Are hydrogen tanks superior to batteries?

I found this on H2USA.ORG

"Capital costs in California, where hydrogen infrastructure is being built out today, are estimated from $0.9 million for a 100- to 170 kg/day station, to $1.4 million for a 250 kg/day station for early (2013) market fueling. For stations built in 2015 to 2017, the capital cost is estimated to be $0.9 million for a 250 kg/day station and $1.5 to $2.0 million for a 400 to 500 kg/day station."

Interestingly, the 500kg/day implies about 100 cars a day which is a figure I arrived at independently.
 
Do I have to explain this AGAIN?

100 cars a day are served, but those cars will not come back for another ten days so a single dispenser will meet the fuel needs of 1,000 cars. If there are six dispensers, that means 6,000 cars can be supplied. It's really very simple.

As to the high cost of hydrogen, I doubt if that is going to worry many able to afford these cars. As the number of FCVs falls we can expect economies of scale to kick in and the cost to fall anyway. There is no shortage of either the water it is extracted from or the energy required to crack it. If you are that worried at the cost, you can even make it yourself and then apart from the capital cost of the equipment it is free.

Why assume the cost of the stuff is set in stone?
 
Here's an interesting idea. Get rid of the compressor:

https://www.hondarandd.jp/point.php?pid=23&lang=en

Reduces energy needed a bit, but the main advantage is no moving parts = less wear and higher reliability. This seems to be an active area of research hopefully we'll see further improvement. It seems to have obvious advantages for home producers too.

You have to join to read the full paper, but its free.
 
Last edited:
Sources:
http://www.hybridcars.com/december-2017-dashboard/
http://www.hybridcars.com/january-2018-dashboard/
http://www.hybridcars.com/february-2018-dashboard/
http://www.hybridcars.com/march-2018-sales-dashboard/

total_1804.jpg


Fuel cell sales are about two orders of magnitude lower than the PHEV and light diesel sales. Their rate of growth is self evident.

Code: 
Group           03/15/18 02/15/18 01/15/18 12/18/17
Total Hybrid       28518    24900    22017    32187
Total BEV          14480     8344     6085    14959
Total PHEV         10882     8152     5800    10190
Total Diesel       10688     8156     6733     9920
Total Fuel Cell      204      416      270      297
Total Efficent     64772    49968    40905    67553
Total Auto Sales 1646888  1297439  1151832  1595793

Bob Wilson

ps. Hopefully this answers:
Martin Williams said:
Something a bit odd here. Maybe it's me.

If these are the figures for March 2018 as you claim you are correct that 204 FCVs were sold. But this implies that about 55,000 hybrids, BEVs an PHEVs were sold in that month. The Inside EVs figure is about 26,000. Perhaps you can clarify things please?

I reckon FCVs are selling at about three-quarters of one percent of plug-ins.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Come on Bob! Three months data? Youcan 'prove' whatever you want if you take a short enough timescale. Climate change deniers do it all the time to 'prove' the planet is cooling!

Last year, in the first three months of 2017. a total of 311 FCVs were sold - all Mirais. This year over the same period, 583 FCVs have been sold plus however many Clarity FCV were sold in February. I can't recall quite how many but it was certainly enough to easily double FCV sales over the first quarter of the year.

Go look at the full picture at http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/toyota/toyota-mirai/ I can't find anywhere that posts Clarity FCV monthly sales.

There is no argument that more BEVs are sold than FCVs. My point is that FCV sales are growing much more rapidly than those of BEVs.

I might also make the point that the annual growth rate of plug-ins is about the same as the growth rate of new models of plugins which means that average per-model sales over the year are hardly growing at all.
 
Martin Williams said:
But if LA ones are as slow and unreliable as you say, then it is high time they were upgraded...
Click to expand...

Yeah, all they have to do is switch to a fuel that's practical rather than ridiculously impractical and pernicious. The reason those fueling stations are so slow and unreliable is an obvious and predictable result of using H2 as a fuel.

