Sponsored

Hydrogen technology

CappyJax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2018
Threads
8
Messages
308
Reaction score
121
Vehicles
Subaru Forester
How about we have a tech forum where we can geek out?

I follow both battery and fuel cell technologies closely. Along with nuclear and solar projects as well. I think BEVs are perfect for around the town driving, but I think FCVs will end up dominating the long distance trips. I think a BEV/FCV hybrid would be the way to go. Plug in for your commute to work, but fill up for the long treks.

Hydrogen storage is particularly fascinating because it is so difficult. But there are compounds that absorb more hydrogen by volume and by weight than liquid hydrogen.

Rivian R1T R1S Hydrogen technology HydrogenDensities

This graph shows various compounds and their gravimetric and volumetric densities. The red lines are gasoline equivalents based on 60% fuel cell efficiency, and 30% ICE efficiency.

The problems are that these materials might take on the hydrogen too slowly, or release it too slowly, or only at high temps, or only a small percentage, or are difficult and expensive to reproduce in large quantities, etc. Various different mixtures are tried to see what works best, just like in the battery world. If one of these in the upper right of the chart becomes commercially available, then even aviation will become electric. If the hydrogen was produced via solar, it would be carbon free, and the operating costs would be less than 1/5th of what they are now.

I think this technology is fascinating. It would be cool to see it implemented before humans kill themselves off. ;)
Sponsored

 

Attachments

Revelation

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Threads
4
Messages
218
Reaction score
355
Location
North Carolina
Vehicles
Rivian Blue R1T
Occupation
IT Solutions Architect
After driving a 3,000 mile round trip in my Tesla Model 3 I disagree that BEV's are only for commutes. While one-day Hydrogen powered cars may be practical, today they are not. The cost far surpasses that of any other method of powering vehicle. At the rate of battery development I don't think hydrogen will have a chance to become a practical alternative.

In two years we will start seeing BEVs that can drive for 600 miles on a single charge. During that same time we will see faster charging options being deployed, in the US, that could recharge those 600+ mile batteries in less than an hour. Within 5 years we will approach 1,000 mile range batteries that can recharge in less than 30 minutes.

The average consumer will not spend the money for 1,000 mile batteries; just as today the average consumer does not buy larger gas tanks in their vehicles. You typically find that behavior in truck buyers that tow often.
 
OP
OP

CappyJax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2018
Threads
8
Messages
308
Reaction score
121
Vehicles
Subaru Forester
The problem with purely electric vehicles, is how much they will tax the grid. The more electric vehicles we have driving across country at peak hours, along with higher charging rates, the more infrastructure has to be built up. Hydrogen is an energy storage medium which can be produced and stored during off peak hours, and pumped into a vehicle at anytime. It would significantly help reduce the peaks in energy consumption from electric vehicles. As the new efficient and green ways to produce hydrogen are being developed, the cost will continue to fall.

There is no battery technology that would provide 1,000 mile range in 5 years or recharge in less than 30 minutes. Not even 600 miles. You are talking about at a minimum 400Wh/kg. and at current the EV batteries are around 200Wh/kg max. Your Model 3 is only 168Wh/kg. For something to show up in 5 years in EVs, it would already have to be in small scale production. It takes around 15 years for emerging commercially viable technologies to end up on the road. Also, the current charging stations don't handle anywhere near the power to charge a 600 mile range battery in 30 minutes. You would need a battery in the range of 200kWh which means you would need at least a 400kW charging station to charge in 30 minutes. Right now we are at 120kW. Even Tesla's next supercharger station is only going to be 360kW, but with their financial problems, that may never come.

And if you ever want to tow, batteries are a long way from cutting it. As I stated in another thread, the range on the Rivian will be under 120 miles when towing an 11,000 pound RV. You would drive for two hours, then charge for two hours. Oh, and you are driving at no faster than 60 mph.

A 3kg hydrogen tank weighs 60kg. Each kg of hydrogen contains 40kWh of energy. Current fuel cells are about 60% efficient giving you 24kWh of electricity per kg. That comes out to 1.2kWh per kg, which is more than 7 times the gravimetric energy density as Tesla's batteries. The volumetric density is not as high, but if you are towing a trailer with room for a lot of tanks, that really isn't an issue. And the cost is plummeting very quickly and should soon be less than $50/kw which would make the total system cheaper to install than batteries. And, in as little as 5 years we are likely to see $2/gallon hydrogen making it 8.3 cents per kWh.

Battery technology is ahead of fuel cells at present, but battery advancements are moving at a rate of 1% to 2% a year. Fuel cell advancements are moving at a much higher rate, especially in regards to cost.

Now, having said this, if we did discover a cheap, easy to build, highly energy density, low degradation battery formula, things could change. Those miracle batteries are touted all the time, but they never seem to make it into production.

I imagine what it would be like it John Goodenough's 8,400Wh/kg sodium suffer battery became a reality. The same weight battery in the Rivian would give you 16,000 miles of range. Airplanes would have two and a half times more range than current jet technologies. You could go a month without charging your phone. You only need around 3,000Wh to match the energy density of gasoline.
 

Sponsored

Revelation

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Threads
4
Messages
218
Reaction score
355
Location
North Carolina
Vehicles
Rivian Blue R1T
Occupation
IT Solutions Architect
The Tesla Roadster will come out with a base range of 600 miles; so yes they are coming. Tesla Level 3 superchargers are coming out soon as well with faster charging times for cars that can take advantage of it - so far only the Model 3.

Chargers are already out around the world that can charge 200 miles of range in 10 minutes or less. Granted only one car can take advantage of that speed at this time. There's already an answer for how you can handle the extra demand placed on the grid... batteries. Tesla has already proven that battery tech works to better meet peak demand on electricity grids.

