's Peak Hill Climb. Make a fuel cell car that can at least compete.

Words don't convince. Deeds do.
(vaporware deleted)

Both vaporware at the moment and likely to remain so, but who knows.

But tell me, do you really believe that FCHEVs will fail in the market if someone doesn't build a super-zoomy version, and that it's impossible to do so? That's like saying that because the Prius has mediocre performance it will never sell in mass numbers, and no one can make a fast HEV. Toyota disproved the first, and Porsche the second.
Hydrogen is far more expensive than gasoline, and the cars are more expensive than ICEs.

Yes, true now, as I've stated over and over again, and that will have to change.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Probably can't fix that for a decade or more like three or more decades.
As noted numerous governments and companies disagree. No way to tell who's right at the moment.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Hydrogen is far more expensive than electric power, and fueling hydrogen is less convenient than charging in your garage (most of the time).
Except for all those who don't have a garage or for some other reason can't charge at home, which is a substantial minority (44% of households) in the U.S., a majority elsewhere.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Hydrogen is slow. Excluding vaporware, of course.

So's a Prius, relatively. The issue is whether it's too slow to attract customers. Do you think the new Mirai will be too slow? How about the BMW that will share the Mirai's stack - 170 hp from the stack, 374 hp total thanks to the battery and motor? The RAV4 Prime's only got 302 total, yet manages 0-60 in 5.7 sec. If the BMW manages that or a bit less, will that be fast enough (for a CUV)? It must be enough for you, as I believe the e-Tron's 5.5.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Quoting your source.
Battery electric vehicles still aren’t comparable with internal-combustion competition in terms of range and recharging, but they are pretty darned close and there’s no reason to believe it won’t equal out within the next 10 years.
If hydrogen doesn't have some reason to sell, it will not sell.

Uh huh, and we disagree on whether it does. It remains to be seen what customers think.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Cheap doesn't work. Not the cars, not the fuel. Probably never the fuel. The Prius was cheap on fuel, boring, but cheap. Market for cheap and boring... but fuel cells and hydrogen are not cheap, and there isn't much of a market for expensive and boring.
See numerous previous comments about present conditions being almost certain to change in the future.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Low emissions, but BEVs are better.
Yup.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Convenient, not hardly. Far more gas stations, and better DCQC coverage.


And where exactly are H2 stations' being built? Existing gas stations, whose gas pumps will become increasingly redundant as ICEs are replaced. But, barring a major improvement in BEV charging speeds (which also requires serious electrical infrastructure upgrades), BEVs don't fit the gas station business model. FCEVs do.

Now, QCs at fast food joints might work okay with BEVs, if the charging times can be brought down to the typical (non-drive-thru) dwell time, say 20 minutes or less. Sit-down restaurants are a better fit for QCs at the moment, though.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Range is mostly boring, especially as BEVs are getting better.
You may find range boring, unless you don't have enough, at which point you realize how important it is. If range isn't important, why are BEV ranges increasing? Why do you have an e-Tron instead of a 40kWh or smaller battery car?

Could it be that customers think range is important, as every single survey of potential BEV customers has confirmed? Was there some other reason that Tesla made a big deal of having the first 400 mile BEV? Of course, my 17 y.o. ICE can do that and more in pretty much any conditions, fuel anywhere in a couple of minutes and do it again ad nauseum, and cost something under 1/3rd of a Model S.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
So what is left? Anything at all besides speed?
See above.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Speed could sell. Run some 200 mph laps with NASCAR. Or Indy cars. Or whatever. Win the Pike's Peak Hill Climb.

Vaporware doesn't sell.
Oh, I don't know. Tesla's made a fair amount off FSD😆
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3819
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:45 am

GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Hydrogen is far more expensive than gasoline, and the cars are more expensive than ICEs.
Yes, true now, as I've stated over and over again, and that will have to change.
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Probably can't fix that for a decade or more like three or more decades.
As noted numerous governments and companies disagree. No way to tell who's right at the moment.
So? They are wrong. Look at the transition between oil and coal. Or any other past transition. Hydrogen cheaper than electric power will impact all of the economy before it gets to cars. This can not happen faster than several decades. Hydrogen has been promising for decades, and has yet to deliver.
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Hydrogen is far more expensive than electric power, and fueling hydrogen is less convenient than charging in your garage (most of the time).
Except for all those who don't have a garage or for some other reason can't charge at home, which is a substantial minority (44% of households) in the U.S., a majority elsewhere.
Curbside L1 or L2. Inductive. Solvable problem. BEVs from 50% to 100% will be much slower than the doublings before then.
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Hydrogen is slow. Excluding vaporware, of course.
So's a Prius, relatively.
Prius is cheap to fuel. Cheap and slow is acceptable to some. Hydrogen isn't cheap, so slow and expensive isn't forgivable.
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Quoting your source.
Battery electric vehicles still aren’t comparable with internal-combustion competition in terms of range and recharging, but they are pretty darned close and there’s no reason to believe it won’t equal out within the next 10 years.
If hydrogen doesn't have some reason to sell, it will not sell.
Uh huh, and we disagree on whether it does. It remains to be seen what customers think.
Hydrogen sells.. I mean leases.. only because of subsidized cars and subsidized fuel.

Electric cars are cheaper to operate than gas cars, and have other advantages. While subsidies help, subsidies are not the only reason why BEVs sell.

I'd like to see fuel cells developed for aviation, and cars are an ideal test bed. But without massive subsidies, isn't going to happen unless hydrogen can develop a niche. Range isn't compelling for an ICE driver, especially with the very limited numbers of hydrogen stations.

Where is hydrogen fuel cells niche in automotive? I don't see one.
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Range is mostly boring, especially as BEVs are getting better.
You may find range boring, unless you don't have enough, at which point you realize how important it is. If range isn't important, why are BEV ranges increasing? Why do you have an e-Tron instead of a 40kWh or smaller battery car?
My range needs are below average. Long long before the car needs a charge, I'm going to hear "Can we please find someplace to stop?" Bio-range is much shorter than car's range. At some range, the same will be true for almost everyone. Other than the iron-butt Cannonball Run types.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

Oilpan4
Posts: 1498
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Fri Jul 10, 2020 6:32 pm

Here's one. If the range of a first Gen leaf like mine from 2010 will serve the needs of most people, why do we need hydrogen cars?

GRA
Posts: 12105
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:04 pm

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:45 am
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 8:40 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Hydrogen is far more expensive than gasoline, and the cars are more expensive than ICEs.
Yes, true now, as I've stated over and over again, and that will have to change.
WetEV wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:50 pm
Probably can't fix that for a decade or more like three or more decades.
As noted numerous governments and companies disagree. No way to tell who's right at the moment.
So? They are wrong.
You're entitled to your opinion. Now all you have to do is convince the governments of China, Japan, S. Korea, Australia, NZ, Saudi Arabia, the EU as a whole as well as Germany, Denmark, and either Norway or Sweden, forget which, plus IIRC the UK, and California of course that you're right and they're wrong, just for starters, as they actually have skin in the game. Good luck.


WetEV wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:45 am
Look at the transition between oil and coal. Or any other past transition. Hydrogen cheaper than electric power will impact all of the economy before it gets to cars. This can not happen faster than several decades. Hydrogen has been promising for decades, and has yet to deliver.
And according to those same governments, is now ready to start delivering. Of course, it will take decades just like any energy transition.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:45 am


Curbside L1 or L2. Inductive. Solvable problem. BEVs from 50% to 100% will be much slower than the doublings before then.
You want to talk about long transition times, consider how long it will take to provide curbside charging at every single parking space, when concrete sidewalks typically last at least 50 years. Are you going to rip them all up early and replace them? How do you plan to pay for that? The Just announced EU plan, which I posted a link to above for its H2 aspects, also talks about building 1 million charging stations, apparently L1/L2 curbside ones, IIRR by 2030. But seeing as how there's something like 300 million people in the EU, even if they had half the car ownership rate of the U.S., one million chargers is just a drop in the bucket. And apparently the governments would have to pay for them, because I guess it's way too expensive to be profitable.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:45 am

Prius is cheap to fuel. Cheap and slow is acceptable to some. Hydrogen isn't cheap, so slow and expensive isn't forgivable.
Once again, you assume that the current situation will last forever. As has been pointed out to you again and again, it's recognized by all that the price of RE H2 needs to come down, and everyone's working to bring that about. If they succeed, H2 will be practical, and if they fail it won't.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:45 am

Hydrogen sells.. I mean leases.. only because of subsidized cars and subsidized fuel.

