Cars, it's electric! Do Do Do

[Patrick]

Electric cars will die…hydrogen is the new gasoline.

Hydrogen fuel cell with batteries - won't need as many batteries this way.
Batteries can store for peaks and regen. Fuel cell designed for average draw rather than peak.

unless you are talking about a fusion reactor - which again gets back to anti-gravity.
so yeah, i'm in.

 

[rick81721]

Electric cars will die…hydrogen is the new gasoline.

The 2000s called - they want that old canard back. Not gonna happen

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesm...en-will-never-be-the-future-of-electric-cars/

 

[shrpshtr325]

The 2000s called - they want that old canard back. Not gonna happen

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesm...en-will-never-be-the-future-of-electric-cars/

View attachment 172604

you realize lithium batteries can explode in an impact too right? hydrogen fuel cells certainly seem to have lost the battle, but certainly have some distinct advantages over batteries

 

[rick81721]

you realize lithium batteries can explode in an impact too right? hydrogen fuel cells certainly seem to have lost the battle, but certainly have some distinct advantages over batteries

Explosion danger was a joke. Inefficiency is the problem - plus most hydrogen comes from fossil fuels.

 

[shrpshtr325]

Explosion danger was a joke. Inefficiency is the problem - plus most hydrogen comes from fossil fuels.

production is definitely an issue, and energy to produce it would currently come from fossil fuels, but so does most of the electricity used to charge BEVs so . . .

inefficiency on the production end is still being worked on, (i assume this is what you meant by inefficiency) if they figure that out it will be alot easier to get people to convert to fuel cell than BEV.

 

[Monkey Soup]

production is definitely an issue, and energy to produce it would currently come from fossil fuels, but so does most of the electricity used to charge BEVs so . . .

inefficiency on the production end is still being worked on, (i assume this is what you meant by inefficiency) if they figure that out it will be alot easier to get people to convert to fuel cell than BEV.

Hydrogen takes more energy to produce than the efficiency you gain. Everything comes from fossil fuels, down to the plastic bodies and interiors that most electric cars are made from. And remind me, what problem are we trying to solve with electric and hydrogen cars?

 

[rick81721]

production is definitely an issue, and energy to produce it would currently come from fossil fuels, but so does most of the electricity used to charge BEVs so . . .

inefficiency on the production end is still being worked on, (i assume this is what you meant by inefficiency) if they figure that out it will be alot easier to get people to convert to fuel cell than BEV.

Inefficiency in the conversion from H2 to electricity. To your first point - so fossil fuels to electricity to power vs fossil fuels to hydrogen to electricity to power

 

[shrpshtr325]

yes currently true, there is a significant energy loss on generating hydrogen, as of now it is more significant than the loss associated with charging BEVs.

Both technologies have a long way to go and i dont feel the BEVs are there yet for mainstream adoption, but with govt pushing them they have moved along quite a bit since they started to show up.

what problem are we trying to solve with electric and hydrogen cars?

yea good question, all these hippies pushing the green concept of them are missing the fact that you arent eliminating greenhouse gases with electric cars (for most of us) you are just moving those gases from the tailpipe to the power plant. . . .

this could be different but people are afraid of the best option currently available so it hasnt.

 

[one piece crank]

I like how BEV's are are referred to as environmentally friendly. Batteries are ahead because it was low-hanging fruit and everyone knows what a battery is. Hopefully this trend hits a roadblock, and/or the hydrogen camp get some support. But like anything Gov't or big-Corporate, easy first and the right choice too late...

Hydrogen is also not like @Patrick 's nightmare. I used to sell and service high-temp hydrogen atmosphere furnaces. With simple safety features there is virtually no risk, unless a bicycle mechanic has modified it.

 

[Santapez]

yes currently true, there is a significant energy loss on generating hydrogen, as of now it is more significant than the loss associated with charging BEVs.

Both technologies have a long way to go and i dont feel the BEVs are there yet for mainstream adoption, but with govt pushing them they have moved along quite a bit since they started to show up.




yea good question, all these hippies pushing the green concept of them are missing the fact that you arent eliminating greenhouse gases with electric cars (for most of us) you are just moving those gases from the tailpipe to the power plant. . . .

this could be different but people are afraid of the best option currently available so it hasnt.

