Hydrogen Neue Klasse EV?

[JHZR2]

Apply that same sentiment to commercial air travel.

In 1950, the question was, "Do you have any idea how much an airline flight costs per mile?"

The answer is always the same: 10 years ago, it cost more than it does now. 10 years in the future, it'll cost even less.

That's how technology works when it comes to costs.

Except that fuel cells are costed associated with platinum, iridium, specialty chemicals, specialty storage, etc.

I spent the first half of my career as a developer of fuel cells and fuel processing systems. The industry joke was that fuel cells were five years out for the last 35 years. I’m a believer in them for some things. Vehicles… not so much.

 

[alarmguy]

I still don’t think the intention is to replace gasoline, just offset it by giving other options.

Well, I was going on the assumption that some states were going to ban the sale of fossil fuel vehicles. Even though it seems like all of that is falling by the wayside because they know it’s not possible. However, we still have airheads that people vote for still.

 

[alarmguy]

Except that fuel cells are costed associated with platinum, iridium, specialty chemicals, specialty storage, etc.

I spent the first half of my career as a developer of fuel cells and fuel processing systems. The industry joke was that fuel cells were five years out for the last 35 years. I’m a believer in them for some things. Vehicles… not so much.

this is the purpose of my posts.
And not directed at anybody, but it’s the people with the open minds that create that paradigm shift and come up with something truly great.

A closed mind cannot do that one example is that I’m not sure everybody in here knows besides fuel cell vehicles. There are hydrogen combustion engines as well.
https://www.topspeed.com/companies-invested-in-hydrogen-combustion-engines/

It’s undeniable that advanced have also been made in efficiently producing hydrogen not on a large scale yet that I know of

But it still comes down to we do not generate enough electricity nor have the infrastructure to charge 300 million cars
I can’t wait till we just get up to 6 million and see what happens with the electric grid in some areas

 

[goblin]

...
But it still comes down to we do not generate enough electricity nor have the infrastructure to charge 300 million cars
...

But we do have the infrastructure to fill up hydrogen-powered cars, and the electricity to refine hydrogen by electrolysis - which is about 4x what is needed to charge an EV, or the lungs for the byproducts released if we refine it ?

 

[Torrid]

Well, I was going on the assumption that some states were going to ban the sale of fossil fuel vehicles. Even though it seems like all of that is falling by the wayside because they know it’s not possible. However, we still have airheads that people vote for still.

I still don’t put much faith in that, not to mention the other 47 states with common sense haven’t attempted it.

 

[OVERKILL]

But we do have the infrastructure to fill up hydrogen-powered cars, and the electricity to refine hydrogen by electrolysis - which is about 4x what is needed to charge an EV, or the lungs for the byproducts released if we refine it ?

Bingo. Trying to generate this volume of hydrogen with electrolysis, let alone store and transport it, is a much larger challenge than charging BEV's.

 

[alarmguy]

But we do have the infrastructure to fill up hydrogen-powered cars, and the electricity to refine hydrogen by electrolysis - which is about 4x what is needed to charge an EV, or the lungs for the byproducts released if we refine it ?

Point of my post is that is old thinking. Much information on the internet on solutions to using electricity to refine H2. Including one that I just posted using seawater and sunlight - H2 AND H2O drinking water.

Ps we dont have the infrastructure to charge 300 million BEVs either.

I dont know the answer but there is a reason why companies continue to explore H2 I do think one reason is the challenges BEVs present. Not even close to 6% of vehicles are BEV and challenges already exist.

Im not saying H2 is the answer. Some take my "open" thoughts as promoting something. The only thing I will promote is that BEVs as they exist will never be the majority in the USA/
Someone will find a solution and a portable power source like H2 might be a possibility rather than upgrading the power/transmission grid for the entire country as large as the USA. Almost an impossible massive costly undertaking I would suggest.

 

[Torrid]

Point of my post is that is old thinking. Much information on the internet on solutions to using electricity to refine H2. Including one that I just posted using seawater and sunlight - H2 AND H2O drinking water.

Ps we dont have the infrastructure to charge 300 million BEVs either.

I dont know the answer but there is a reason why companies continue to explore H2 I do think one reason is the challenges BEVs present. Not even close to 6% of vehicles are BEV and challenges already exist.

That's what we need more than anything, a better power supply for EVs. I'd be happy if that was hydrogen. It doesn't look likely with current technology, but I'm glad they're continuing to develop it. If it wasn't for continued development of batteries we wouldn't have the EVs we have now. The motors are easy. The power supply is complicated.

