Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
That post by its self proves why Hydrogen is a Rube Goldberg solution for a problem easily solved by batteries.

I thought a year or 2 ago the next big thing in fuel cells was going to be needing little or no platinum group metals. Guess that didn't pan out.
 
Which post are you referring to? Pt requirements have been radically reduced, to the point where it's the same amount as a catalytic converter (see upthread). But reducing it further will lower the cost even more while reducing sourcing issues, so of course you'll do so if it's cost-effective.

GCC:
Rolls-Royce and Daimler Truck AG plan cooperation on stationary fuel-cell systems


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/05/20200527-daimlerrolls.html


. . . Daimler Truck AG and the Volvo Group plan to start large-scale production of heavy-duty fuel-cell commercial vehicles for demanding and heavy long-haul applications in the second half of the decade. However, the fuel-cell systems for stationary applications can be produced in series by the planned joint venture between Daimler Truck AG and the Volvo Group at an earlier stage, as the specific requirements for use in transport on public roads do not apply. . . .
 
GCC:
Phase I SBIR program project selections include efforts in hydrogen and fuel cell R&D technologies


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/05/20200528-sbir.html


. . . The following three projects, supported by the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office, will address hydrogen R&D challenges and advance progress in hydrogen production from wind power:

Alchemr will develop and test a hydrogen production system that can enable chemical and fuels manufacturing as well as increased use of offshore wind energy without the need for major transmission infrastructure investment. The new anion exchange membrane electrolyzers will enable fuels and chemicals to be manufactured at off-shore locations. This will enable wind energy to be utilized without requiring major transmission infrastructure to be built and create new revenues and jobs for US industry.

Giner will develop a cost model and design requirements for a wind-to-hydrogen generation system and identify the cost impacts associated with generating and transmitting hydrogen from offshore windfarms instead of electricity.

Greenway Energy will develop and test a new, low-cost, and efficient electrolysis system that can be directly coupled with wind turbine power. The electrolyzer will demonstrate long term performance and lifetime with minimal maintenance and operating costs.
 
Both GCC:
European HYFLEXPOWER project to demo first integrated power-to-X-to-power hydrogen gas turbine


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/06/20200601-hyflexpower.html


RE to H2 storage to CHP.

. . . Engie Solutions has been entrusted with producing energy at the Smurfit Kappa site in Saillat-sur-Vienne, France. At the site, Engie Solutions operates a 12 MWe combined heat and power facility which produces steam for the manufacturing company’s requirements. The conversion of an existing infrastructure has the advantage of significantly lower costs and minimized lead time compared to a greenfield site. The project will develop and demonstrate an advanced plant concept that will contribute to modernizing and improving the factory’s existing power plant.

During two demonstration campaigns, the facility will be powered by a mix of natural gas and hydrogen, ultimately aiming for up to 100% hydrogen operation. In this regard, the overall goal of the HYFLEXPOWER project is to test an entirely green hydrogen-based power supply for a completely carbon-free energy mix. This would save up to 65,000 tons of CO2 per year for a SGT-400 at baseload operation. . . .

The project’s total budget is close to €15.2 million, of which €10.5 million will be contributed entirely by the European Union under the Horizon 2020 program.

Officially launched on 1 May 2020, the project will last 4 years and will be split into several phases. . . .




ITM Power establishing subsidiary to build, own and operate H2 refueling stations


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/06/20200601-itm.html


ITM Power is establishing ITM Motive as a separate, wholly owned subsidiary for building, owning and operating a portfolio of hydrogen refueling stations in the UK. On establishment, ITM Motive will own and operate a network of eight publicly accessible hydrogen refueling stations, which will expand to 11 by the end of 2020. Each station incorporates an ITM Power electrolyzer and a Linde IC90 compression, storage and dispensing system.

ITM Power has successfully sourced both UK and EU funding to support the build and deployment costs, and developed a siting agreement with Shell for deployment on their forecourts in the UK. . . .
 
GCC:
Nikola orders enough electrolysis equipment from Nel to produce 40,000 kg of hydrogen per day


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/06/20200604-nikola.html

Nikola Corporation, which is making its public-trading debut on the NASDAQ today (NKLA), signed a purchase order with Nel ASA for 85-megawatt alkaline electrolyzers to support five of the world’s first 8-tonne-per-day hydrogen fueling stations. Together, these electrolyzers may produce more than 40,000 kgs of hydrogen each day. . . .

The company expects to generate revenue by 2021 with the rollout of its Nikola Tre Class 8 BEV, followed by the Nikola Two Class 8 FCEV starting in 2023. The build out of hydrogen fueling stations will serve Nikola customers’ fleets, such as Anheuser-Busch. . . .
 
