Here's Ballard's 10-year stock performance:
https://www.google.ca/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&c...
Obama cut funding for fuel cell research a few years ago:
http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/obama-to-...
Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
51–60 of 67 posts
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
And how much energy is lost converting energy to hydrogen? Because there are no native hydrogen energy stores. You're either using electricity to crack water, or you're going to crack natural gas. Its more efficient to simply use batteries. EDIT: I'd like to point out, generating hydrogen does make sense if you're using an energy source that is essentially free. Too much hydro and you have to dump the water anyway? M…
So water electrolysis has losses of 50-80%. And then you need to transport it to refueling stations (which could be pretty high). Edit: forgot the obvious, the losses in the actual fuel cell. 40-60%. Yeah that equation doesn't add up. What losses to we have on the battery end? Transmission line losses (6%), li-ion charge/discharge losses (80-90%), losses due to the fact that the car needs to keep the battery warm/coo…
One possible solution is renewable energy.
All current renewable energy sources have one big flaw. They produce energy when the circumstances are right, not when required. Beacause of this they cause issues in the energy grid.
If we could build water cracking facilities at the right scale with the right characteristics, that could help offset the efficiency/cost issues.
And on the issue of high pressure fire bombs, gas powered cars are pretty common here in Europe and those things are pretty safe. There are numerous safety features, not to mention that gas tanks are pretty tough vessels.
Edit: On the topic of fire bombs. I have today learned that one would not want Hydrogen tank in his vehicle.
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#53While everyone is talking up hydrogen as a clean alternative. Currently, 90% of hydrogen is refined using fossil fuels. Even if you account for hypothetical/nonexistent future technologies, the majority of hydrogen for the foreseeable future is coming from fossil fuels. Hydrogen is truly, "Bullshit". If it launches nationwide it be because gas companies are behind the push, and they will only do it once their gasolin…
But same can be applied to electricity. Yes you can get green electricity nowadays but majority is still produced by old fashion power stations.
I don't understand why there is so much controversy and disagreement surrounding this question. Electric cars are a requirement for a sustainable energy economy. Where the energy comes from, doesn't really matter in the short term as long as it comes from renewable or nuclear energy in the long term.
Regardless, people claiming that electric cars aren't green because the electrical power is often produced from fossil sources, conveniently forget that a lot of fossil fuels are spent producing petroleum fuels. You don't just stick a straw into the ground and have gasoline pour automatically into every gas station in the world.
First, you have to have survey teams (often offshore) find oil. Then you have to build the production infrastructure to get it out of the ground. Then you have to add water injection and other tricks to get it out of the ground. Then you have to transport it to a refinery. Then you have to refine it. Then you have to transport it to gas stations. So it's not as easy as some of the naysayers claim.
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know, we'll get it from the atmosphere of Jupiter!
I know this is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but what would the long-term consequences be of importing large quantities of hydrogen from off-planet and then binding it to local oxygen? I suppose if we had the tech to do that, we might be able to find off-planet oxygen as well...? Except wasn't most of ours produced by plants splitting carbon-dioxide?
More water vapor, which is also a greenhouse gas. It's quite a bit more potent of one than CO2, in fact.
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Charging time is overblown. You can charge a modern battery to 80% in about 5 minutes. That's about how long it takes to fill my car with gas at the moment. You're not going to be refueling a hydrogen fueled car that quick - it's a volatile, extremely high pressure, extremely cold gas. The safety considerations are substantial .
At what amperage and voltage and how much did it cost to upgrade the charging station connection to the grid. And how do you cool the battery during such a fast charge? what % of the energy is lost in heat from the chemical reaction - even Tesla has to obey the laws of thermo dynamics. Thinking about it from a thermofluids angle You could I suppose have a complex system of heat exchangers built in to the the battery…
Tesla's supercharging stations charge at 135kW 400V DC, recharging >50% of a 85kWH battery in 30 minutes. The power is delivered from a large (>300kWH) battery pack installed in the charging station, which is continously trickle-charged from the grid. There will also be swap stations implemented, swapping out the entire 85kWH battery pack in 2 minutes.
This is largely a solved problem, both from the sides of technology and deployment. It's just that public perception hasn't caught up yet. Give it 5 years and just about everyone will want one of these cars. For everyday use you won't even need the quick-charge capability.
