Gabe79

Electric cars emit 50% less greenhouse gas than diesel, study finds

133 posts in this topic

True that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, M3AN said:

True that.

 

Actually not true both Germany and Japan have  national hydrogen refueling network, others are building them - germany currently has 110 stations and is aiming for 400 

 

 

Mirai- hydrogen.PNG

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many in NZ, where I live?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None because we are fixated with gas guzzlers- but working on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 3pedals said:

None because we are fixated with gas guzzlers- but working on it. 

The irony being that switching to the magical hydrogen still depends on gas guzzlers existing. 

It makes no sense to still rely on petroleum refining for a country that is self sufficient on electricity in a way that is nearly entirely renewable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, How? 

NZ has cheap hydro power which can be used to sustainably produce hydrogen which then replaces fossil fuels no petroleum required. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 3pedals said:

Really, How? 

NZ has cheap hydro power which can be used to sustainably produce hydrogen which then replaces fossil fuels no petroleum required. 

I think there is a considerable misunderstanding, or perhaps, redefinition of the word "cheap" here. There is nothing about hydrogen fuel cells that makes it cheap if you take away the existing context of it being part of the refining process for petroleum. This definition of "cheap" simply looks the other way when faced with the prospect of creating an entire supply chain which doesn't currently exist in this, or any other country. The difference with electricity being that obviously there are outlets everywhere... Even if we're talking about fast chargers not existing en-masse yet, there isn't a new infrastructure that needs to be created for their use, we already have that infrastructure (again, here and everywhere else already...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gabe79 said:

I think there is a considerable misunderstanding, or perhaps, redefinition of the word "cheap" here. There is nothing about hydrogen fuel cells that makes it cheap if you take away the existing context of it being part of the refining process for petroleum. This definition of "cheap" simply looks the other way when faced with the prospect of creating an entire supply chain which doesn't currently exist in this, or any other country. The difference with electricity being that obviously there are outlets everywhere... Even if we're talking about fast chargers not existing en-masse yet, there isn't a new infrastructure that needs to be created for their use, we already have that infrastructure (again, here and everywhere else already...)

Several funadmental mis-understandings in your argument: 

Fast chargers are an oxymoron- It's all very nice for Mr Musk to say his car is fast charge capable (and it depends on what you call fast charge) BUT the supply network  doesn't exist, secondly batteries don't cope with fast charging very well (it kills them).  

Maths / science is simple: if you have an empty 75kW-hr battery you have to put the equivalent energy back in i.e 75kW for an hour ( ignoring losses)   - 150kW  for 30 minutes and 300kW for 15 minutes or 600kW  to match the refill time for hydrogen) and diesel / petrol). The faster you try to do this the higher the losses are and if they go to wireless charging the losses are ridiculously high.  As for theludicrous 120kW version well you can do the maths. 

A 600kW supply is capable of supplying 120 to 200 houses so you actually need a scale of infrastructure at each charge station capable of powering a big subdivision or small village. Then you need the charge station hardware which is not cheap - and that is for ONE charge point - imagine a fuel station with1 pump 

But back to the facts :

Our power is cheap to produce (we are overcharged for it) and 85% renewable - using it off peak to generate hydrogen which can then be easily reticulated /transported is viable - 5kg is all you need for 450km of travel in a fuel cell car and you only need a small battery to buffer the supply - that's lighter than the 50 to 90kg of diesel / petrol for the average car/SUV and way lighter than the 680kg of batteries a Tesla drags around all the time to get a similar (less) range. 

  • Hydrogen supply chain infrastructure exists, it is installed in Germany, France , Italy  Japan and other countries - some has been operating since 2011 -  it can be easily overlaid on major transport routes and located in cities easily for $ millions. 
  • Capacity required at each H station is 10% of what is required for diesel or petrol,
  • Electrical Supply / capacity on the Transpower grid is not an issue in NZ, it is a major in other countries, 
  • Upgrading the  Electricity network within regions IS  a MAJOR  issue - to provide sub 30 minute charging will require a complete re-build of all 29 regional networks in NZ  and cost $billions. 
  • Those 3 pin plugs which  "every where" as you say can't power a fast, medium or even slow charger- try 32 hours to charge a Tesla model S -75 from empty,
  • Dragging around 5kg of hydrogen makes a lot more sense than 680kg of batteries. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by 3pedals
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Issue with either Hydro, petrol or electrics  there still a massively high consumption of fossil fuels to  build these vehicles.

I believe the highest consumption of oil goes into every day products as in plastics, roads and panels wiring,tires etc etc in vehicles let alone whats used for house hold goods and cell phones etc.

So regardless of how it runs there's no free lunches, we may reduce what vehicles use or don't but the fossil fuel will always be there to which i believe over 80% is used for every day products not vehicles.

We are polluting regardless what we do. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 8:54 AM, 3pedals said:

Decent contribution please - yes there are losses in the conversions but also consider the full hydrocarbon extraction/ distillation and consumption process in an internal combustion engine or industrial heating system - same with battery storage - where do you source the electrons to fill the battery / Hydrocarbon powered generation ? thats not efficient or renewable. 