GCC:
[youtube]UC Irvine analysis finds renewable hydrogen sector could reach price parity with conventional fuel by mid- to late 2020s[/youtube]


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/06/20200606-uci.html


The California Energy Commission has released a UC Irvine roadmap for the buildout and deployment of renewable hydrogen production plants in California to support policy decisions and inform stakeholders.

The study concludes that, with appropriate policy support, the renewable hydrogen sector can reach self-sustainability (price point at parity with conventional fuel on a fuel-economy adjusted basis) by the mid- to late-2020s.

The roadmap defines actions needed to support an optimal deployment of renewable hydrogen production plants needed to meet the growing demand for renewable hydrogen. The analysis builds upon insights from early market development and a series of analyses developed for the roadmap on current and future technology costs, feedstock supply and cost, siting and factory buildout, and demand growth.

The roadmap effort developed several scenarios for the growth in renewable hydrogen demand through 2050. Although transportation is expected to be the primary source of demand for renewable hydrogen, petroleum refining, power generation and storage, heat, industrial processes, and ammonia production are all additional sources of potential demand. This analysis projects a high-case demand for renewable hydrogen of more than 400 million metric tons per year in 2030 and more than 10 times that amount in 2050. . . .

The analysis projects plant gate-to-dispenser costs to decline from around $16 per kilogram (excluding subsidies and credits) at present to a midpoint estimate of $6 by 2025, declining to below $5 by 2050 with a low-end estimate of $4 per kilogram. The biggest factor in the cost decline is increased station utilization (fuel dispenses as a fraction of full capacity) with economies of scale and technology progress also contributing.

The analysis also found that the dispensed price of hydrogen is likely to meet an interim target based on fuel-economy-adjusted price parity with gasoline of $6 to $8.50 per kilogram by 2025. Furthermore, reaching the long-term DOE target of $4 per kilogram is within the forecast band for 2050, but the base forecast is around $5 per kilogram.
 
smkettner said:
Once again hydrogen is just ten years away if the government keeps funding these projects.

What a waste of tax money. 5 years just to get close to the price per mile of gasoline and that ASSUMES someone (other than government) is willing to invest the significant capital to build the hydrogen production facilities needed to bring the cost of hydrogen down.
 
GRA said:
Five to ten (less in Europe), kinda like BEVs if the government keeps funding them and QC infrastructure.

Hydrogen powered cars are a lot more than five years away, in any sort of significant numbers. Say 0.1% or more. BEVs have been there for almost a decade.

BEVs can take over most driving, other than long distance. Hydrogen might take over the couple of percent of miles that are on long trips.

Maybe.

Or Al-air or better Li-ion or ...
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
Five to ten (less in Europe), kinda like BEVs if the government keeps funding them and QC infrastructure.

Hydrogen powered cars are a lot more than five years away, in any sort of significant numbers. Say 0.1% or more. BEVs have been there for almost a decade.

BEVs can take over most driving, other than long distance. Hydrogen might take over the couple of percent of miles that are on long trips.

Maybe.

Or Al-air or better Li-ion or ...

Hydrogen cars will always be at least 5 years away.
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
Five to ten (less in Europe), kinda like BEVs if the government keeps funding them and QC infrastructure.

Hydrogen powered cars are a lot more than five years away, in any sort of significant numbers. Say 0.1% or more. BEVs have been there for almost a decade.

BEVs can take over most driving, other than long distance. Hydrogen might take over the couple of percent of miles that are on long trips.

Maybe.

Or Al-air or better Li-ion or ...


FCEVs are here now, albeit in small numbers due to high prices but more importantly, lack of infrastructure and especially high fuel prices. The last is the biggest problem: Solving it will make them more commercially viable, which will in turn lead to greater production of cars, reducing their price, and also buildout of infrastructure.

Which is to say, exactly the same trajectory that BEVs have taken but lagging by several years, and both are still too expensive to be mass market without subsidies.

FCEV trucks/buses/trains are more likely to be viable sooner than private cars, but as they generally use multiple car stacks that can only help economies of scale.

Of course, there's no guarantee that the reduction in renewable H2 costs will happen, just as there's no guarantee that battery prices and energy densities will improve enough that they're competitive with ICEs, which is why I believe we need to continue supporting R&D on both ZEV techs.
 
GRA said:
FCEVs are here now, albeit in small numbers due to high prices but more importantly, lack of infrastructure and especially high fuel prices. The last is the biggest problem: Solving it will make them more commercially viable, which will in turn lead to greater production of cars, reducing their price, and also buildout of infrastructure.