Electric cars are cheaper to operate than gas cars, and have other advantages. While subsidies help, subsidies are not the only reason why BEVs sell.

I'd like to see fuel cells developed for aviation, and cars are an ideal test bed. But without massive subsidies, isn't going to happen unless hydrogen can develop a niche. Range isn't compelling for an ICE driver, especially with the very limited numbers of hydrogen stations.

Where is hydrogen fuel cells niche in automotive? I don't see one.
I've laid it out at length. May happen, may not, but your contention that range isn't compelling for an ICE driver flies in the face of every survey of why people are reluctant to buy BEVs, as well as vehicle specs. Both the RAV4 Prime and Escape PHEV have ranges exceeding 500 miles, the Prime almost 600, despite the fact that gas stations are ubiquitous. Why waste the money and volume on such big tanks if customers didn't find range 'compelling'? See below.

WetEV wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:45 am


My range needs are below average. Long long before the car needs a charge, I'm going to hear "Can we please find someplace to stop?" Bio-range is much shorter than car's range. At some range, the same will be true for almost everyone. Other than the iron-butt Cannonball Run types.

See above. Of course, range isn't just valuable for driving x number of hours/miles non-stop; it also means you can do a weekend round trip without needing to fuel enroute. If I drive to Yosemite or Tahoe and back in my Forester, I don't need to stop for gas. I usually do anyway because I'm thrifty: gas is 20-30 cents cheaper/gal. in the central valley and it's just an extra 5-10 minutes, but it's entirely optional - if I'm tired or just want to get home soonest, I don't bother. Range allows flexibility and spontaneity for those who need or value those things. Which is exactly why ICEs beat out BEVs a century ago - people wanted to be able to tour, and do so without being forced to adhere to a rigid plan. ICEs permitted this, BEVs and their (then and current) infrastructure didn't/don't. They're improving, but still have a ways to go.
Last edited by GRA on Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 12105
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Fri Jul 10, 2020 11:29 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 6:32 pm
Here's one. If the range of a first Gen leaf like mine from 2010 will serve the needs of most people, why do we need hydrogen cars?

Because most customers don't find the range of a 24 kWh LEAF or similar adequate even before degradation. Why do you think far more expensive Teslas out sell cars like the 24 kWh LEAF? Why has the average size of battery packs steadily increased over the past ten years? After all, a small pack is cheaper and lighter, and one of the top three reasons people give for not buying a BEV is price. If people were comfortable with short range city cars they'd buy them. I drove one for a week in the late '90s, and while it was okay for what it was, it was simply incapable of doing all the things I needed a car to do, and I had no need for two cars.

Even most multi-car families, many of whom could make use of one such car, don't want them.
Last edited by GRA on Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 12105
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sat Jul 11, 2020 12:12 am

GCC:
Air Products, ACWA Power and NEOM sign agreement for $5B production facility for production and export of green ammonia to global markets for H2 delivery

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/0 ... -neom.html

Air Products, ACWA Power and NEOM signed an agreement for a $5-billion world-scale green-hydrogen-based ammonia production facility powered by renewable energy.

The project, which will be equally owned by the three partners, will be sited in NEOM, a new model for sustainable living located in the north west corner of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and will produce green ammonia for export to global markets. . . .

It is based on proven, world-class technology and will include the innovative integration of over four gigawatts of renewable power from solar, wind and storage; production of 650 tons per day of hydrogen by electrolysis using thyssenkrupp technology; production of nitrogen by air separation using Air Products technology; and production of 1.2 million tons per year of green ammonia using Haldor Topsoe technology. The project is scheduled to be onstream in 2025.

Air Products will be the exclusive off-taker of the green ammonia and intends to transport it around the world to be dissociated to produce green hydrogen for the transportation market. . . .
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 12105
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sat Jul 11, 2020 1:14 am

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:18 pm
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:53 pm
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:27 pm
That's been apparent for some time.

I see you repeat this tripe over and over again, and then I look at your signature line, and can only shake my head in dismay at the obvious hypocrisy (you and your friends driving all over the place in your gas vehicles, because you're afraid the chargers might not work, and to do it with a non-tesla to re-inforce the lack of chargers point). You even found a QC station in Ely, but still want to make excuses about how BEV's can't make the trip! You're dead-set on your "BEV's are not good enough" thesis and won't acknowledge the blinders.

