Electric & Alt Fuel Vehicles (part 2)

Part one is here.

Please continue...

Here is my last post in the old thread:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cornkid said:
Oh please... thats Americans for you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'm not sure it is wise to lump an entire nation together under one umbrella. Wouldn't it include you under that same umbrella anyway?


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO POLLUTION! NADA...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The electricity to convert water into H2 comes from solar, but the electricity to charge EVs comes from coal and oil? Interestingly, this is exactly what the car makers are saying as well.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is quieter, emmits Water as a by-product
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Much louder than an EV, and the water emission is actually a big deal. It'll take power to keep it from becoming a solid in freezing temps, and thus stopping the FC process.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MUCH more power that Gasoline.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'm not sure how we compare "power" of fuels. Gasoline is certainly far more energy dense per unit volume until you compress H2 to something insane.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Electricity is made with... guess what... OIL and COAL (sometimes Nuclear, wow what an improvement)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Again, I'd like to get my power from the same clean source that the folks who're making H2 get theres. Well, look at that! I DO! My EV is completely fueled by solar power.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We will never run out of it
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


We can't run out of something we don't have. We have to create it to have it... so as long as we make it, that's true - we won't run out of it. But where will we get all the energy to make it?


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and runs much betterh than...an Electric car.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


OK, you got me here. A FCV IS an electric car. All the ones made today actually run off of batteries, in fact. The FC stack keeps the batteries charged, and the traction power comes from the batteries. The FC stack can't serve up the power fast enough otherwise. Again, a FCV *is* an EV. I prefer a Battery EV for cost, simplicity, practicality, safety and power. YMMV.

And... We use solar power, or in Iceland, thermal power, to isolate Hydrogen.... It isnt that challenging. Many people in Europe are already driving around with it....

-tom

[ QUOTE ]
Cornkid said:We use solar power, or in Iceland, thermal power, to isolate Hydrogen.... It isnt that challenging. Many people in Europe are already driving around with it....


[/ QUOTE ]
And you could use that same power to charge the batteries in BEVs much more efficiently. It's easier to transport electricity to where it is needed than hydrogen. You may not have terrorist problems in Iceland but in much of Europe and the USA tankers full of hydrogen are a terrorists's dream (so is gasoline, BTW). The sooner we divorce our society from using highly explosive liquids for fuel, the safer we'll all be.

You really believe that electricity is the answer.. ok:
- A car that runs on Electricity not only has a short runtime, it has VERY little horsepower.
- How do we get the electricty? How is it transported?

-tom

[ QUOTE ]
Cornkid said:
You really believe that electricity is the answer.. ok:

[/ QUOTE ]
Ummm. Yes. The same as you. A FCV is an Electric Vehicle. Takes electricity to make the "fuel" and the traction power comes from an electric motor.

[ QUOTE ]

- A car that runs on Electricity not only has a short runtime, it has VERY little horsepower.
- How do we get the electricty? How is it transported?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'd REALLY like you to do a bit of research so we can have a meaningful conversation about this.

FCVs currently have less range than BEVs. Currently BEVS have far more power than FCVs... and most gasoline cars.

How do we get our electricity? The same way you'll have to get yours for a FCV. But the difference is, I'll only need a quarter of it to power my BEV as you'll need to power a FCV. FCV WILL pollute far more than any BEV. Hmmm. Where did I lose you?

[ QUOTE ]
Cornkid said:
You really believe that electricity is the answer.. ok:
- A car that runs on Electricity not only has a short runtime, it has VERY little horsepower.
- How do we get the electricty? How is it transported?

-tom

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? little horsepower? How do electric trains get about I wonder? I think you'll find that an AC electric motor the size of your average V8 will happily snap the drivetrain with all its torque (which in my view means a lot more than power) apart from having more power anyway.

As for short runtime, if a tank of petrol gets you far enough, I fail to see how Li Ion batteries can't deliver the same amount. Not to mention the ease of "re-fuelling."

And the electricity is transported the same way it always has been, just how it gets to your house (unlike the hydrogen which you will have to go out and get).

One other thing too, the electricity it takes to charge the EV can be completely home-grown (whichever country you are in - heck you can even get it at home via solar cells), but I very much doubt that it is viable to produce hydrogen locally for most places. That can produce its own problems (just look at petrol prices!)

Ummm... Hydrogen doesnt pollute. It bonds within the fuel cell (actually the PEM [ proton exchange memebrane]) and produces a current in adition to a by-product of H2O. I do not see any pollution anywhere in there. If you consider water vapor pollution... I understand you... Any other way... Im sorry

-tom

Here is some literature that might interest you:

http://www.bellona.no/data/f/0/22/38/0_9811_1/GHP_cahpt_5-7_226_kb.pdf

-tom

[ QUOTE ]
Cornkid said:
Ummm... Hydrogen doesnt pollute.