Hydrogen isn't going to get cheap anytime soon. If ever. Most useful as a feedstock for other things, like fertilizer.

GRA said:
Which is to say, exactly the same trajectory that BEVs have taken but lagging by several years, and both are still too expensive to be mass market without subsidies.

A major difference is that BEVs would still sell today with zero subsidies, and hydrogen powered vehicles would not. Sure, BEVs are not mass market yet. Sill doubling sales every two to three years. Mass market time is coming as the cost of batteries, the energy density of batteries and the durability of batteries keep improving.
 
Electric vehicles don't have a lack of infrastructure. In the United States electricity is almost everywhere.

There's no shortage of hydrogen or hydrogen production. One of the excuses floated by fan boys is something the the effect of "there's no efficient way to make hydrogen".
Millions of tons of hydrogen is used to make ammonia, mostly for fertilizer every year in the US alone. If there was some cheap, clean super efficient renewable way to make hydrogen the Petrochemical industry would be all over it.

Should just kill the hydrogen subsidy and put it all on electrics, or towards encouraging domestic mining of battery materials.

Hydrogen fuel cells have had around 60 years to do something and they haven't.
Lithium battery tech is closer to half the age of fuel cells and have already blown by and are leaving fuel cells in the past for daily driver grocery getter applications.
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
FCEVs are here now, albeit in small numbers due to high prices but more importantly, lack of infrastructure and especially high fuel prices. The last is the biggest problem: Solving it will make them more commercially viable, which will in turn lead to greater production of cars, reducing their price, and also buildout of infrastructure.

Hydrogen isn't going to get cheap anytime soon. If ever. Most useful as a feedstock for other things, like fertilizer.


That is exactly the issue discussed in the article, and while it's certainly not guaranteed, it does appear to be possible in the next 5-10 years, so it depends on your definition of 'soon'. As BEVs are forecast to reach price parity with ICEs in the same time frame, 'soon' appears to be the same for both.


WetEV said:
GRA said:
Which is to say, exactly the same trajectory that BEVs have taken but lagging by several years, and both are still too expensive to be mass market without subsidies.



A major difference is that BEVs would still sell today with zero subsidies, and hydrogen powered vehicles would not. Sure, BEVs are not mass market yet. Sill doubling sales every two to three years. Mass market time is coming as the cost of batteries, the energy density of batteries and the durability of batteries keep improving.


Some expensive BEVs would still sell without subsidies (or mandates), but not enough to see any significant growth. Otherwise there would be no need for either. Also see https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=30946&p=584860#p584860
 
GRA said:
WetEV said:
A major difference is that BEVs would still sell today with zero subsidies, and hydrogen powered vehicles would not. Sure, BEVs are not mass market yet. Sill doubling sales every two to three years. Mass market time is coming as the cost of batteries, the energy density of batteries and the durability of batteries keep improving.
Some expensive BEVs would still sell without subsidies (or mandates), but not enough to see any significant growth. Otherwise there would be no need for either.

If there had never been any subsidies or mandates, the EV growth would have been slower, but would still happen. Batteries got better and cheaper driven by uses other than cars until after 2010. The rational for subsidies and/or mandates is to speed the process.

Hydrogen fuel cell powered cars might happen on their own if and only if hydrogen gets cheap. And that's not even going to start for "5 to 10 years".
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
WetEV said:
A major difference is that BEVs would still sell today with zero subsidies, and hydrogen powered vehicles would not. Sure, BEVs are not mass market yet. Sill doubling sales every two to three years. Mass market time is coming as the cost of batteries, the energy density of batteries and the durability of batteries keep improving.
Some expensive BEVs would still sell without subsidies (or mandates), but not enough to see any significant growth. Otherwise there would be no need for either.

If there had never been any subsidies or mandates, the EV growth would have been slower, but would still happen. Batteries got better and cheaper driven by uses other than cars until after 2010. The rational for subsidies and/or mandates is to speed the process.

Hydrogen fuel cell powered cars might happen on their own if and only if hydrogen gets cheap. And that's not even going to start for "5 to 10 years".


Cheap is relative. What the study forecasts is that H2 will be comparably priced with gas on a per mile basis in the U.S. in 5 to 10 years, which means that it will be competitive in areas with higher gas prices sooner. Always assuming that the forecast is accurate and the required steps are taken, neither of which is ever guaranteed.

I have serious doubts about your claim that (P)EV growth would have happened without subsidies or mandates this time. Sure, Nissan and GM might have been able to sell a few LEAFs and Volts to Hollywood celebs and the like, and Fisker might have done so too, but would Tesla ever have appeared let alone survived to produce the Model S (and maybe the Roadster too) without government funds?

