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

361–370 of 503 posts

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

#361

Post by acc_297 »

A good professor convinced me hydrogen was a dead end some years ago.

But to be fair busses and trains and other public transit that does fixed routes every day is the perfect bench for any clean energy drive train that needs real world testing.

Also public money should never be overly shy of coordinating with companies who are trying to in good faith to solve our climate crisis.

Some discussion on this thread about hydrogen being a poison pill promoted by oil interests which I don’t really know about.

Electric bus programs have been broadly successful and no doubt have contributed in a real way to our understanding of that technology.

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

#362

Post by danmaz74 »

sholladay wrote: post #214

They keep falling for it because fixed route busses are the one use case where hydrogen could theoretically make sense. The bus can fill up far faster than it could recharge an equivalent battery. The bus gets lighter and more efficient as it uses fuel. And crucially, it can always fill up at the same place, which really ought to be the central depot where all the buses in that network return to. But inevitably with…

Aren't buses with a fixed route also a great candidate for battery swap solutions? As all the buses are managed by the same company, I would be curious to know if there are any hidden issues with this approach: while an bus is riding with a battery, the replacement battery gets charged, and when necessary you just swap the battery.

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

#363

Post by grandempire »

acc_297 wrote: post #361

A good professor convinced me hydrogen was a dead end some years ago. But to be fair busses and trains and other public transit that does fixed routes every day is the perfect bench for any clean energy drive train that needs real world testing. Also public money should never be overly shy of coordinating with companies who are trying to in good faith to solve our climate crisis. Some discussion on this thread about…

> Also public money should never be overly shy of coordinating with companies who are trying to in good faith to solve our climate crisis.

I think it’s the opposite. Public money should be conservative spends on things we know work. Let the startups try the risky bets.

As this has been reversed a lot of cities have gotten taken for a ride. For example “self driving car lanes”.

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

#364

Post by fulafel »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #276
sholladay wrote: post #214

They keep falling for it because fixed route busses are the one use case where hydrogen could theoretically make sense. The bus can fill up far faster than it could recharge an equivalent battery. The bus gets lighter and more efficient as it uses fuel. And crucially, it can always fill up at the same place, which really ought to be the central depot where all the buses in that network return to. But inevitably with…

> The bus gets lighter and more efficient as it uses fuel. This argument is weak. To get any kind of reasonable energy density you have to compress hydrogen to 10,000psi. The tanks to contain a gas at that pressure are heavy enough that the weight of gas inside is almost negligible. Especially in ground vehicles which aren't hugely sensitive to weight.

The relevant comparison is to an equivalent energy battery, not the tank enclosure vs fuel.

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

#365

Post by lostlogin »

alistairSH wrote: post #355
lostlogin wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The current US administrations moves against renewables It is promoting electric cars fairly forcefully.

Only Teslas.

Without a doubt it’s ‘despite being electric’ rather than ‘because they are electric’.

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

#366

Post by cowsandmilk »

sebstefan wrote: post #348
sholladay wrote: post #214

They keep falling for it because fixed route busses are the one use case where hydrogen could theoretically make sense. The bus can fill up far faster than it could recharge an equivalent battery. The bus gets lighter and more efficient as it uses fuel. And crucially, it can always fill up at the same place, which really ought to be the central depot where all the buses in that network return to. But inevitably with…

Would it be so hard to manufacture your own hydrogen on-site with the $20k plug and play electrolysis setups they sell to labs and industries? You can just plug into a high wattage outlet and let it work when the grid is at low demands You can't drill for oil & refine it at a bus depot but for the case of hydrogen maybe the assumption that fuel has to come from a supplier can be challenged I don't see any benefits fr…

See https://alphastruxure.com/news-press-release/emtoc-microgrid... for an example of on-site hydrogen production.

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

#367

Post by casey2 »

xbmcuser wrote: post #186
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…

The current US administrations moves against renewables should make you realize how powerful the oil gas lobby is. They got some pushback from local politicians so were slowed down but the way they started they were looking to end all wind and solar for a false promise of nuclear tomorrow.

Powerful is correct. It's strange to me the number of people on this site who think we should just throw away trillions of dollars. We should use natural gas to make renewable dirt cheap, just that would offset any externalities you can make up.

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

#368

Post by lesuorac »

chrisco255 wrote: post #335
retetr wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Sales figures for this "popular" car: 1997 (Gen I): 660 units 1999 (Gen II): 457 units

Those aren't really "sales" numbers (tbh I'm not even sure GM "sold" any car either given that it was able to destroy all of them).

GM only produced 660 units and 457 units. They never tried to actually mass produce the car and seeing how current electric vehicles are I really understand why; why cannibalize your higher margin ICE vehicles?

This is basically the same argument people make about a cure for cancer. Since there's a ton of money in treating cancer you can't develop a cure and kill your cash cow. It however, completely misses that somebody that isn't currently treating cancer can come in and develop a cure (i.e. Tesla) without tanking their treatment margins.

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

#369

Post by calibas »

chrisco255 wrote: post #331
kergonath wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What about electric cars wasn't "viable" in 2003? That was the year Toyota released their all electric RAV4 in California Musk was very effective in pushing the narrative that there was nothing before Tesla.

I was alive in 2003. There were no mass market electrics on the road. The RAV4 nickel-metal hydride plug-in hybrid from 97-03 sold a grand total of 1400 units. Nickel MH batteries were notorious for losing range quickly, having a memory if recharged frequently from only partial discharge, losing 20-50% of their charge per month on self-discharge alone, having far less energy density than lithium, only lasting for 500…

> The RAV4 nickel-metal hydride plug-in hybrid from 97-03 sold a grand total of 1400 units.

FYI, it wasn't a hybrid.

And your statement is a bit misleading. 1400 sales sounds pathetic, until you realize that means they completely sold out. 1400 was all they ever made.

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

#370

Post by 1oooqooq »

tialaramex wrote: post #327
ajb wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blue hydrogen is supposed to capture the carbon. If its just emitted, then it's grey hydrogen: https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/hydrog...

Right, if you "oops" don't have working capture because it's never been practical you're making "Blue" hydrogen in which your customers can tell everybody they're environmentally friendly but due to a technical hitch you are emitting lots of CO2. Maybe you can agree a token $1B fine, of course offset against the taxes you were already going to pay, and everybody carries on as before. Hooray for your profitable corpor…

1bi fine? i wish. they just sign up for those carbon buyback scams and won't cost more than 20mi, including the bribes.
Post reply on HN