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#56There are three pressing concerns for hydrogen fuel cells, which can be added up to "bullshit". First, energy density. I can't speak to that in detail, but the range problem is serious. Then again, the range problem seemed insurmountable for electric cars until Tesla got within spitting distance. Second, platinum. Traditional hydrogen cells require some platinum in the catalyst, which is fine at lab scales, but unvia…
See this link about energy density: http://www.aip.org/tip/INPHFA/vol-10/iss-1/p20.html Even liquid hydrogen doesn't come close to the volumetric energy density that seems like it'd be a solution for transportation. And the more compressed or cold you get it has a lot of attendant problems in terms of expansion effects of the gas, or the energy required to compress it. The permeability of hydrogen in containers, espe…
Thanks for the link. I've always suspected that energy density was a problem, but never investigated it.
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
It applies to gasoline cars too, you need energy to process oil into gasoline.
Oil is a net positive on the energy, even with the energy cost to refine it. Generating hydrogen from water is a net negative on the energy, guaranteed, by thermodynamics. Unless we start stealing it from an extra-planetary source, it is best to think of hydrogen as a battery, not a fuel.
Oil is not a net positive on the energy; gasoline consumes more in electricity during the refining process than it contains; it's just in a much more useful form.
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
And how much energy is lost converting energy to hydrogen? Because there are no native hydrogen energy stores. You're either using electricity to crack water, or you're going to crack natural gas. Its more efficient to simply use batteries. EDIT: I'd like to point out, generating hydrogen does make sense if you're using an energy source that is essentially free. Too much hydro and you have to dump the water anyway? M…
And how much energy is lost charging batteries? Because there are no native sources for charged Tesla battery packs. You're either using electricity to charge them at your house (with 60% lost in transmission) or charging them closer to the power plant. It's more efficient to simply use hydrogen. I don't understand why anyone would be convinced by arguments like this that don't include numbers, when you can make the…
> using electricity to charge them at your house (with 60% lost in transmission)
The overall losses in Germany are 7%. [1]
> It's more efficient to simply use hydrogen.
Only if you fake your numbers by an order of magnitude, see above.
> I don't understand why anyone would be convinced by arguments like this that don't include numbers.
Still better than your astroturf numbers. If hydrogen is better, so be it. However, the Tesla S can go 450km with one charge today and it can be charged everywhere.
An electric car is the nightmare of traditional car manufacturers: an electric motor costs nothing and lasts unlimited kilometers. You need no engine oil change, the brakes last a lot longer and cars will easily last 1.000.000 miles / kilometers and a lot more with little maintenance. You do need to change the battery but this is not money for the car manufacturer.
So there are two huge industries for which e-cars are a nightmare: petrol and classic car manufacturers.
Disclosure: I drive an MiEV an it works amazingly well.
[1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbertragungsverlust (german)
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
So water electrolysis has losses of 50-80%. And then you need to transport it to refueling stations (which could be pretty high). Edit: forgot the obvious, the losses in the actual fuel cell. 40-60%. Yeah that equation doesn't add up. What losses to we have on the battery end? Transmission line losses (6%), li-ion charge/discharge losses (80-90%), losses due to the fact that the car needs to keep the battery warm/coo…
One possible solution is renewable energy. All current renewable energy sources have one big flaw. They produce energy when the circumstances are right, not when required. Beacause of this they cause issues in the energy grid. If we could build water cracking facilities at the right scale with the right characteristics, that could help offset the efficiency/cost issues. And on the issue of high pressure fire bombs, g…
>Edit: On the topic of fire bombs. I have today learned that one would not want Hydrogen tank in his vehicle.
Everyone comes to this conclusion when you realize how deadly compressed hydrogen is compared to liquid petroleum. Nothing like being burned by fire you can't see.
Re: Elon Musk Calls Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars ‘Bullshit’
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
At what amperage and voltage and how much did it cost to upgrade the charging station connection to the grid. And how do you cool the battery during such a fast charge? what % of the energy is lost in heat from the chemical reaction - even Tesla has to obey the laws of thermo dynamics. Thinking about it from a thermofluids angle You could I suppose have a complex system of heat exchangers built in to the the battery…
Tesla's supercharging stations charge at 135kW 400V DC, recharging >50% of a 85kWH battery in 30 minutes. The power is delivered from a large (>300kWH) battery pack installed in the charging station, which is continously trickle-charged from the grid. There will also be swap stations implemented, swapping out the entire 85kWH battery pack in 2 minutes. This is largely a solved problem, both from the sides of technolo…
> Give it 5 years and just about everyone will want one of these cars.
They sold a batch of MiEV / IOn for $15.000 here and so far everybody is very enthusiastic about them. I think 5 years is a tad optimistic but I give it less then 10 years.