[/ QUOTE ]
Tom -

Truly, I am at a loss.

You are a champion of EVs, without seeming to know that you are doing so. And at the same time, you are disparaging the one cost-effective, proven EV that is on the road - the BEV.

You say Hydrogen doesn't pollute, yet you just told me that BEVs *DO* pollute because the electricity comes from coal and oil. Hydrogen pollutes because it requires significant amounts of electricity to CREATE the Hydrogen in the first place. More electricity is requird to make H@ than is required to charge batteries in a BEV! You don't get the H2 for free! If you count where the electricity comes from for a Battery EV, you must also count where the electricity comes from for a FCV! Once the H2 is created, yes it is relatively clean to convert back into electricity (you know - for the FC ELECTRIC VEHICLE). But that was not my point. It takes 2-3 times the electricity to create H2 as it would to simply charge a Battery EV.

You say EVs are underpowered. Yet the only way to make a FCV accelerate acceptably is to use batteries or capacitors. Every FCV on the road today uses batteries (or a combination of batteries and capacitors) because the power cannot be served up from a FCV fast enough. Batteries are required BECAUSE they make the car more "powerful." Locomotives use electric traction power. Busses use electric power. The Li-Ion Tzero that goes 0-60 in 3.6 seconds uses electric power. Hybrids use little electric motors so they ICE can be severely down-sized to save fuel.

Forget everything else I typed above, and let me say this. Fuel Cell Vehicles are under-powered, inefficient, expensive EVs.

I am in agreement with a bunch of folks here in that the BEV might come back into existence after hybrids have been around for awhile.

I heard that a diesel hybrid was going to be available in Europe soon. I hope they make it here. I would like to buy a diesel hybrid compact car in the next few years and then replace the new ICE minivan we just bought 7-8 years down the road.

I would be willing to give a BEV a try, though I couldn't charge it at work (probably considered stealing ) and sometimes I am at work for 32 hours or so. It gets below freezing here and that could affect the charge. I only drive 30 miles combined with the grocery store right on my route home.

[ QUOTE ]
Cornkid said:
Here is some literature that might interest you:

http://www.bellona.no/data/f/0/22/38/0_9811_1/GHP_cahpt_5-7_226_kb.pdf


[/ QUOTE ]
Yup, I've read it before, it is a bit dated. Says some great things about BEVs, actually. And while it shows a pretty rosy future for FCV's, it ignores the gross inefficiencies of H2 production.

It talks about a few FCVs. All prototypes - you'll notice that none have ever made it into production despite the car-makers claim that they really want to build these. One of the popular cars is the DaimlerChrysler's Necar. They talk all about the range and weight and power... but fail to compare it to a BEV version of the same car. And look, here's the comparison, right here:
http://darelldd.com/ev/docs/carbdetour.pdf

Let me paste the relevant summary since it is quite long. But please don't miss the graphic at the top of the story. Spotting the FCV seven years of development, the BEV wins in range.

"· The commonly held belief is that fuel cell vehicles will have two to three times the fuel
economy of gasoline powered vehicles. But so far, fuel cell vehicles are losing. The
mid-sized gasoline powered Toyota Prius gets 13 percent better EPA fuel economy than
the subcompact Honda FCX fuel cell vehicle.

· Fuel cell vehicles are energy pigs. Fuel cell vehicles that operate on hydrogen made with
electrolysis consume four times as much electricity per mile as similarly-sized battery
electric vehicles.

· Battery electric vehicles powered by today's available battery technology can have twice
as much driving range as current fuel cell vehicles.

· Fuel cell vehicles will inconvenience their drivers with more than ten times as much time
devoted to refueling compared with battery electric or gasoline powered vehicles.

· CARB chairman Alan Lloyd effectively abandoned battery electric vehicles in response
to auto company threats to pull out of the California Fuel Cell Partnership.

· As they were publicly trumpeting the arrival of the second generation EV1, General
Motors privately vowed never to produce any more of them."


I love that you're a big fan of electric drive, and that you think it will stomp gas cars. And I agree! What I don't agree is that FCV's will stomp Battery EVs. FCV's are as heavy, if not heavier, much more complex, much more expensive, don't last as long, are more difficult to fuel, the fuel costs more, they are less efficient... but they are still EVs!

[ QUOTE ]
Wolfen said:
I would be willing to give a BEV a try, though I couldn't charge it at work (probably considered stealing ) and sometimes I am at work for 32 hours or so. It gets below freezing here and that could affect the charge. I only drive 30 miles combined with the grocery store right on my route home.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wolfen -

I'd love to have a diesel *plug in* hybrid. That's my dream second car.

