First, there is no ICE. The hydrogen powers a fuel cell which leverages a chemical reaction to generate electricity which powers the electric motors.Now you get to hunt down two non standard fuel sources. There is also the internal combustion hardware for the hydrogen fuel and fuel storage. Can we spell Hindenberg? The same. carriage packs the source of a large electrical fire and a destructive chemical explosion. I think I will purchase 100% EV.
Using hydrogen as a battery is inefficient no matter the source of electricity to "refine" it. That same electricity could be used to charge a battery. In addition to the electricity needed to produce the hydrogen, it also needs to be compressed to 10,000 psi and cooled. If it is not produced on-site, it will need to be trucked to the station location (theoretically you could install a pipeline to every hydrogen station, but the same it true for gasoline). Hydrogen is generally stored/trucked at 5,000 psi, then further compressed and cooled when filling a vehicle.Yes, it's definitely interesting. Batteries have their strengths and weaknesses and fuel cells theirs. Put them together and you get the advantages of both so that the disadvantages of each don't matter. But you also get the cost and complexity of both.
Beyond that I don't see hydrogen in a consumer application for some time. And, of course, hydrogen as produced now is dirty. When it is produced by electrolysis from wind, solar or hydro that will change.
First, there is no ICE. The hydrogen powers a fuel cell which leverages a chemical reaction to generate electricity which powers the electric motors.
Carrying a tank of hydrogen is no riskier than a tank of gasoline for an ICE vehicle, the natural gas cylinder powering the grill on your patio, LP tank heating your house... or the fire risk associated with the lithium ion battery powering your BEV or portable devices.
20 years ago I would have bet money that a hydrogen infrastructure would have been the path forward. And if dieselgate had happened at that time, it probably would have been. Battery tech has come a long way but we're still another 5-10 yrs away from being able to complete a full charge in under 5 minutes.
That said, I'm no fan of "hybrid" power trains.
It does if it is, as is the case with gasoline, generated at a central plant in which case it has to be moved to the distribution plant and stored there. Transport by pipeline requires construction of a pipeline which is no small feat as the pressures required to fill the cars' reservoirs are pretty high and hydrogen embrittles metals. Efficient trucking requires the use of cryogenic techniques.Doesn’t hydrogen have the same infrastructure problem as gasoline?
This is one of the reasons pure FCEVs won't catch hold in the consumer market. Being able to refuel at home is one of the biggest plusses with BEVs. This car, however, would allow fueling at home at least to the extent one could get to a filling station (were there actually any) and top off range with hydrogen.Consumers would have to go to an outside location to refill hydrogen.
Hydrogen is, at this time, much more expensive than electricity and more expensive than gasoline. The manufacturers of FCEV cars are offering free fueling for some period of time in order to get people to buy the cars.[/QUOTE]I would imagine hydrogen would be much more expensive to build and maintain for a fueling station than a row of charging stations. Perhaps I am wrong. But if those assumptions are true, hydrogen will not become a thing simply due to dollars and cents.
But it's all about economics in reality though we will always trumpet desire to "save the planet" if that suits our purposes. Hydrogen's only real advantage is that, suitably stored, it is much more energy dense than battery stored electricity. It is, if generated from renewables, clean. Now renewable means something like solar or wind which is "free" in the sense that you don't consume anything (except water) to generate the hydrogen. In this case the energy stored in the hydrogen is free and the energy wasted in producing it and in compressing it is free too. thus it does not matter that the preparation of hydrogen for use in an FCEV is inefficient. We all know that the electricity from a solar array is not really free (the hardware has to be depreciated etc.) but as the technology advances it may come to the point where hydrogen from electrolysis may be both clean and economically feasible. That's not today.Using hydrogen as a battery is inefficient no matter the source of electricity to "refine" it.
Well it would be as that's the system we use nowI personally think that synthetic fuels from water and co2 will be more viable as that technology advances. It can be a direct drop-in replacement for gasoline and diesel vehicles.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Edmunds Discusses the R1T, Cybertruck, GMC Hummer||Rivian General Discussions||0|
|Another Battery Research Breakthrough||Batteries, Charging, Alternative Energy||2|
|Article: Rivian has a real edge over Tesla’s Cybertruck. Here’s why.||Rivian General Discussions||2|
|G||EV trucks over next 2-3 years - what's your plan?||Rivian General Discussions||3|