You mention the cost to the electricity grid to power all of the electric cars yet you ignore the enormous energy required to produce hydrogen fuel. You then spend more money to transport and store it than you would electricity or even fossil fuels for that matter.

Let's talk more about hydrogen.... Refueling time is dependent on a lot fo factors that cannot be controlled, i.e. ambient temperature. We also know that hydrogen fuels cells are several times more explosive than a gas counterpart. We also know the H2 leaks from hydrogen tanks and that it can lead to ozone depletion. Currently that is not a big deal as the amount that leaks is minuscule. Now replace every car on the road with fuel-cell technology and it will be a different story.

Batteries are not without their own environmental concerns.

You also compare towing with a BEV and a hydrogen stating that if you have trailer, you have room for tanks. Yet you eliminate the possibility of additional batteries on the trailer. That's a steep double-standard. Your hydrogen truck will burn more hydrogen when towing, just as an electric trunk will use more energy and a gas/diesel trunk would use more fuel.

This is without even talking about the advances in Solid State batteries. For those we have to wait and see...
 
OP
OP

CappyJax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2018
Threads
8
Messages
308
Reaction score
121
Vehicles
Subaru Forester
Tesla makes a lot of promises that never materialize. And even the level 3 chargers won't do what you say. And please reference chargers that charge 200 miles in 10 minutes or less. Because at 350watts/mile, that is 70kWhs in 10 minutes. That would require 420kWs or more.

You are not understanding the concept of off-peak energy storage. During peak hours when energy consumption is highest, more electric vehicles will stress an already stressed system. Hydrogen would be generated during off peak hours when there is a surplus of grid power. This will allow for the hydrogen to be stored and used during peak hours to reduce the stress on the grid. You can use batteries to store the energy, but you also have inefficiencies there as well, and still the time to charge, especially large batteries.

Hydrogen fueling time is impacted by temperature. So is charging a battery. But even the best case battery will charge slower than the worst case hydrogen tank.

Hydrogen is far safer than gasoline, propane, and certainly lithium-ion batteries. First off, modern hydrogen tanks are built like airplane black boxes. They can withstand serious crashes. Far more than the occupants, so you would die in a crash long before a tank ruptures. During testing, they had to use an armor piercing .50 caliber to puncture the tank. When the tank is punctured, the hydrogen is expelled in less than two seconds, and due to it being the lightest element, it rises up in the atmosphere at 45 mph. That means in mere seconds, all the hydrogen is gone from the vehicle. Gas is liquid and pools, propane is heavier than air and pools, lithium-ion when puncture ignites and the fire grows to cause more ignition and explosions. It is ironic that you are promoting lithium-ions and actually point to hydrogen as being less safe, when hydrogen would be by far the safest of the four, and lithium-ion the least safe in an accident. But I see your bias is based purely on an irrational fear of the technology.




Modern hydrogen tanks do not vent hydrogen like tanks of the past. Therefore, your concern about ozone depletion is moot.

"You also compare towing with a BEV and a hydrogen stating that if you have trailer, you have room for tanks. Yet you eliminate the possibility of additional batteries on the trailer."

No, I didn't eliminate the possibility, I just found it impractical. The batteries will weigh over 7 times as much as the hydrogen tanks. If I want to triple the range of the Rivian while towing, then I would need 360kWh. At 168Wh/kg, that is 2,142kg. The same thing in hydrogen tanks would be 300kg. So, you use 43% of the towing capacity to haul around batteries, while I use only 6% of the towing capacity to haul around tanks.
 

Revelation

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Threads
4
Messages
218
Reaction score
355
Location
North Carolina
Vehicles
Rivian Blue R1T
Occupation
IT Solutions Architect
What did I say about Tesla's level 3 superchargers, oh yeah that they would charge faster than current ones. Interesting that you are challenging me on that notion. The one's that are claiming 20 miles in 10 minutes are not Tesla.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/14...e-bmw-450kw-electric-vehicle-charging-station

Peak energy is more of a strain on the power plant to meet demands of the people without over producing. Sure there could be infrastructure in places where it doesn't meet the requirements. The typical case is the power plant not meeting demand. That is where brown outs and black outs come from. Again, only look to the battery systems that are in place today to handle peak customer demands.

Funny that you say I am biased due to irrational fear... Seriously if that is the best you can muster then have at it. I wasn't aware of the newer hydrogen tanks. You could have easily left it there instead of acting like a child and throwing insults. Stay safe behind your keyboard young internet warrior.

First off I never said anything about the weight of the batteries in relation to trailers. I simply indicated that you omitted it and behaved as if wasn't even an option. I only indicated that it could be done to extend range.

Finally I will leave this here: (just started reading it and I am finding it interesting)
https://ssj3gohan.tweakblogs.net/blog/11470/why-fuel-cell-cars-dont-work-part-1
 
OP
OP

CappyJax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2018
Threads
8
Messages
308
Reaction score
121
Vehicles
Subaru Forester
Sorry if you felt insulted. I was just pointing that you have an irrational fear. Now I will point out that you are acting like a whiney child cause I proved you wrong on everything you said.
 

Revelation

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Threads
4
Messages
218
Reaction score
355
Location
North Carolina
Vehicles
Rivian Blue R1T
Occupation
IT Solutions Architect
Settle down kid. You didn't prove anything wrong, in fact the opposite - I proved you wrong about peak demand; the faster battery recharge rate and I posted additional links dispelling your other points. You have an interesting sense of "winning a debate."
 
OP
OP

CappyJax

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2018
Threads
8
Messages
308
Reaction score
121
Vehicles
Subaru Forester
"
Research project “FastCharge”: ultra-fast charging technology ready for the electrically powered vehicles of the future."
Sponsored

 
 




Top