You apparently take trips on the 'wing and a prayer' principle. I don't, not being willing to waste a bunch of driving that may require me to turn around and abandon or waste a great deal of my vacation/recreation time, when there are easily forseeable single-point failures en route. I also carry a spare tire, jack and lug wrench and at least a gallon of water, flares, a Qt. of oil, duct tape, tools, emergency blanket in the car on trips, as I may be many miles off pavement with no phone service or need to help at accidents. I take it you'd consider such precautions unnecessary. Not for me, but then I am an old Boy Scout, and you know the Scout motto, don't you?

As for doing it in a non-Tesla, of course. Teslas cost more than I'm willing to pay, in addition to having features I don't want and a demonstrated lack of Quality Control that doesn't imply long-term reliability, even if I were willing to ignore that no one is currently willing to warranty a battery's capacity for more than 8 years, and that's to only 70% of an at best marginal if not completely inadequate initial range.

Me driving all over the place? I detailed exactly how much I've driven this decade. Tell us, how far have you driven in that time? Flown? Housing situation? I don't claim to be environmentally pure. Are you?

By the way, my moaning about the H2 dispensers was about the refueling time (FC's primary selling point), not about whether or not they'd work. It's about how H2 is too slow and _expensive_ of a solution to ever reach mass adoption.

In other words, having multiple dispensers solves the problem even in the unlikely event that there's no technical solution, which apparently there is given the new standard.
I too carry an emergency blanket, tape, wrench set, rags, bottled water, jack, fix-a-flat kit, and a portable inflator.
If I hit something that needs the tire replaced, then I've done something really stupid. If I hit two nails, the fix-a-flat can cover it, while a spare tire won't.

I drive 20,000 miles a year, but most of it commuting miles (because my wife works in the opposite direction, so our combined miles would be the same regardless of where we live. So we chose to live where the schools are good. I vacation travel about as much as you do, ~2000 miles annually.

I admit that Lassen was the most out of the way I've gone so far, but it's not like I'm done taking trips. I don't use mass transit, because my EV's pollute (I pay a little bit more for SCE's 100% renewables electricity supply) much less than the bus (although they've begun adding more battery busses lately, so it might all balance out soon). And having kids preclude me from biking everywhere, especially considering that I'm more likely to die on a bicycle on these city roads.

Look, I've already said before I could care less how you justify your life. My major beef is how you take your pre-conceived notions about BEV's and actively socialize it, discouraging people from seriously considering BEV's and directly benefitting from the switch. You are part of the problem by being a cognitive speedbump.

I'd written a reply to this and thought I'd posted it, but it seems to have disappeared. In it I pointed out your own shortcomings re environmental purity, among them by living where you have to commute by car (one of you needs to change jobs, no matter how inconvenient and disruptive it might be; the environment demands it). I'm guessing you also live in a detached, single-family home, the most energy and resource intensive firm of housing there is.And then there's your biggest environmental purity failure, with the longest lasting environmental impact of all: having kids. You're in no position to criticize anyone else re their environmental decisions.


BTW, among the 'pre-conceived notions' that you seem to criticize me for is my unwillingness to depend on single QCs for roadtrips owing to a lack of redundancy. Tell me, is DaveinOlyWa, now driving I believe his 5th LEAF, also suffering from 'pre-conceived notions' when he recently wrote in the 'Electrify America Network's that:.
I was supposed to be on day one of a trip crossing the Cascades to Spokane, down to Bend OR and back up the Oregon Coast. But 40% of the EA chademo's I had planned to check out were recently confirmed as broken (some not so recent!) with no good check ins or comments from EA other than to acknowledge they are down so that was one reason I am heading to another trip instead
Or you could check out Doug wants a Leafs lists about the EA Ogallala CHAdeMO appearing and disappearing from operational status, as he's deoendent on it to visit family. As you may or may not know, EA sites have just one CHAdeMO. Was Doug (3rd LEAF) Falso suffering from Preconceived notion?
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Sat Jul 11, 2020 1:54 am

GRA wrote:
Sat Jul 11, 2020 1:14 am
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:18 pm
GRA wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:53 pm


That's been apparent for some time.





