Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

cleantechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 503 posts

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#191

Post by manquer »

fraserharris wrote: post #119

AC Transit (eg: East San Francisco Bay) performed a detailed 2 year study (July 2020 - June 2022) comparing newer Hydrogen Fuel Cell & Battery -powered buses to existing Diesel, Fuel Cell, & Hybrid -powered buses, 5 of each type. The key results are the Hydrogen Fuel Cells have significantly more expensive infrastructure, fuel, and maintenance costs than Battery. However, both technologies are still less reliable tha…

The maintenance costs are only marginally higher per the report at $1.33 FCEB vs $1.15 BEB , $2.37 for Hybrids and $1.28 for Diesel (with additional public health costs for respiratory illnesses), the sample size(5x5) is too small to draw any meaningful conclusion on infrastructure costs or even reliability given the limited experience in operating anything not diesel.

Economics of hydrogen in CA are also complicated given our on-off approach to hydrogen infrastructure[2] for both personal and commercial vehicles but there is some progress on commercial side at least last year [1].

Hydrogen is not everyone but there are use cases for it.

The uptime (i.e. the refueling time) is an key factor [4]. Battery operated vehicles need a lot of downtime for charging thus you will need more vehicles for the same coverage. Fast charging can help but impacts battery life and thus TCO.

All green public transit are expensive. It is not a easy choice for administrators, should they improve coverage/ service frequency etc for their residents who need transit the the most or better air quality and less noise pollution for all of them.

Remember Fuel Cells are far cleaner for the air much more than BEV also, because it needs oxygen from the air FCs purify the air to do so. Kind of like having a big vacuum on the road in addition to not emitting direct pollutants[3]

[1] https://www.portofoakland.com/port-of-oakland-celebrates-hyd...

[2] https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/zero-e...

[3] Ignoring tire dust, it is problem for all vehicles of course, that is independent of propulsion systems

[4] Even for personal vehicles it can be a decision factor when considering going green, as an owner of a Mirai with no easy access to EV charging stations I have benefited from being to refuel like a gar car.

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#192

Post by LatteLazy »

People keep falling for the myth that this can be solved at a personal level or even national level.

People keep falling for the myth that we are making progress (we’re not).

Hydrogen powered busses are just a specific case of a much much larger communication/coordination issue…

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#193

Post by m463 »

mixermachine wrote: post #151
pjscott wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have actual knowledge of their motives? Or is this speculation, confidently stated as fact? Another possible motive, mentioned in the the paragraph you quote, is that the oil companies see an energy transition coming and are trying to get aboard the hydrogen train to diversify their future revenue sources. And that sounds like a reasonable motive; the sort of thing that people who don't see themselves as evil…

One can extract hydrogen from fossil fuels. So if a hydrogen break through is coming, they already have a cheap source for the material. Not really green though...

not really cheap either.

I remember natural gas vehicles (busses and cars, like the honda civic). You could actually fill up at home if you had natural gas, but the electricity just to compress the natural gas for the car cost as much or more than the compressed fuel in the car.

For hydrogen, it is even harder. take a look at cars running compressed hydrogen. I remember $17 for the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline. I think it is even more expensive now.

Easier to burn CH4 than use energy to split out the H2, then compres it, then store it.

I actually think solar is better.

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#194

Post by rco8786 »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #149
fraserharris wrote: post #119

AC Transit (eg: East San Francisco Bay) performed a detailed 2 year study (July 2020 - June 2022) comparing newer Hydrogen Fuel Cell & Battery -powered buses to existing Diesel, Fuel Cell, & Hybrid -powered buses, 5 of each type. The key results are the Hydrogen Fuel Cells have significantly more expensive infrastructure, fuel, and maintenance costs than Battery. However, both technologies are still less reliable tha…

I'm not going to dispute your numbers with diesel versus EV reliability, but I have to think the simplicity of an EV drivetrain will win that battle in the next version or two.

It’s hard to imagine it not. And also kudos and crazy respect for all the thousands of engineers that poured their work into making combustion engines as efficient and reliable as they are. A true marvel of humanity, and something to be respected even as we leave it behind.