Since we want a renewable fuel to replace fossil fuels, synthetic methane would be a good choice. Since that can be used to replace natural gas with no alteration, there's a ready market for it. And I'd love to see a movement to replace diesel with synthetic methane (or even natural gas) for long-distance trucking, until the BEV tech is up to that challenge!

* * * * *

A highly relevant quote:

I don’t want to turn this into a debate on hydrogen fuel cells, because I just think that they’re extremely silly. There’s multiple rebuttals of it online. It’s just very difficult to make hydrogen and store it and use it in a car. Hydrogen is an energy storage mechanism, it’s not a source of energy. So you have to get that hydrogen from somewhere.

If you get that hydrogen from water, you’re splitting H2O. Electrolysis is extremely inefficient as an energy process. If you took a solar panel and used the energy from that solar panel to just charge a battery pack directly—compared to try to split water, take the hydrogen, dump the oxygen, compress the hydrogen to an extremely high pressure—or liquefy it—and then put it in a car and run a fuel cell... it is about half the efficiency. It’s terrible.

Why would you do that? It makes no sense. Hydrogen has very low density. It’s a pernicious molecule that likes to get all over the place. If you get hydrogen leaks from invisible gas, you can’t even tell that it’s leaking. But then it’s extremely flammable, when it does, and has an invisible flame.

If you’re going to pick an energy storage mechanism, hydrogen is an incredibly dumb one to pick. You should just pick methane. That’s much, much easier. Or propane.

The best case hydrogen fuel cell doesn’t run against the current case batteries. So, then, obviously, it doesn’t make sense. That will become apparent in the next few years. There’s no reason for us to have this debate. I’ve said my piece on this. It will be super-obvious as time goes by.​

--Elon Musk, January 13, 2015

One of the ways it's becoming ever more "super-obvious" is the way H2 fueling stations are so often low on fuel or closed, as well as how the number of stations built lags further and further behind the goals announced by the California Fuel Cell Partnership, as the years go by.
-
 
Martin Williams said:
I am afraid that's opinion dressed as fact. I think the answer is clearly 'yes'.
Click to expand...

Nope. You refusing to recognize reality does not mean reality is mere opinion.

Next you'll be calling science, the Laws of Physics, and thermodynamics, "fake news". Come to think of it... you already are.
-
 
Toyota fuel cell sales for recent months:
Code: 
model 03/15/18 02/15/18 01/15/18 12/15/17
Mirai       83      166      213      296
Can you guess how many months?

Bob Wilson
 
Three / Four? It makes no difference to my argument. You have cherry-picked data to support your case.

FCV sales have more than doubled in a year. In fact if you count in the December 2017 (296) and compare it with December 2017 (116) the growth rate is even more striking!
 
Last edited:
I can't think why Pushmi imagines quotes by Elon Must are even worth reading. The man is a gifted salesman who has sunk billions into a business that hydrogen threatens to disrupt if not ruin. He's hardly going to find anything good to say about it. The problem is Musk, not hydrogen.

If California decides to build third-rate hydrogen stations that break down all the time, and can't build them fast enough then that is their problem. They need to do better. Other countries seem to manage it. However, it doesn't seem to be putting people there off buying hydrogen cars, does it.
 
Martin Williams said:
FCV sales have more than doubled in a year.
Click to expand...
Great except that was a year ago. Since then reality has slowly won the marketing war. Mirai sales have a negative slope and adding another fuel cell model or soon to be broken station doesn't solve hydrogen problems.

Still, you could invest in advocate for: https://nikolamotor.com

They have so much money they are returning the deposit of early adopters.

Then there is the map of where one can drive:
fool_cell_010.jpg


Kinda spase in the rest of the USA:
fool_cell_020.jpg


Excellent source of maps showing all types of alternate fuel:
https://www.afdc.energy.gov/stations/#/find/nearest

Bob Wilson
 
Last edited:
Pushmi-Pullyu said:
Quoting Elan Musk:
If you’re going to pick an energy storage mechanism, hydrogen is an incredibly dumb one to pick. You should just pick methane. That’s much, much easier. Or propane.
Click to expand...
So here is a fuel cell that works with methane:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/04/201805406.html

So this suggests an interesting, dual tank architecture. One for ordinary, compressed methane and a second cryogenic tank for liquified natural gas (LNG.) Around town, use compressed methane. For cross country, a small tank of LNG.