 

[alarmguy]

That's what we need more than anything, a better power supply for EVs. I'd be happy if that was hydrogen. It doesn't look likely with current technology, but I'm glad they're continuing to develop it. If it wasn't for continued development of batteries we wouldn't have the EVs we have now. The motors are easy. The power supply is complicated.

... and the existing power grid even more complicated though I think finally the pubic starting to accept we need powerplants ... 30 years behind though.

I agree on the current technology issues with H2 but I dont know? There sure seems to be a lot of companies working on that in the sense that maybe they know more then me (very, very likely *LOL*) There can also be some we dont know about other than H2... got me. I just dont think the current situation is sustainable but we have 100 years or more of gasoline we can refine too.

(Internet here is a bit wonky this morning or is it the site?)

 

[Torrid]

... and the existing power grid even more complicated though I think finally the pubic starting to accept we need powerplants ... 30 years behind though.

I agree on the current technology issues with H2 but I dont know? There sure seems to be a lot of companies working on that in the sense that maybe they know more then me (very, very likely *LOL*) There can also be some we dont know about other than H2... got me. I just dont think the current situation is sustainable but we have 100 years or more of gasoline we can refine too.

(Internet here is a bit wonky this morning or is it the site?)

I think BEV is just winning right now because the delivery process is a lot easier than hydrogen and I can't hydrogen fill at home. It's just not currently cost effective to use hydrogen. EVs are cheaper to operate than buying gas so it's going to have to be either a better experience or somehow cheaper to catch on.

All I see with powerplants here is they're just converting away from coal to natural gas. The closest one to me still operates on coal for now. I'm still trying to figure out why we don't use more nuclear. There's a ton of wind power here too. I can see multiple windmills during my whole 40 mile drive to work.

 

[kschachn]

But we do have the infrastructure to fill up hydrogen-powered cars, and the electricity to refine hydrogen by electrolysis - which is about 4x what is needed to charge an EV, or the lungs for the byproducts released if we refine it ?

Thermodynamically it would be difficult to conceive of a more pointless energy source than to decompose a stable oxide just to recombine it again.

 

[goblin]

In my book, the reason car manufacturers continue to invest in hydrogen research is because they know plain well that they own the whole chain on building an internal combustion engine (ICE), with knowledge stretching back 100 years, whereas they'll be leveled to a "grab a ticket and get on the line" status should they switch to EVs.

A hydrogen powered vehicle is an amazing thing, but at the end of the day it's an ICE, with its pros and cons. Emissions and a (reasonably) fast fueling are pros, but it carries all the inherent ICE cons, which can be boiled down to complexity (provided we theoretically can fix everything else).

Complexity is a non-compressible cost. Can't get around it. An ICE has 200+ parts not counting transmission and peripherals. An electric motor has way less.

Not even 25 years ago photographers were loudly screaming that they would NEVER use digital cameras, that film will NEVER be bested by a digital sensor, that professionals will NEVER use digital cameras.
The tipping point came (once DSLRs hit about 6 megapixels), and the full pail tipped over.

Then the same photographers blasted that they will NEVER use a camera with a digital (screen) viewfinder, that digital viewfinders will NEVER equal optical ones, that pros will NEVER use a mirrorless camera(no optical viewfinder).

What do you know, everybody is mirrorless now.

Why ? Because - once feelings get out of the way - a film camera has more moving parts (and requiring watchmaker precision levels) than a digital one, because an optical viewfinder (a good one, the cheap ones were beaten by digital viewfinder right off the bat) is insanely expensive to manufacture - the pentaprism alone is a work of art - and this cost can't go down. Whereas a digital viewfinder gets better with every generation, for the same price, which is low to begin with.

So it's all a matter of tipping point. When we get to it, it will all roll downhill real fast.

As for energy production - power plants are being built left and right for Ai centers, might as well electrify the rest.

As for hydrogen production from solar and seawater - well, gas can be produced from cow's exhaust gasses too, it doesn't make it a viable solution.

Nature abhors complexity. Business does, as well. If two systems do the same (simple) job and one is simpler - it wins. It's not about politics, agendas, conspiracies or green lizards - EVs are less complex. They will NOT replace ICEs everywhere but will corner ICE technology to dedicated fields and markets, which will keep shrinking.

 

[alarmguy]

I think BEV is just winning right now because the delivery process is a lot easier than hydrogen and I can't hydrogen fill at home. It's just not currently cost effective to use hydrogen. EVs are cheaper to operate than buying gas so it's going to have to be either a better experience or somehow cheaper to catch on.