As I was typing this sitting outside, a Clarity FCEV just drove past. Which reminds me, during the stay-at-home I got bored walking my usual evening exercise route, so explored side streets. On one of them I found a house with two ZEVs, an e-tron and a Clarity FCEV. In the past 8 years or so it's the third house with two ZEVs or PEVs I've seen in my neighborhood.

The first one, some years back, had one of the 2nd Gen Toyota FCEVs based on the Highlander, the FCHV-ADV, and a LEAF. I have no idea where they fueled the FCEV, as this was before any of the retail stations in the area opened. They also had an ICE pickup and another CUV IIRR. The FCEV presumably went back at the end of the lease; they've still got the LEAF plus the other cars.

The other household had a gen 1 Volt for several years, until it was joined by an S P100D a year or two back.

One other household replaced their gen 1 LEAF with a 40kWh gen 2. They've always charged these via L1, using an extension cord running out a window, which must make their utility bill shoot up during the heating season. I'd have to do the same, which is one of the reasons I don't find BEVs a good match for my needs. My landlord did promise he'd put in a charging circuit if I got one, but as he'd have to replace the service entrance with a higher-rated one in addition to adding the wiring and breaker, I'm skeptical.
 
GRA said:
WetEV said:
If there had never been any subsidies or mandates, the EV growth would have been slower, but would still happen. Batteries got better and cheaper driven by uses other than cars until after 2010. The rational for subsidies and/or mandates is to speed the process.

Hydrogen fuel cell powered cars might happen on their own if and only if hydrogen gets cheap. And that's not even going to start for "5 to 10 years".


Cheap is relative. What the study forecasts is that H2 will be comparably priced with gas on a per mile basis in the U.S. in 5 to 10 years, which means that it will be competitive in areas with higher gas prices sooner. Always assuming that the forecast is accurate and the required steps are taken, neither of which is ever guaranteed.

I have serious doubts about your claim that (P)EV growth would have happened without subsidies or mandates this time. Sure, Nissan and GM might have been able to sell a few LEAFs and Volts to Hollywood celebs and the like, and Fisker might have done so too, but would Tesla ever have appeared let alone survived to produce the Model S (and maybe the Roadster too) without government funds?
Consider something you might know about, EV conversions. Take a car, usually older with a blown motor, buy it cheap, and put batteries and an electric motor into it.

Did you follow that scene much?

At first, it was hobby projects. Then various places started offering parts for common conversions, such as VW beetles. Then various places selling predone conversions. For one place, it was all electric VW beetles. For another, it was all Toyota Corollas.

Battery prices kept falling, so the cost of a conversion kept falling. As the volume of conversions kept rising, parts needed became more available and cheaper. And as places started selling predones, you didn't need to be a geek to get one. I don't have a good source for statistics, but it went from it was easy for me to know of everyone that owned an EV on the West Coast to far too many to count over a decade. Perhaps a hundred conversions. Or more. Subsidies and mandates didn't apply to conversions.

The above is history pre-2008. Next is speculation.

A possible next step is the one Tesla did with the Roadster. Buy new cars without engine, and make it electric. Without the mandate that created the EV1 and expanded the market and investment for EVs, this wouldn't have happened when it did, but it seems to me like it was going to happen even with no subsidies. Sooner or later the profitable business of converting VW bugs is going to run out of VW bugs to convert. Then what? Buy the tooling from VW Mexico or Brazil when they phased out the Beetle? Maybe, if they could get it cheap enough. Buy Fiat Spider bodies from Fiat? Or something else?

Or perhaps it happens a different way. EV dragsters (such as White Zombie) were showing up gas cars on drag strips. Perhaps someone like Porsche decided to make a car that could hold it's own against the EVs... by engineering an EV. Initially as a halo car and very spendy, but as the demand would grow and the cost to produce would fall, volume would build... And competition would show up.

The path to market for EVs with no subsidies or mandates is from the top end. When a $80k converted car can beat up a $1million "super car" on the drag strip, someone's going to figure it out.

Next, price of EVs is going to fall as cost to produce EV declines with increasing production and as competition increases. Sure, first BEVs start as very expensive cars. But they don't stay there.

Hydrogen relies on subsidies and mandates completely.

I'll likely never see an FCEV beyond several I've seen at University Engineering exhibits.
 
Hey Ford:
Mustang vs Electric Mustang.
One is loud.
One is fast.
Wonder what just inspired Ford to make an electric mustang?

https://youtu.be/GECr7BDb3oM
 
Back
Top