You wouldn't need to charge at work. Eventually, with two-way charging, it may come to the point where your employer would *pay* you to charge at work. With two-way charging, your car could offer up some power during peak times to keep brown-outs or black-outs at bay. Would be cheaper than building a new peaker power plant, and much more efficient. But I digress...

If you have a 30-mile round trip, it doesn't matter what the temperature is. You may lose 10% of your range in the severe cold, but if you start with 100+ miles of range anyway, you aren't going to be hurting! And consider that the EV will *always* start in the morning with no block heater!

You work for 32 hours!? That's nuts!

[ QUOTE ]
Cornkid said:
And... We use solar power, or in Iceland, thermal power, to isolate Hydrogen.... It isnt that challenging. Many people in Europe are already driving around with it....

[/ QUOTE ]

Iceland is an unusual case. They are a small country with a small population and an abundance of volcanos, so geothermal is cheap and easy. I wonder if per-capita car ownership in Iceland is anywhere near North America's figures. I think that the primary focus for Iceland's FC conversion was their fishing fleet.

Claiming "no pollution" for hydrogen in Iceland is almost cheating - they have geothermal resources that much of the rest of the world does not.

Maybe hydrogen will work for Iceland, but none of their advantages apply to the US or most other industrial countries.

Ever seen an air compressor in a shop? The ones I've seen only go up to 150 PSI or so, and they're still rather substantial beasts. Imagine how strong a tank would have to be to handle 10,000 PSI (65x more pressure). I'll bet that such a tank with a 20 gallon capacity would weigh at least half as much as the average compact car (GMs HyWire concept weighed in at over 4000 pounds and wasn't anywhere close to being "road-worthy"). Filling such a beast would be an interesting experience and I can only imagine how much energy it would take to compress the H2 during transport and filling.

I can also imagine some terrible accidents at filling stations and on the road due to hydrogen's dual tendencies of defeating even the best gas seals and its incredible volatility.

No, I think that most hydrogen proponents haven't done much research on the realities of hydrogen.

[ QUOTE ]
jtr1962 said:The sooner we divorce our society from using highly explosive liquids for fuel, the safer we'll all be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yay! A point on which I can comment (since Darell handles all of the EV questions so well)...

Liquid fuels have big advantage over gases or electricity (in batteries) for fuel density and ease of handling. Sometime I'm going to calculate the energy contained in a propane tank like campers use vs. a pop bottle of similar volume full of biodiesel...same volume of biodiesel is hugely more energy.

The key point here is the phrase "highly explosive liquids". Flash point is the temperature at which a fuel will self-volatize (out-gas) and ignite in the presence of a flame or spark.

Flash point:

Reg Gasoline: -45F
Petrodiesel: 125F (much safer)
SoyBioDiesel: 300F (much, much safer)

Diesel engines use high pressure/temperature to ignite the biodiesel fuel building in inherently higher efficiency in the combustion process and providing huge amounts of torque (vs. a gasoline engine) in the process.

I actually want two vehicles (since we are already a 2 car family...it is no more than I already have):

1. BEV commuter; pure battery powered electric with no more stops at anyone's "filling station". I want to re-fuel at home in the comfort of my garage by pulling in and simply plugging in my car to the house. It will quietly, safely recharge during the night while I sleep using excess electrical generation capacity that is geared up for daytime peak loads from industry and private homes for peak air conditioning loads. Over time, I want most of that electricity to come from clean, U.S. produced wind energy. 100% of my electricity today is supplied by my "Green Power" contract with my utility. It basically comes from the ever growing number of large wind turbine "farms" in Iowa.

2. Diesel-Electric Plug-in Hybrid...on biodiesel

Starting in 2007, I think you will begin to see these either on the market or at least being shown in prototype form. They will give quick refueling at conventional "filling stations" and therefore unlimited range. I want enough battery to handle most of my local trips on pure-electric that I recharge at home but the engine kicks in when I need more than my batteries will deliver.

Nice, clean, renewable fuels that are produced in the U.S. and make our country safer and build our local economy. No fuel money spent that finds its way to terrorists or funneled into nuclear proliferation programs in foreign countries. No tanker spills. No giant liquidfied natural gas tankers that are like huge bombs coming into U.S. ports just waiting for a terrorist to ignite them, etc. etc.

Why on earth would any American want to buy fuel from a foreign country (especially ones with an unstable, repressive gov't) when they could energize their transportation vehicle from all U.S. produced energy that funnels money to their neighbors and builds high quality jobs right here in the good 'ole U.S. of A.?

Ya got me! But we are doing it, every day; Day after Day after Day. Darell has stopped most of his use of foreign energy. I've stopped most of mine (cut my use of petroleum by 75% and still travel the same miles).

What are you all waiting for? There's no way I'm waiting until 2020 or whatever date the hydrogen folks claim there will be viable hydrogen cars. I'm using renewable energy NOW. It is produced right here in my own country TODAY.

