Are hydrogen fuel cell cars like Toyota Mirai the future?

BeenThroughItAll

bigjl wrote: »

According to the info I have read the Tesla fastcharger network can charge a vehicle to nearly full charge in 20mins.

You may have misunderstood I was not referring to a home charger but the free network of Tesla funded fast chargers.

No, I understood you're not talking about home chargers. How on earth you could reach that conclusion I have no idea, when I even named the Supercharger in my post.


I am perfectly aware of the difference, between the 7kW charger I have at home which I installed myself (because I am qualified to do so) and a 100+kW DC charger like the Supercharger, a 43kW AC rapid, and a 50kW CHAdeMO.


You'll notice that on the Tesla website to which you link there is information showing that the SC network can charge, as I thought, the Model S pack to 100% in 75 minutes. Tesla claim a 40 minute charge to 80%, or a 30 minute charge equating to ~170 mile range. That would mean on my 350mile trip I'd need to stop halfway, wait half an hour, and arrive at my destination with no charge, ready to charge again.

That does not in any way fit within the criteria I need to fulfil in order to make a BEV, even a Tesla, appropriate for my major usage.


ETA, it's also pretty hopeless that the nearest Supercharger is over 90miles from where I live.

gzoom

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

What I do have is a customer base including some of the biggest automotive manufacturers in the UK, several R&D firms who actually develop battery and charging technology (they're several years ahead of what's on the market), some of the largest oil and gas companies in the world and fuels distribution and storage companies in Europe, and OEDM businesses who build technology like the solar-powered hydrogen generator I mentioned before.


Most of those businesses are talking about HFVs as the future, and I'm happy to go along with their judgement as they are right at the heart of development.

So if Tesla/Nissan/Zoe can get the price of a 70kWh battery pack down, and stick it into a car for £35k, giving you a range of 250 miles would you buy it??

What do you think will happen to your petrol usage?? Would you need to pay for hydrogen if you can charge your car at home for half/quarter the cost/or free if you can generate your own electricity??...and if everyone moved to BEVs, who is going buy the products these companies are selling??

There is massive potential for Battery EVs to completly change the energy landscape, and with it upset a lot of established business. Hydrogen is like petrol, it's product that needs to be produced, distributed and sold. Where as electricity can be generated by various means, even by the consumer themselves, at home, with solar panels - At which point you have to ask, just why do we need these industries?? What the point of solar powered hydrogen station when you can just use the electricity directly at home, rather than having to go to a fuel station and pay for hydrogen??

There is a massive conflict of interest in petrol chemical companies pushing hydrogen. I personally don't want anything to do with that end of things.

Solar panels are getting cheaper and more efficient, batteries are getting cheaper, having an battery EVs gives me the freedom of not been dictated to by the prices set for fuel by large companies. Ofcourse these companies will vote for Hydrogen, for them to pick battery EVs is like turkeys voting for Christmas.

But I think it's already too late for them, Norway is leading the way, the products are here, and if you actually sit down and look at the science/finances/costs hydrogen fuel cell cars are already a dead end. But still a turkey will always be a turkey and wouldn't vote for Christmas no matter what .

bigjl

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

No, I understood you're not talking about home chargers. How on earth you could reach that conclusion I have no idea, when I even named the Supercharger in my post.


I am perfectly aware of the difference, between the 7kW charger I have at home which I installed myself (because I am qualified to do so) and a 100+kW DC charger like the Supercharger, a 43kW AC rapid, and a 50kW CHAdeMO.


You'll notice that on the Tesla website to which you link there is information showing that the SC network can charge, as I thought, the Model S pack to 100% in 75 minutes. Tesla claim a 40 minute charge to 80%, or a 30 minute charge equating to ~170 mile range. That would mean on my 350mile trip I'd need to stop halfway, wait half an hour, and arrive at my destination with no charge, ready to charge again.

That does not in any way fit within the criteria I need to fulfil in order to make a BEV, even a Tesla, appropriate for my major usage.


ETA, it's also pretty hopeless that the nearest Supercharger is over 90miles from where I live.

I skimmed your post then thought I had used the incorrect term, fast charger, instead of Supercharger and thought it could have caused confusion.

I was then replying but had to go and do something so left the post unfinished.

I then came back and finished it off without seeing your other post.

I must admit that the charging in 20mins was information given to me by the staff at Tesla.