All I see with powerplants here is they're just converting away from coal to natural gas. The closest one to me still operates on coal for now. I'm still trying to figure out why we don't use more nuclear. There's a ton of wind power here too. I can see multiple windmills during my whole 40 mile drive to work.

3 Mile Island is why. Silly but true. 3 mile island scared the population and also shut down a BRAND NEW Nuclear plant on Long Island that was completely finished and in low power testing. Back then it cost 5 billion to build with the latest state of the art controls for back then.
Anyway, they spent upwards of close to 2 billion more decommissioning it. Never was able to produce. If interested, much on the subject and also videos on "Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant"

Fast forward to my new state (at the time) to South Carolina. I was kind of proud less then 10 years ago to be I think the only state in the nation (or one of a very select few) that had not one, but two nuclear plants under construction on the same site as another operating nuclear plant. Less then maybe 15 straight line miles from my home.
Get this, such a sure thing, they also built and ran what must have been hundreds of miles of new power line cables with the tall towers to carry the electricity once the plants were completed. These towers were built along with substations along the right of way of the existing older ones from the existing plant.
SO what happen, Westinghouse/Toshiba had massive delays in getting equipment, behind on schedule they tried to modify some other equipment to get it faster to the site. Billions being spent. Toshiba having financial problems. South Carolina Electric Utility management started covering up the issues, even though they weren't to blame. It got so bad, then they were to blame for covering it up and lying.
Anyway those uncompleted plants lay there almost in ruins. The electric utility had to be sold off to an energy company (for got the name, its huge)

Even though I now live across the state line from SC. I always loved SC for its small state size and at the same time growth as a big manufacturing state. Not only that, but what some see as a backwards state we have more green energy then most. Yet we have no annual car inspections at all, no emission tests either.

So for example California has 10% of its power Nuclear (by a plant due to be shut down) SC has 55% Nuclear power and if they can get these plants construction restarted I think will lead the nation.


https://www.chooseenergy.com/news/article/failed-v-c-summer-nuclear-project-timeline/

Just this year!
https://www.live5news.com/2025/01/23/revival-failed-vc-summer-nuclear-project-could-happen-sc/

 

[alarmguy]

In my book, the reason car manufacturers continue to invest in hydrogen research is because they know plain well that they own the whole chain on building an internal combustion engine (ICE), with knowledge stretching back 100 years, whereas they'll be leveled to a "grab a ticket and get on the line" status should they switch to EVs.

A hydrogen powered vehicle is an amazing thing, but at the end of the day it's an ICE, with its pros and cons. Emissions and a (reasonably) fast fueling are pros, but it carries all the inherent ICE cons, which can be boiled down to complexity (provided we theoretically can fix everything else).

Complexity is a non-compressible cost. Can't get around it. An ICE has 200+ parts not counting transmission and peripherals. An electric motor has way less.

...

I get the idea of your post but we all know very well that gasoline engines easily get to 200,000+ miles without a new engine. We do not know what a H2 engine would get.
EV motors, less complex DO wear out and have to be replaced as well as their battery packs. So I dont see the combustion engine as a con anymore than an electric and I dont think most of America does either.

Either way, either technology the public wont care as they have at least equal service life.
EVs are very expensive for what you get and more inconvenient to much of the public. Im not saying all public. But much.
We have a few in our community, mostly second vehicles. One loves her Lyric, the other likes their Tesla.

I see both cars plugged in all the time in their driveway with a the cord running across it. When they go out they leave the plug and cord laying in the driveway. Looks unsightly. I suspect our HOA might make a rule about it if we have many more who leave the stuff laying around. As it is in our community which is a resort, you cant even have a dirty driveway, garbage cans etc cant be seen from the street etc. Meaning a driveway must be power washed if it gets ugly or you get fined.

 

[Torrid]

I get the idea of your post but we all know very well that gasoline engines easily get to 200,000+ miles without a new engine. We do not know what a H2 engine would get.
EV motors, less complex to wear out and have to be replaced as well as their battery packs. So I dont see the combustion engine as a con anymore than an electric and I dont think most of America does either.

Either way, either technology the public wont care as they have at least equal service life.

Burning H2 isn't the answer. It's much less efficient than gasoline and multiple times in cost. Fuel cell hydrogen EVs would be the answer efficiency wise and that truly does only produce water in the power generation process.

 

[alarmguy]

Burning H2 isn't the answer. It's much less efficient than gasoline and multiple times in cost. Fuel cell hydrogen EVs would be the answer efficiency wise and that truly does only produce water in the power generation process.