You apparently take trips on the 'wing and a prayer' principle. I don't, not being willing to waste a bunch of driving that may require me to turn around and abandon or waste a great deal of my vacation/recreation time, when there are easily forseeable single-point failures en route. I also carry a spare tire, jack and lug wrench and at least a gallon of water, flares, a Qt. of oil, duct tape, tools, emergency blanket in the car on trips, as I may be many miles off pavement with no phone service or need to help at accidents. I take it you'd consider such precautions unnecessary. Not for me, but then I am an old Boy Scout, and you know the Scout motto, don't you?

As for doing it in a non-Tesla, of course. Teslas cost more than I'm willing to pay, in addition to having features I don't want and a demonstrated lack of Quality Control that doesn't imply long-term reliability, even if I were willing to ignore that no one is currently willing to warranty a battery's capacity for more than 8 years, and that's to only 70% of an at best marginal if not completely inadequate initial range.

Me driving all over the place? I detailed exactly how much I've driven this decade. Tell us, how far have you driven in that time? Flown? Housing situation? I don't claim to be environmentally pure. Are you?





In other words, having multiple dispensers solves the problem even in the unlikely event that there's no technical solution, which apparently there is given the new standard.
I too carry an emergency blanket, tape, wrench set, rags, bottled water, jack, fix-a-flat kit, and a portable inflator.
If I hit something that needs the tire replaced, then I've done something really stupid. If I hit two nails, the fix-a-flat can cover it, while a spare tire won't.

I drive 20,000 miles a year, but most of it commuting miles (because my wife works in the opposite direction, so our combined miles would be the same regardless of where we live. So we chose to live where the schools are good. I vacation travel about as much as you do, ~2000 miles annually.

I admit that Lassen was the most out of the way I've gone so far, but it's not like I'm done taking trips. I don't use mass transit, because my EV's pollute (I pay a little bit more for SCE's 100% renewables electricity supply) much less than the bus (although they've begun adding more battery busses lately, so it might all balance out soon). And having kids preclude me from biking everywhere, especially considering that I'm more likely to die on a bicycle on these city roads.

Look, I've already said before I could care less how you justify your life. My major beef is how you take your pre-conceived notions about BEV's and actively socialize it, discouraging people from seriously considering BEV's and directly benefitting from the switch. You are part of the problem by being a cognitive speedbump.

I'd written a reply to this and thought I'd posted it, but it seems to have disappeared. In it I pointed out your own shortcomings re environmental purity, among them by living where you have to commute by car (one of you needs to change jobs, no matter how inconvenient and disruptive it might be; the environment demands it). I'm guessing you also live in a detached, single-family home, the most energy and resource intensive firm of housing there is.And then there's your biggest environmental purity failure, with the longest lasting environmental impact of all: having kids. You're in no position to criticize anyone else re their environmental decisions.


BTW, among the 'pre-conceived notions' that you seem to criticize me for is my unwillingness to depend on single QCs for roadtrips owing to a lack of redundancy. Tell me, is DaveinOlyWa, now driving I believe his 5th LEAF, also suffering from 'pre-conceived notions' when he recently wrote in the 'Electrify America Network's that:.
I was supposed to be on day one of a trip crossing the Cascades to Spokane, down to Bend OR and back up the Oregon Coast. But 40% of the EA chademo's I had planned to check out were recently confirmed as broken (some not so recent!) with no good check ins or comments from EA other than to acknowledge they are down so that was one reason I am heading to another trip instead
Or you could check out Doug wants a Leafs lists about the EA Ogallala CHAdeMO appearing and disappearing from operational status, as he's deoendent on it to visit family. As you may or may not know, EA sites have just one CHAdeMO. Was Doug (3rd LEAF) Falso suffering from Preconceived notion?
I minimize my environmental impact where I can. And you're the one bringing up "environmental purity". It's just a deflection tactic you're using to hide your hypocrisy.

The other leaf owners are able to successfully deal with an occasional downed qc station just fine. They don't let it affect the remaining 95% of the time the leaf benefits them. Just like how you're able to deal with an occasional flat tire or car that won't start and needs a jump, a few hiccups along the way isn't the end of the world. Stop making excuses for being an EV hater. Saying that you support electric vehicles, while simultaneously spreading FUD about BEV's and espousing the promises of H2 as being "comparable" is dishonest.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”