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#196

Post by calibas »

chrisco255 wrote: post #182
calibas wrote: post #109

Back in 2003, President George W. Bush announced the Hydrogen Fuel Initiative. At the time, people criticized the effort as an attempt by the oil industry to shift attention away from electric cars. The oil industry knew that hydrogen power wasn't going to be viable anytime soon, while electric cars were already a direct threat to their profits, so they pushed the US government towards hydrogen power. Not to disparag…

In 2003 there were no viable or mass market electric cars at all. What a made up narrative.

What about electric cars wasn't "viable" in 2003? That was the year Toyota released their all electric RAV4 in California...

Unlike hydrogen, there was already whole highly-developed system for production and distribution of electricity.

Also, you're mistaken about my "made up narrative". I'm not claiming electric cars were mass market, I'm strongly implying there were forces at work fighting against that very thing!

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#197

Post by retetr »

chrisco255 wrote: post #182
calibas wrote: post #109

Back in 2003, President George W. Bush announced the Hydrogen Fuel Initiative. At the time, people criticized the effort as an attempt by the oil industry to shift attention away from electric cars. The oil industry knew that hydrogen power wasn't going to be viable anytime soon, while electric cars were already a direct threat to their profits, so they pushed the US government towards hydrogen power. Not to disparag…

In 2003 there were no viable or mass market electric cars at all. What a made up narrative.

See the EV1, a popular, mass produced electric vehicle that was controversialy "discontinued" in 1999 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1?wprov=sfla1

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#198

Post by dwaltrip »

pjscott wrote: post #136
neves wrote: post #125

Why? Because Oil Companies are lobbying for inefficient hydrogen to delay a green revolution: https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/carbon-notes-5-green-hydrog... > The members of the hydrogen coalition are all obviously incumbent fossil fuel and petrochemical interests looking for a bridge to the new era. If realized, their ambitious hydrogen projects may overload the available supply of green power, for little real bene…

Do you have actual knowledge of their motives? Or is this speculation, confidently stated as fact? Another possible motive, mentioned in the the paragraph you quote, is that the oil companies see an energy transition coming and are trying to get aboard the hydrogen train to diversify their future revenue sources. And that sounds like a reasonable motive; the sort of thing that people who don't see themselves as evil…

It'd be reasonable if hydrogen was competitive with electric, but it's not.

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#199

Post by vel0city »

bluGill wrote: post #181
vel0city wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forcing more people to change busses more often for their routes just to fit some 15 minute max route ideal is going to make more people hate the busses.

Making a lot more destinatians available will make people use the bus.

You're not necessarily making more destinations available. You're potentially just requiring more changes to go to the same destinations.

Imagine a metro area with somewhat grid-like streets (or at least common paths) that go on for an hour+ in each direction. People still generally cluster to 20-30min from the destinations they care to go to, so it doesn't break that standard. Breaking it up into four 15-minute stretches isn't making it better for anyone. All you're doing is forcing people to get off one bus at an edge and hop on another. Just run more busses on the full path so there's still ample service for the changes.

How does forcing the 15-minute max path make more destinations available?

Re: Why do transit agencies keep falling for the hydrogen bus myth?

#200

Post by giantrobot »

kaibee wrote: post #105
giantrobot wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mechanism through which fossil fuel interests work is "grey hydrogen" which is hydrogen produced through processing of fossil sources with no eye towards carbon capture. Grey hydrogen is as polluting as just burning the fossil feedstock but works with an established hydrogen infrastructure. This lets the producers "green wash" their production pipeline by stating in a lies-through-omission manner that their hydro…

> It's the same lie as EVs claiming to be "green" in places where fossil fuel sources dominate electricity production. This is just anti-ev propaganda. First, its kind of a chicken-egg situation: 'its not worth going green for the power grid, all the cars are still ICE' 'oh its not worth building EV cars, the power grid is dirty anyway'. Second, there are lifecycle analyses that show that even if your powergrid is en…

> This is just anti-ev propaganda.

It's not. I'm not in any was opposed to EVs. Assuming so is a bit ridiculous on your part.

There's a marketing push to cast EVs as green no matter the prevailing sources of utility power. EVs can be green (like hydrogen) if they're charged from renewables. They also get greener over time since they're as green as their charging source.

In the short term EVs are just moving their emissions from tail pipes to smoke stacks. Contrary to the marketing around them.

Post reply on HN