That will teach me to listen to staff who have a motivation in selling.

I did see a video online that repeated the figures. My fault again for believing the film rather than actually considering the science.

But hey, I have had little to do with science since leaving Uni......

Are your calculations including power reclaimed by regenerative braking?

When I test drove one round London I actually managed to increase the range during the test drive, which was well over 200miles, around 225miles I think.

I thought the range of the Tesla S was around 250/260 though?

Strider590

Personally i'm still asking why we cannot make electric vehicles powered by nuclear/atomic batteries, which use up the non-harmful isotopes derived from the waste from nuclear power plants. The technology exists, so why don't we have it?

One atomic battery the size of a normal large car battery, would be capable of running a car for double it's expected life time without EVER needing to be recharged or replaced.

The reason we don't have this sort of technology is because certain large corporations pay to make sure we never see it.

gzoom

So the Mirai has started deliveries in the land of the Pruis lovers - California. But even there hydrogen refilling sounds like a major issue. Only a hand full of public stations, so Toyota are having to install pumps at their dealership....However these cannot store hydrogen at such high pressure, result - 150 miles of range. That's barely more than the range on latest 30kWh Leaf. Oh and you have to call ahead to let them know your coming, and they aren't due to be up and running till summer next year.....When is Toyota going to see sense and give up on this massive waste of money/time.

http://insideevs.com/toyota-provides-mobile-hydrogen-refuel-stations-for-mirai-while-waiting-on-infrastructure/

WellKnownSid

gzoom wrote: »

So the Mirai has started deliveries in the land of the Pruis lovers - California. But even there hydrogen refilling sounds like a major issue.

I think I remember reading they had 7 or 9 stations in Tokyo now - all powered by renewable energy - but you never see a car in them. Which is a good thing - because if four vehicles turned up and needed to be filled from empty, they'd empty the hydrogen tanks completely and it'll take a week to re-generate!

But - think about it - a filling station that uses only renewable energy to make its own fuel - and then the cars that burn that fuel only producing water as a by-product.

Yes, the execution is a bit lame - and yes, the technology is horrendously expensive - but you can see why it piques interest.

Anyway - the in equally daft news: ELECTRICITY has finally reached our town, or at least a charging point. It renders the question over getting a Zeaf (sic) moot, apart from the drive to get it home (and back to the nearest dealer for servicing).

In a way - a charging point out here in the sticks is utter madness - if you cannot get to the next nearest charging point within the range of current electric vehicle technology, how exactly will they get used? Still, if I can find a Renault / Nissan dealer with a low-loader willing to drop off and collect... I now have the means to charge it. And I don't think it'll be busy

Cornucopia

There was an interesting set of items about Hydrogen vehicles on last week's Click.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06kxpwk/click-24102015

I won't get into how biased it was - Click is not news, after all.

Ectophile

Strider590 wrote: »

Personally i'm still asking why we cannot make electric vehicles powered by nuclear/atomic batteries, which use up the non-harmful isotopes derived from the waste from nuclear power plants. The technology exists, so why don't we have it?

One atomic battery the size of a normal large car battery, would be capable of running a car for double it's expected life time without EVER needing to be recharged or replaced.

The reason we don't have this sort of technology is because certain large corporations pay to make sure we never see it.

Nuclear battery with non-harmful isotopes? If it's nuclear, then the isotopes must be radioactive.

How many people will be willing to drive around in a car with a nuclear battery? Who will clean up the mess after an accident?

WellKnownSid

Ectophile wrote: »

Nuclear battery with non-harmful isotopes? If it's nuclear, then the isotopes must be radioactive.

How many people will be willing to drive around in a car with a nuclear battery? Who will clean up the mess after an accident?

Most of us have, at some time, been strapped into small metal cage travelling at 70mph with around 20 gallons of highly flammable chemicals behind us being slowly pumped onto four raging fires in front of us.

Clearly, how intrinsically inert the stored energy is will be a major a factor, but ultimately it doesn't actually matter how you store the energy - a battery, a fuel tank or a nuclear fuel rod - the outcome is broadly the same.

If the energy were to get out when you don't want it to, possibly in some kind of uncontrolled release, then the more energy you've got stored away the bigger the headache. Carrying a 'lifetime' worth of energy inside every car on our roads clearly has a potential for upset... a bit like carrying around a few thousand gallons of petrol.

Not so much a kaboom but a very bright flash followed by complete silence...