As we know it in it present form. Technology advances. Transistors used to be expensive too.

You saw the article I am sure doubt using sunlight to convert seawater to H2 AND fresh drinking water.

 

[Torrid]

As we know it in it present form. Technology advances. Transistors used to be expensive too.

You saw the article I am sure doubt using sunlight to convert seawater to H2 AND fresh drinking water.

I did see the story on it. I think it's interesting. I just wonder if it could be scaled up to a useful level.

 

[goblin]

As we know it in it present form. Technology advances. Transistors used to be expensive too.

You saw the article I am sure doubt using sunlight to convert seawater to H2 AND fresh drinking water.

Sunlight is a great thing but it should come with its own little tag of how much of it is needed to do anything on an industrial scale.

As for replacing/maintaining an electric motor vs an ICE - if you really want to put an equal sign between them - we're on the wrong track and I want my time back

We are talking about the price an EV will end up costing to manufacture, NOT the price it will cost to maintain

EV manufacturers will always be able to undercut ICE prices, once both industries are up to speed. Recycling (parting) an EV will be cheaper because simpler. Everything will be simpler.

We can cherry pick all we want - obtaining hydrogen at the scale needed to make it viable will be orders of magnitude more /fill negative here - polluting, expensive, complex - you name it/.

And once ICE is cornered - it will start shedding its pluses like a balding dog, till it remains a specialized tool or a Veblen good.

 

[Brons2]

Sometimes I’m a little surprised at some comments in here.
Some think that I am a pro hydrogen person meaning the next step in all things sustainable fuel.
Not really, as much as I do think the possibilities are limitless and some think I am saying it is a certain thing.

What I am saying is there is no way on earth the electric grid is going to charge 300 million cars and close down all the gas stations in the United States. Sorry not happening.

I do think with an open mind hydrogen is a distinct possibility and I can’t be completely out of my mind. Being big box retailers like Walmart, Amazon and Target currently use hydrogen powered forklifts.
Some businesses power their buildings with hydrogen. Toyota gets made fun of because of its investigation of hydrogen, BMW same thing.

What I am saying is there’s many close minds in here. Sometimes you have to think out of the box which is why certain people come along in the history of mankind and change everyone’s way of thinking.

Here is another one, Sunpower created hydrogen fuel and drinkable water.
https://news.cornell.edu/stories/20...ater-lead-low-cost-green-hydrogen-clean-water

No matter what, the electric grid is not going to replace gasoline

Super odd post. You say on one hand that people are way too closed minded on H2, yet, there's no way ever that the electric grid is going to replace gasoline?

OK, so looking at H2 cars vs. EVs...
One solution involves overcoming basic physics.
The other solution requires expanding the electric grid and sourcing more battery elements, and offers a nice intermediate step in hybridization. Not only these things, but the end user actually has the ability to produce their own fuel with PV.

We argue on BITOG about the inefficiencies of PV, wind and other renewables, but those are way less energy intensive than separating H2 from natural gas or water.

I'm not some luddite though. I see used Toyota Mirais for sale super cheap. They are supposed to be Lexus nice to operate. If there was a filling station somewhere, anywhere near me, I would consider one. Or if a home station was cheap and cost effective to separate the H2 from natural gas using electricity. But it isn't, so I won't.

Anyway....

 

[OVERKILL]

Point of my post is that is old thinking. Much information on the internet on solutions to using electricity to refine H2. Including one that I just posted using seawater and sunlight - H2 AND H2O drinking water.

The problem is you don't really understand the scale of the problem here, and since you have me on ignore, I'm not going to bother getting into the mathematics of it (which I've done before), but I can assure you, the amount of power generation you need to generate the H2 does not workout favourably for H2 over BEV.

Ps we dont have the infrastructure to charge 300 million BEVs either.

No, we don't, but we are far closer to having it than we are to replacing gas stations with hydrogen ones, let alone the generation needed to produce all that H2. BEV's are "easy", because you can charge them at home, so they really don't need the same level of infrastructure that gas and diesel cars need, while hydrogen cars need even MORE extensive (and complex) infrastructure because of its increased level of hazard and considerable challenges with handling and storing it.

This is a lot like the argument that because we are investing in fusion, that we should abandon fission and just ignore all the problems with fusion because a few blokes are claiming it's the future. You could spend a day explaining to somebody why fusion is hard, sustained fusion harder, and net positive fusion harder still, let alone meaningful net positive, but if their argument is perpetually "oh, we'll figure it out, it's the future" at some point you just have to abandon the conversation because the person either can't, or won't, understand the details that underpin the challenges.