Bob Wilson
 
The problem is that this is no longer entirely clean in that CO2 is emitted. As original raison d'etre of electric cars has been cutting these emissions I can't really see this as a step forward. The idea of locking up hydrogen atoms in molecules is a nice one though. I once wrote a science fiction story based on a polymerised form of hydrogen, H8. This convenient stuff resembled water, was 100% hydrogen and liquid at room temperatures, easily dissociated into H2 at 88C and non toxic. Pity it can't exist isn't it!

I am familiar with maps of US hydrogen stations. If you look at https://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrogen_locations.html#/find/nearest?fuel=HY you can download a spreadsheet with quite detailed information about them. I don't know whats going in LA with them closing or failing. This doesn't seem to be the case elsewhere.

Have you looked at Europe and Japan? There are far more there and they seem to work. We even have about a dozen in the UK including at least one that produces its own hydrogen from a small wind turbine! I think its only about 250kW so you don't get much from it. I think they claim half a dozen cars a day! The station can also take hydrogen from a road tanker "if this is not enough"! There are currently so few FCVs in the UK I imagine its more than enough at the moment!

Battery car enthusiasts seem blind to the fact two thirds of people in Europe will not buy a plugin because they can't plug it in at home! Limiting your market to a third of the population is hardly a wise marketing strategy. In the USA, I believe the number of people in this position is about a third. The alternative options of waiting for ages at a 'fast' recharging station or driving around looking for a hitching post are deeply unattractive. This is where hydrogen has the advantage and I believe it is the one that will make the difference. We shall see how the market develops though.
 
Martin Williams said:
Do I have to explain this AGAIN?

100 cars a day are served, but those cars will not come back for another ten days so a single dispenser will meet the fuel needs of 1,000 cars. If there are six dispensers, that means 6,000 cars can be supplied. It's really very simple.

As to the high cost of hydrogen, I doubt if that is going to worry many able to afford these cars. As the number of FCVs falls we can expect economies of scale to kick in and the cost to fall anyway. There is no shortage of either the water it is extracted from or the energy required to crack it. If you are that worried at the cost, you can even make it yourself and then apart from the capital cost of the equipment it is free.

Why assume the cost of the stuff is set in stone?
Click to expand...

So, 100 cars per day per dispenser / 600 cars per day? This is simply not correct.

Each six dispenser filling station can fill no more than 36 cars per day. Compression recovery time is not something your magical thinking can negate.
 
Then you need to redesign them so they do. I am not going to argue with the engineering deficiencies in US hydrogen dispensers.

'Compression recovery time' indeed. What on earth are you talking about? Compressors and gases don't get tired for heaven's sake!
 
Martin Williams said:
Then you need to redesign them so they do. I am not going to argue with the engineering deficiencies in US hydrogen dispensers.

'Compression recovery time' indeed. What on earth are you talking about? Compressors and gases don't get tired for heaven's sake!
Click to expand...

Again with your wishful thinking.

Compression is not instant. Have you ever used a compressor? It takes time to build up the pressure after using it lowers the pressure. 10,000PSI is extremely high pressure. Compressors get hot - because they have energy losses.

Martin, you obviously think that it should all work just the way you want it to. Reality is though - it does not. Have fun all by yourself in your fantasy world.
 
bwilson4web said:
Toyota fuel cell sales for recent months:
Code: 
model 03/15/18 02/15/18 01/15/18 12/15/17
Mirai       83      166      213      296
Can you guess how many months?

Bob Wilson
Click to expand...
Here are the FCV sales figures for the first quarter of 2016 to 2018 (Source: carsalesbase.com)

2016 - 97
2016 - 311
2018 - 583

The 583 figure includes clarity sales for March but omits those for February as I don't have them. By all means, call this faltering growth if you like. Long may it continue to falter in this way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top