Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

[GRA]

If you think electric vehicles (BEV, FCEV, or even PHEV) are the means to a zero-emissions future, then hybrid vehicles will naturally have to be excluded, because 100% of their miles driven are through the energy derived from burning gasoline/diesel.

As all currently available FCEVs are hybrids of one form or another, your claim fails to hold up. Oh, and what if a PEV's battery is charged using on or off-board electricity solely generated by fossil fuels?

Well pardon me for failing to be specific enough. I thought the context would've been pretty clear that the only hybrids being excluded are the non-plugin combustion "cars". So please focus on the point and reconsider according to:

If you think electric vehicles (BEV, FCEV, or even PHEV) are the means to a zero-emissions future, then combustion-hybrid non-plugin automotive vehicles will naturally have to be excluded, because 100% of their miles drive are through the energy derived from burning gasoline/diesel.


And if some idiot wants to pay $6/gal of gasoline to charge their EV with 50 cents worth of electricity (through a generator), just because they can, that's their prerogative. That doesn't change the fact that the vehicle itself can run entirely on electricity pulled from the sun (like mine). Something that a combustion-hybrid-non-plugin car can NEVER do.

Who says you've got to pay to run your own generator? If you charge your car mostly at home at night, as the majority currently do, especially off-peak, odds are the grid electricity is substantially or even, depending on where you live, solely being generated by burning fossil fuels. 40% or so of the world's PEVs are in China, and in 2021 China got 51.8% of its electricity by coal and another 4.5% from NG. Most of the baseload is coal, plus nukes.

Not that you've got to travel to China:

Coal-fired power plants account for nearly all of West Virginia's electricity generation, and the 10 largest power plants in the state, by capacity, are coal-fired. Most of the rest of the state's electricity generation is from hydroelectric, wind, and natural gas-fired facilities. West Virginia is one of only a half-dozen states east of the Mississippi River that does not have any nuclear power plants. . . .

West Virginia typically generates more electricity than it consumes. Although more than two-fifths of West Virginia households use electricity as their primary source for home heating, retail sales to all customers account for less than half of West Virginia's net electricity generation. As a result, West Virginia is a net supplier of electricity to the regional grid. West Virginia is a leader in the nation in net interstate sales of electricity.

https://www.energywv.org/wv-energy-prof ... acilities.


None of which is to suggest that PEVs and FC(H)EVs aren't part of the means to a zero emission future, as they're essential to it, but as usual the devil's in the details. Oh, and then there are combustion ICEs and/or hybrids which burn H2, and then. . . .

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

As all currently available FCEVs are hybrids of one form or another, your claim fails to hold up. Oh, and what if a PEV's battery is charged using on or off-board electricity solely generated by fossil fuels?

Well pardon me for failing to be specific enough. I thought the context would've been pretty clear that the only hybrids being excluded are the non-plugin combustion "cars". So please focus on the point and reconsider according to:

If you think electric vehicles (BEV, FCEV, or even PHEV) are the means to a zero-emissions future, then combustion-hybrid non-plugin automotive vehicles will naturally have to be excluded, because 100% of their miles drive are through the energy derived from burning gasoline/diesel.


And if some idiot wants to pay $6/gal of gasoline to charge their EV with 50 cents worth of electricity (through a generator), just because they can, that's their prerogative. That doesn't change the fact that the vehicle itself can run entirely on electricity pulled from the sun (like mine). Something that a combustion-hybrid-non-plugin car can NEVER do.

Who says you've got to pay to run your own generator? If you charge your car mostly at home at night, as the majority currently do, especially off-peak, odds are the grid electricity is substantially or even, depending on where you live, solely being generated by burning fossil fuels. 40% or so of the world's PEVs are in China, and in 2021 China got 51.8% of its electricity by coal and another 4.5% from NG. Most of the baseload is coal, plus nukes.

Not that you've got to travel to China:

Coal-fired power plants account for nearly all of West Virginia's electricity generation, and the 10 largest power plants in the state, by capacity, are coal-fired. Most of the rest of the state's electricity generation is from hydroelectric, wind, and natural gas-fired facilities. West Virginia is one of only a half-dozen states east of the Mississippi River that does not have any nuclear power plants. . . .

West Virginia typically generates more electricity than it consumes. Although more than two-fifths of West Virginia households use electricity as their primary source for home heating, retail sales to all customers account for less than half of West Virginia's net electricity generation. As a result, West Virginia is a net supplier of electricity to the regional grid. West Virginia is a leader in the nation in net interstate sales of electricity.

https://www.energywv.org/wv-energy-prof ... acilities.


None of which is to suggest that PEVs and FC(H)EVs aren't part of the means to a zero emission future, as they're essential to it, but as usual the devil's in the details. Oh, and then there are combustion ICEs and/or hybrids which burn H2, and then. . . .

None of the existing combustion ICE's and/or hybrids (except for prototypes and experimental vehicles) can burn H2.