Hydrogen is the emerging energy / tehnology that is superceding batteries ( unless you believe Musk the battery maker ) 

 

 BTW the horse and cart is very viable - bio fuel in , about a horse power and some sh*t out - reasonable efficiency - 100% renewable 

 

You source the electrons from renewable electricity generation, which give you more bang for your buck in batteries than they do in hydrogen fuel cells. The comparison between hydrogen and batteries should not focus on where the electricity comes from since it is the same for each place, but the efficiency is markedly different. That's what makes hydrogen less attractive.

On 1/14/2018 at 2:06 PM, Michael. said:

What is a better tech than hydrogen fuel cell? 

Batteries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 3pedals said:

 

  • Dragging around 5kg of hydrogen makes a lot more sense than 680kg of batteries. 

 

What does the fuel cell and hydrogen tank weigh? Let's at least try to be fair and compare the same factors eh...

 

Curb weight for example, the Mirai is 1850kg to the Tesla's 1961kg, both Luxury 4dr sedans.

Edited by tawa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tesla model S  with a 75kW battery sitting outside the office tips the scales at just under 2200kg on our weighbridge a bit more than the 1961 you quote. 

The new composite hydrogen tanks are relatively light -and for the battery version E.V's you need also to consider all the charge control hardware as additional weight so whilst we haven't included all the weight for hydrogen Ev,s the same is also true for battery ones. 

The batteries biggest problem is the mass associated with decent energy output  

Energy from one kg of hydrogen - weight for weight it is the highest energy fuel giving an equivalent of over 33kW-hrs /kg  so assuming a low 33% conversion rate in a fuel cell - that equates to  nearly 10kW-hrs per kg compared to 0.166 kW-hrs / kg for a Tesla battery. 

For a lithium or other conventional battery you first have to produce the electrons, then put them into the battery chemistry before you can extract them.  Generating them, putting them in and extracting them is the whole equation. 

Look at the Fuel cell as a direct conversion battery - you put hydrogen in, mix it with air (oxygen) and get a shitload of electrons out, plus  a little bit of wateral in in real time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎14‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 8:27 PM, aja540i said:

it's a pointless argument at this stage, you can buy an electric car and use it now, you can't buy a hydrogen car at the moment and use it.

You can use the electric car - to a point. In very many places, and for very many people an electric car would require a massive change to their daily routine to be able to "live with it", not everyone lives in a big city, drives 10km to work at a snail's pace and can charge it up for free during the day. So, yes, there are some people that can buy an electric car and use it now.

Also, there are people that could buy a hydrogen fuel-cell car, and use it now. They do exist, they are available, and there is a supply of Hyrogen. Again it may not be possible, or feasible for everyone, but it is for some.

One of the Aussie state governments has just committed to a hydrogen fuel-cell fleet, can't remember if it is ACT or NSW, using Hyundais I think it was. It will be interesting to see how that goes.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 3pedals said:

The Tesla model S  with a 75kW battery sitting outside the office tips the scales at just under 2200kg on our weighbridge a bit more than the 1961 you quote. 

The new composite hydrogen tanks are relatively light -and for the battery version E.V's you need also to consider all the charge control hardware as additional weight so whilst we haven't included all the weight for hydrogen Ev,s the same is also true for battery ones. 

The batteries biggest problem is the mass associated with decent energy output  

Energy from one kg of hydrogen - weight for weight it is the highest energy fuel giving an equivalent of over 33kW-hrs /kg  so assuming a low 33% conversion rate in a fuel cell - that equates to  nearly 10kW-hrs per kg compared to 0.166 kW-hrs / kg for a Tesla battery. 

For a lithium or other conventional battery you first have to produce the electrons, then put them into the battery chemistry before you can extract them.  Generating them, putting them in and extracting them is the whole equation. 

Look at the Fuel cell as a direct conversion battery - you put hydrogen in, mix it with air (oxygen) and get a shitload of electrons out, plus  a little bit of wateral in in real time

Since I lack both, and a weighbridge I just went with their spec'd weight.

So include the relatively light 85kg tanks and the relatively light 60kg fuel cell for the hydrogen one to make it an accurate comparison. If you compare the weight of the fuel itself and not the containers it would be 5kg vs 0kg for electrics since charged batts weight no more than empty ones!

I'd say the biggest problem is the recharge time, what difference does weight really make?

And where do you get the hydrogen from? Fossil fuels (non-sustainable) or from the same electricity you put in batteries, just with far less efficiency; it's faster to refuel and weighs less, but it's a less efficient use of electricity. That's what makes it less viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will use my low tech battery ev for now, if and when the tech/ infrastructure becomes financially viable I will look at converting it to a fuel cell ev, it could be an interesting project but I'm not holding my breath!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tawa said:

Since I lack ... a weighbridge...

WTF? F'*$K of then, your opinion is worthless.

FFS. <_<

Edited by M3AN
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, M3AN said:

WTF? F'*$K of then, your opinion is worthless.