Powerplant runs at a higher efficiency than any vehicle, that includes transmission losses. And then you have scrubbers for particulates and such along with renewable sources of power generation such as wind/solar along with nuclear that can't be used in a gas/diesel powered car. Exhaust is tightly controlled for NOx and other byproducts by the EPA with lots of tracking.

Plus the direct pollution from power plants is not in areas where people live. City/town streets with vehicles has the exhaust right there lingering.

It's why many buses switched to natural gas as opposed to diesel. Less particulates on the bus route even though the cost savings isn't huge as you have to do gas compressor stations at the bus facilities and all the gas detection for safety.

 

[rick81721]

Hydrogen is also not like @Patrick 's nightmare. I used to sell and service high-temp hydrogen atmosphere furnaces. With simple safety features there is virtually no risk, unless a bicycle mechanic has modified it.

Would you drive a van with an operating hydrogen furnace in the back?

 

[one piece crank]

Would you drive a van with an operating hydrogen furnace in the back?

You should see a hydrogen pusher furance in operation, with flame curtain entry and exit points. Then you would understand. Mixture percentages need to be ~10% pure oxygen or 40% air mixture to become combustible.

 

[shrpshtr325]

Powerplant runs at a higher efficiency than any vehicle, that includes transmission losses. And then you have scrubbers for particulates and such along with renewable sources of power generation such as wind/solar along with nuclear that can't be used in a gas/diesel powered car. Exhaust is tightly controlled for NOx and other byproducts by the EPA with lots of tracking.

Plus the direct pollution from power plants is not in areas where people live. City/town streets with vehicles has the exhaust right there lingering.

It's why many buses switched to natural gas as opposed to diesel. Less particulates on the bus route even though the cost savings isn't huge as you have to do gas compressor stations at the bus facilities and all the gas detection for safety.

yes they are easier to clean up, and run at a more consistent efficiency since they are stationary (im not sure about overall efficiency as far as energy contained in the fuel). they are finally transitioning away from coal plants in the US (down to about 20% of the electricity production as of now) but thats a recent thing and even with better controls coal is a 'dirtier' (using the language from the same people who are pushing the evs) fuel than diesel or natural gas. The particulate emissions is not really an issue for most gasoline powered vehicles either, thats more of a diesel thing, and even new ones with the DPF and DEF setups on them run pretty damn clean in that department.


I mean i guess since power plant emissions effect fewer people that makes it ok to ignore them in the grand scheme of things . . . 🤷‍♂️

 

[Santapez]

yes they are easier to clean up, and run at a more consistent efficiency since they are stationary (im not sure about overall efficiency as far as energy contained in the fuel). they are finally transitioning away from coal plants in the US (down to about 20% of the electricity production as of now) but thats a recent thing and even with better controls coal is a 'dirtier' (using the language from the same people who are pushing the evs) fuel than diesel or natural gas. The particulate emissions is not really an issue for most gasoline powered vehicles either, thats more of a diesel thing, and even new ones with the DPF and DEF setups on them run pretty damn clean in that department.


I mean i guess since power plant emissions effect fewer people that makes it ok to ignore them in the grand scheme of things . . . 🤷‍♂️

Nobody said ignore. It's the lesser of two evils.

And even with better emission controls on vehicles they aren't as clean as power plants.

Power plants aren't chipping their plants and rolling coal.

And yes you're right, power plants are even cleaner as we're moving away from coal burning plants, thanks for confirming my point on that.

 

[BananaFred]

Test drove a Polestar 2 at the Short Hills Mall last Friday. In and out in an hour (cuz nothing else to buy at the SHM). They have plenty of availability for test rides because they just opened. Nice power (although it definitely did not feel like 420 hp), cruised up to 90 MPH without much effort on JFK pkwy. One pedal driving feels a little like a manual transmission, which I liked. Car felt squirrelly on hard turns. Would be more compelling in a mid-sized SUV body. My reservation is how the technology will age...will they still be delivering OTA updates to a 2021 car in 2026 ? The interior made out of recycled plastic bottles and recycled fish netting is a little over the top (I did not notice any stray fish hooks)

 

[shrpshtr325]

Nobody said ignore. It's the lesser of two evils.

And even with better emission controls on vehicles they aren't as clean as power plants.

Power plants aren't chipping their plants and rolling coal.