Come on in! The water is fine! (and...clean, by the way)

[ QUOTE ]
idleprocess said:
(GMs HyWire concept weighed in at over 4000 pounds and wasn't anywhere close to being "road-worthy"). Filling such a beast would be an interesting experience and I can only imagine how much energy it would take to compress the H2 during transport and filling.

[/ QUOTE ]
Idle... your posts these days just make me downright giddy! :thrumbsup:
The HyWire (a second generation of the thing is being built now - sure wish we ever had a second generation of any of the production EVs!) is an execellent example hype vs. reality. Most folks think that BEVs are way too heavy, and that somewho FCVs will be featherweight (hey, they're just filled with that light H2, after all!). They think FCV will have superior range. They think FCV will have superior power.

NOT.

The HyWire is:

1. heavier than any other BEV in its class (Mind you the HyWire doesn't even have to conform to any saftey standards and is a prototype while the comparison is to production BEVs!)
2. cramped in range - about 30 miles max.
3. severely underpowered. 30mph max.


[ QUOTE ]
I can also imagine some terrible accidents at filling stations and on the road due to hydrogen's dual tendencies of defeating even the best gas seals and its incredible volatility.

[/ QUOTE ]
Quite honestly, H2 doesn't scare me all that much more than gasoline scares me. But then gasoline scares me WAY more than it does the general motoring public. The two "fuels" (for lack of a better term for H2) have their own unique set of scary aspects, certainly. It constantly amazes me how comfortable we are with gasoline! If I hear one more person say how dangerous it would be to be in an accident that involved lots of broken batteries, I may just burst into flames myself.

[ QUOTE ]
No, I think that most hydrogen proponents haven't done much research on the realities of hydrogen.

[/ QUOTE ]We are spoon-fed how great FCV's will be, and how much better they'll be than BEVs... and all that would be grand if they could be produced, fueled and sold in a practical way. Hasn't been demonstrated yet, that's for certain. The easy way to cheat is to compare some dreamy future technology with a technology that has been stagnated in a quagmire of politics for ten years. Let's fund BEV and FC research the same way and see who wins!

Lost in all this is that BEVs are now proven. The car makers didn't want to have to build them but they were forced to. Took a couple of years to bring a BEV to market. The makers say they want to build FCV's... yet they started the FCV program in the 60's, and we still don't have a single one on the market. What up?

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

jtr1962 said:The sooner we divorce our society from using highly explosive liquids for fuel, the safer we'll all be.



I have owned my grand am since 1993

extreemly reliable and fun and cheap car to own.

I am still waiting for the dangerous gasoline in my car to explode.

there are worse ways to die.

oh that electric car gm had that did 0 to 60 in less than 8
seconds would be way behind me to 60 mph.

I would still probably rather have the electric car.

but gm cancelled a great little car.

I would have hid mine from them.

Now how did a hybrid come in the discussion. All a hybrid is.. is a car that uses less gas.. basically.

Hydrogen may take more power to isolate... but it IS MORE IFFECIENT.. Maybe 10 years ago they werent.. but now they are.. They are sooo efficient that Europeans have built many HydroStations throughout Europe and are driving the new cars.

Hydrogen is expensive.. about 3 times the cost of Gasoline, BUT something on the order of 90% of it is produced in Iceland, all WITH GEOTHERMAL POWER!

The electricty you would use in your car is made from either Nuclear and/or Gas/Coal. It is NOT as effictive.

I do not diagree with electricty powering cars.. Its just not refined enought for Global transformation.,

-tom

[ QUOTE ]
markdi said:
I would have hid mine from them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Many of us considered that. And it would have been attractive if I didn't have a family, a job, a home, etc. We'd be defaulting on our lease contract, and they could (would!) quite legally go after our finances. Plus, if I'm hiding it, I'm not driving it - so that would somewhat defeat the purpose!

Ok, Corn, you convinced me, where can I buy one and how much?

[ QUOTE ]
Hydrogen may take more power to isolate... but it IS MORE IFFECIENT

[/ QUOTE ] Then it is not more efficient. Read what you just wrote…

Seriously think about it, have you ever seen a super tanker full of oil? And we use what, 30 of those a day? How is Iceland going to make a billion gallons equivalent a day to supply us all? Not going to happen my friend, no matter how much geothermal power they have, not going to happen...

Bottom line if you use 1000w to go a mile in an EV you can go 1/4 mile in a FCV for that same 1000w. It just makes no sense. Heck if Iceland has all this power why don't that just generate electricity and put power lines in the road and run the vehicles inductively? Or sell the power to us, oh wait it would cost much more then any way we can produce it here, that's why.

This is like arguing that falling water generates free, clean electricity, so we should pump more water up mountains so we have even more free clean electricity. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/jpshakehead.gif