FFS. <_<

ahahahaha

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, tawa said:

I'd say the biggest problem is the recharge time, what difference does weight really make?

Close but not quite accurate - trimming 200 to 400kg out of vehicle is significant in terms of eficiency and drive dynamics - look at the i3.

The combined system of the hydrogen tank and fuel cell still provides a much higher energy density per kg than the battery system  and the overall weight is significantly lower in some cases (Tesla)  comparable in other (330e) - so weight and performance are both better key benefits of hydrogen are:

  • lower overall mass - better vehicle performance 
  • much shorter recharge time,
  • lower infrastructure cost. 

I'd go battery today if I chose to run an EV today  and it would be a 330e BUT instead I choose to wait until the hydrogen option is available in NZ 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, M3AN said:

WTF? F'*$K of then, your opinion is worthless.

FFS. <_<

I mean, I could macguyver something together if I got a tesla out of it though; all I'd need would be 8 mules, 700ft of 12AWG string, and a bunny in a comical hat

10 hours ago, 3pedals said:

Close but not quite accurate - trimming 200 to 400kg out of vehicle is significant in terms of eficiency and drive dynamics - look at the i3.

The combined system of the hydrogen tank and fuel cell still provides a much higher energy density per kg than the battery system  and the overall weight is significantly lower in some cases (Tesla)  comparable in other (330e) - so weight and performance are both better key benefits of hydrogen are:

  • lower overall mass - better vehicle performance 
  • much shorter recharge time,
  • lower infrastructure cost. 

I'd go battery today if I chose to run an EV today  and it would be a 330e BUT instead I choose to wait until the hydrogen option is available in NZ 

 

More significant is wasting 30-50% of your energy fuel before you can even get it into the car.

Does lower mass equal better performance though? Is the Tesla model S outperformed by the Mirai then?

I agree the recharge time is an issue.

Infrastructure cost is debatable at scale, for now (very small scale) the infrastructure is there to support EVs on our roads, but requires a large cost to support hydrogen vehicles.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, tawa said:

I mean, I could macguyver something together if I got a tesla out of it though; all I'd need would be 8 mules, 700ft of 12AWG string, and a bunny in a comical hat

More significant is wasting 30-50% of your energy fuel before you can even get it into the car.

Does lower mass equal better performance though? Is the Tesla model S outperformed by the Mirai then?

I agree the recharge time is an issue.

Infrastructure cost is debatable at scale, for now (very small scale) the infrastructure is there to support EVs on our roads, but requires a large cost to support hydrogen vehicles.

Low quality obfuscating argument - checking out - have  good day 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, 3pedals said:

Low quality obfuscating argument - checking out - have  good day 

Don't be so hard on yourself, while the weight issue you brought up was obfuscating, your point about recharge time is not low quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tawa said:

Infrastructure cost is debatable at scale, for now (very small scale) the infrastructure is there to support EVs on our roads, but requires a large cost to support hydrogen vehicles.

This is where I think New Zealand will struggle, with the low population density in 95% of the geography, how feasible is it to have two alternative fuel supply networks? I think you will stuggle to fast chargers into some parts of NZ, as there will never be the population demand to justify the cost of putting in the charger and the supply gubbins.

EV charging network is "charging" ahead, geddit??, already so it certainly has the advantage now. It would take a very brave person / company to put up the coin to develop a rival hydrogen supply network now that the oppposition is so far in front. Maybe when Tesla the "golden child" has fallen over, the masses might have a re-think and look at alternative alternatives to ICEs?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrary I wonder if NZ could one day be a good small test bed for hydrogen technology, like the tests the did with Eftpos back in the day. Different matters all together, but you never know.

I'm sure there have been lots of things from international entities being tested here on a mass scale. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, E30 325i Rag-Top said:

This is where I think New Zealand will struggle, with the low population density in 95% of the geography, how feasible is it to have two alternative fuel supply networks? I think you will stuggle to fast chargers into some parts of NZ, as there will never be the population demand to justify the cost of putting in the charger and the supply gubbins.

EV charging network is "charging" ahead, geddit??, already so it certainly has the advantage now. It would take a very brave person / company to put up the coin to develop a rival hydrogen supply network now that the oppposition is so far in front. Maybe when Tesla the "golden child" has fallen over, the masses might have a re-think and look at alternative alternatives to ICEs?

That could be of benefit if we go to a more distributed generation and buffered power network. Micro-hydro and wind and even some solar out in that 95% could be buffered by powerwalls or even just cars capable of backfeeding into the network to even out blips in demand from supercharging, depending on how much buffering goes on you could lose all the efficiency gains (viaAC/DC rectumfrying and back again) batts have over hydrogen though.

Carbon nano batts could knock Tesla over (though I suspect Elon would pivot to make use of such tech and stay in the game) and knock out hydrogen too. Or other battery chemistry, or supercaps, or even room temp superconductors. I wonder if we'll get to the point where trucking electricity out to remote locations is their most viable source of energy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now