And thank you for showing your true colors as you continue to parrot the fossil fuel talking points. Although coal and natural gas power plants are inherently more efficient in both electricity production and emissions control than an ICE car, AND that the grid is getting cleaner as more coal power plants get decommissioned (even China's coal contribution is down from 5 years ago), YOU live in California, not West Virginia nor China. The devil might be in the details, but choosing the worst case scenario to illustrate a niche condition is an open window into your mindset.

Since we first started arguing over 5 years ago, you've probably already traveled 20,000 miles (4k per year) on gasoline, assuming you drive gently and get about 27mpg, you would've burned 740 gallons of gasoline in that time, producing 18,500 lbs of CO2 (20lbs for the combustion, and another 5lbs for the refining of crude into gasoline but ignores delivery emissions) during that time. Building a BEV produces 6,000lbs more CO2 than building a gas car. Congratulations you've found a way to pollute more in your 5 years of solo biking and bus-riding than I have in my 75,000 miles (CA's grid gives me the option to choose which power producer gets my utility dollars) of raising a family.

Yes, we need to clean up the grid, but that's not a reason to keep ICE around.

Having said all that, this has been a series segues after segues from why Toyota was just throwing good money after bad by investigating combustion H2 engines.

[oxothuk]

If you charge your car mostly at home at night, as the majority currently do, especially off-peak, odds are the grid electricity is substantially or even, depending on where you live, solely being generated by burning fossil fuels.

Another good reason for building more nukes.

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

If you charge your car mostly at home at night, as the majority currently do, especially off-peak, odds are the grid electricity is substantially or even, depending on where you live, solely being generated by burning fossil fuels.

Another good reason for building more nukes.

Both hydro and geothermal works at night as well.
And EV's charge whenever electricity is cheapest.
If it becomes cheaper during the duck-curve around noon, then charge them at that time.
No need to build more nukes. Instead, utility companies need to pass along demand pricing to their customers.

[LeftieBiker]

When we charge at night (which we usually do) we are guaranteeing that the power we use comes from the old hydro dam 3/4 of a mile from us. Rather than juggling loads, though, we need to build solar powered charging stations that use panels on office building, factories...wherever people park their EVs while working.

[SageBrush]

Instead, utility companies need to pass along demand pricing to their customers.

'Demand' pricing is a label used in the industry to refer to per kW charges.
You probably mean a TOU schedule, something I agree with 100%

[Oils4AsphaultOnly]

Instead, utility companies need to pass along demand pricing to their customers.

'Demand' pricing is a label used in the industry to refer to per kW charges.
You probably mean a TOU schedule, something I agree with 100%

Oh right. And sort-of. TOU is the current demand shifting scheme where the price of electricity is dependent on blocks of time, which are divided into the simple categories of peak, off-peak, and super-off-peak. I meant something closer to market pricing, where electricity prices vary by the hour (or every 2 hrs) based on predicted supply of solar and wind. That kind of mechanism doesn't really help any of the existing customers, but would allow EV's to work double-duty as overflow energy storage as they would sop up electricity when production outpaces demand. That's why my original name for it was "demand pricing".

[SageBrush]

^^ I like it !

[Marktm]

Oh right. And sort-of. TOU is the current demand shifting scheme where the price of electricity is dependent on blocks of time, which are divided into the simple categories of peak, off-peak, and super-off-peak. I meant something closer to market pricing, where electricity prices vary by the hour (or every 2 hrs) based on predicted supply of solar and wind. That kind of mechanism doesn't really help any of the existing customers, but would allow EV's to work double-duty as overflow energy storage as they would sop up electricity when production outpaces demand. That's why my original name for it was "demand pricing".

The optimal in energy pricing was the "Griddy" contract that was available until the "Texas freeze" that demonstrated how dangerous such a contract can be with ERCOT's pricing schemes. Many had to pay 10,000's of $$s with the $9/kWh (plus) that ERCOT now has reduced (big deal!) to $4/kWh . Such contracts with battery storage similar to the upper tier of EVs combined with substantial home/business solar would have made money instead - in many cases (my case in particular). AND supported the grid effectively if the utility companies get out of the way. Just IMO.

[SageBrush]

The optimal in energy pricing was the "Griddy" contract that was available until the "Texas freeze" that demonstrated how dangerous such a contract can be with ERCOT's pricing schemes. Many had to pay 10,000's of $$s with the $9/kWh (plus) that ERCOT now has reduced (big deal!) to $4/kWh . Such contracts with battery storage similar to the upper tier of EVs combined with substantial home/business solar would have made money instead - in many cases (my case in particular). AND supported the grid effectively if the utility companies get out of the way. Just IMO.

Battery storage will not last long during a freeze if you live in an uninsulated shanty Those folks are used to wasting thousands of kWh a month during *normal* winters to stay warm, and they have NO idea what a kWh is, let alone its price. Welcome to Texas.