And yes you're right, power plants are even cleaner as we're moving away from coal burning plants, thanks for confirming my point on that.

you didnt say ignore, but the guys pushing to rush the development (not saying something shouldnt be done, but rushing it isnt going to end well either) are acting like if you drive a BEV you are 0 carbon, which is far from the truth.

90+% of diesel vehicles are not chipped or rolling coal, (probably more like 99% but i have no proof of this one, just that diesel is mostly used in commercial trucks where the company cares about operational cost and longevity vs the 'hey look at me' factor) so small % of vehicles even small % effect on overall emissions.

I think BEV is a temporary solution atm until we figure out a better energy source for transportation (maybe better battery tech will come along and prove me wrong, who knows), no i dont know what is, i would love for it to be something more like fuel cells and less like batteries (which also have quite a carbon hit to create and dispose of).

 

[Monkey Soup]

you didnt say ignore, but the guys pushing to rush the development (not saying something shouldnt be done, but rushing it isnt going to end well either) are acting like if you drive a BEV you are 0 carbon, which is far from the truth.

90+% of diesel vehicles are not chipped or rolling coal, (probably more like 99% but i have no proof of this one, just that diesel is mostly used in commercial trucks where the company cares about operational cost and longevity vs the 'hey look at me' factor) so small % of vehicles even small % effect on overall emissions.

I think BEV is a temporary solution atm until we figure out a better energy source for transportation (maybe better battery tech will come along and prove me wrong, who knows), no i dont know what is, i would love for it to be something more like fuel cells and less like batteries (which also have quite a carbon hit to create and dispose of).

Cars and trucks are not the major source of air pollution or CO2. Something like 6 ocean going container ships spew more pollution per day than all of the 4-wheeled vehicles in the world combined, and there are way more than 6 of them out there. Then theres the most populated countries in the world still burning coal at home and driving 2-stroke vehicles.

 

[shrpshtr325]

Cars and trucks are not the major source of air pollution or CO2. Something like 6 ocean going container ships spew more pollution per day than all of the 4-wheeled vehicles in the world combined, and there are way more than 6 of them out there. Then theres the most populated countries in the world still burning coal at home and driving 2-stroke vehicles.

this is part of my point, the western(developed) world is rushing to get fossil fuel burning vehicles off the road (replaced with BEV) as if it is THE solution when they are ignoring other major sources of emissions. (as well as other alternatives, batteries in their current state are made from elements which are limited in volume and in (insert unknown number) of years we will be back in a place where we need to find an alternative. BEV are a temporary measure, and not a great or permanent solution (maybe nothing is permanent wtf knows)

what about air travel? that emits a TON of CO2 as well. . . .

 

[Patrick]

I like how BEV's are are referred to as environmentally friendly. Batteries are ahead because it was low-hanging fruit and everyone knows what a battery is. Hopefully this trend hits a roadblock, and/or the hydrogen camp get some support. But like anything Gov't or big-Corporate, easy first and the right choice too late...

Hydrogen is also not like @Patrick 's nightmare. I used to sell and service high-temp hydrogen atmosphere furnaces. With simple safety features there is virtually no risk, unless a bicycle mechanic has modified it.

If a hydrogen tank is ruptured in an accident, it is either going ballistic (10,000 PSI) or exploding.
I'm a fuel cell fan, and I know they don't operate like a furnace - chemical reaction producing heat, electricity, and water.
Where the hydrogen comes from is a problem (Rick noted), cause the source produces CO2, but no CO.

Propane fuel cells that can be filled at home seem like a reasonable idea too. Infrastructure is there.
Again CO2 producers - but maybe we get better at sequestering? Almost like a filter that gets changed?

My claim to fame is i went to school with the Plug Power guys. They are saving the world's energy problems.
I argue on the internet. They never did come to the bar where i worked. Explains a lot.

PS - i'd love to see that type of furnace!

I did say fusion, not fission. When they figure out how to sustainably combine 2 H and make an He + heat,
game over.

 

[one piece crank]

If a hydrogen tank is ruptured in an accident, it is either going ballistic (10,000 PSI) or exploding…

If flight recorders can survive a plane crash…

PS - i'd love to see that type of furnace!

You seriously would! Imagine someone left a wrench inside, then they bring the furnace up to temp and the wrench evaporates. Subsequent sintering runs result in randomly plated parts due to the contaminated atmosphere!

Science!