Toyota Backs Fuel Cells over batteries...
- Thread starter Shannow
- Start date
- Status
Toyota and Honda and other Japanese car manufactures spent ton of money in Hydrogen R&D the last 20+ years because of the pressure from Japanese government. Toyota has no choice now after spent billions dollar in Hydrogen research, they tried to justify their mistakes.
About their claim of battery experiences, they didn't start doing anything with Li-on battery until very recent, their batteries in their hybrid and plug-in hybrid was much inferior to Li-on. Only now they started using Li-on batteries in various hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles. They are way behind everybody in battery technology.
From consumer point of view, a ZEV(Zero Emission vehicle) is ZEV, FCV(Fuel Cell Vehicle) or BEV(Battery Electric Vehicle) are similar in tail pipe emission. The only different right now is how convenience in fueling either FCV and BEV.
There are some hydrogen stations in California, most of them concentrate in Orange County, Los Angeles County and Silicon Valley. I can drive a Toyota Mirai from Orange County to San Fransisco and back without problem, because there is one Hydrogen station around midway on I5. Can I drive Mirai to Phoenix or Las Vegas ? Absolutely not, because there is no hydrogen station outside California
Can I drive a Tesla vehicle to Phoenix or Las Vegas ? Absolutely yes, because there are super charger stations on major highways. I can also drive a Tesla vehicle all the way from California to Florida or New York or Main ... Can I do that with Toyota Mirai ?
About hydrogen station, as of now the cost to build a station is about $2 million, who in their right mind would spend that much of money to serve 5-10 cars a week ? and probably up to 30-50 cars a week 4-5 years from now. Who wants to invest $2 million to have a few hundreds in revenue a week and probably lost few thousands every week for many years ? That why only hydrogen stations built the last few months in California was with state money.
It is very much chicken and egg, no fueling stations no sale, no sale then no stations.
Hydrogen fueling stations according to Toyota: https://ssl.toyota.com/mirai/stations.html
Tesla Super Charger stations according to Tesla: https://www.tesla.com/supercharger
About their claim of battery experiences, they didn't start doing anything with Li-on battery until very recent, their batteries in their hybrid and plug-in hybrid was much inferior to Li-on. Only now they started using Li-on batteries in various hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles. They are way behind everybody in battery technology.
From consumer point of view, a ZEV(Zero Emission vehicle) is ZEV, FCV(Fuel Cell Vehicle) or BEV(Battery Electric Vehicle) are similar in tail pipe emission. The only different right now is how convenience in fueling either FCV and BEV.
There are some hydrogen stations in California, most of them concentrate in Orange County, Los Angeles County and Silicon Valley. I can drive a Toyota Mirai from Orange County to San Fransisco and back without problem, because there is one Hydrogen station around midway on I5. Can I drive Mirai to Phoenix or Las Vegas ? Absolutely not, because there is no hydrogen station outside California
Can I drive a Tesla vehicle to Phoenix or Las Vegas ? Absolutely yes, because there are super charger stations on major highways. I can also drive a Tesla vehicle all the way from California to Florida or New York or Main ... Can I do that with Toyota Mirai ?
About hydrogen station, as of now the cost to build a station is about $2 million, who in their right mind would spend that much of money to serve 5-10 cars a week ? and probably up to 30-50 cars a week 4-5 years from now. Who wants to invest $2 million to have a few hundreds in revenue a week and probably lost few thousands every week for many years ? That why only hydrogen stations built the last few months in California was with state money.
It is very much chicken and egg, no fueling stations no sale, no sale then no stations.
Hydrogen fueling stations according to Toyota: https://ssl.toyota.com/mirai/stations.html
Tesla Super Charger stations according to Tesla: https://www.tesla.com/supercharger
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
It is very much chicken and egg, no fueling stations no sale, no sale then no stations.
No not at all. There are no stations because there is no demand. If for some silly reason they built stations anyway there still would be no demand.
Hydrogen is an unsuitable fuel for a motor vehicle. Any fuel that is stored as a gas is.
It is very much chicken and egg, no fueling stations no sale, no sale then no stations.
No not at all. There are no stations because there is no demand. If for some silly reason they built stations anyway there still would be no demand.
Hydrogen is an unsuitable fuel for a motor vehicle. Any fuel that is stored as a gas is.
Originally Posted By: Falken
Overkill, we use green energy, with waterfalls, in Quebec.
I believe we can find greener methods that make regional sense.
And, where oil makes the most sense in the future, so be it, use oil.
But why can't we have widely adopted CNG or Propane for commuter cars at this point?
If you only attack the weakest point of any argument it throws out many valid points as well.
We have geniuses trying to figure all this stuff out still, and I am far from a genius over here, but we already have many technologies that are falling to the wayside "just because... Oil oil oil...".
Check the R12 thread. People are flipping out at the idea of 1 lb. of propane in an HVAC system. How well do you think people would like the idea of 30-40 gallons of the stuff being in their car, being heated in the engine bay, and delivered into their engine?
Overkill, we use green energy, with waterfalls, in Quebec.
I believe we can find greener methods that make regional sense.
And, where oil makes the most sense in the future, so be it, use oil.
But why can't we have widely adopted CNG or Propane for commuter cars at this point?
If you only attack the weakest point of any argument it throws out many valid points as well.
We have geniuses trying to figure all this stuff out still, and I am far from a genius over here, but we already have many technologies that are falling to the wayside "just because... Oil oil oil...".
Check the R12 thread. People are flipping out at the idea of 1 lb. of propane in an HVAC system. How well do you think people would like the idea of 30-40 gallons of the stuff being in their car, being heated in the engine bay, and delivered into their engine?
I have two 20 lb propane tanks on my deck, I drove a forklift at work for YEARS that ran on the stuff when I was a machinist. Indoors to boot.
But if the answer for all eternity is only ever going to be oil for some people, I guess a thought provoking argument for change won't happen.
The next 5 years will be really interesting I imagine.
But if the answer for all eternity is only ever going to be oil for some people, I guess a thought provoking argument for change won't happen.
The next 5 years will be really interesting I imagine.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Quote:
Nobody makes more batteries than Toyota. We’ve been doing batteries longer than anyone in the automotive business. Which is why we’re so bullish on fuel cells. We don’t see those same hurdles.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookecrothe...m/#526796626ecc
It's true that Toyota made more battery than any other car manufacture, Tesla included.
But Toyota had mostly obsolete battery: NiMH (nickel-metal hydride). It is in the current 2016 Lexus ES300H and other vehicles. Toyota doesn't have much experience with more advance Li-on batteries.
Quote:
Regarding mechanicals, ES 300h is motivated by a 2.5-liter, 156-hp gasoline-powered I-4 aided by a pair of 105 kW electric motors (one acting as a generator) and a 245-volt nickel-metal hydride battery pack. Managed by a CVT automatic, that familiar hardware generates 200 total-system horsepower.
Source: http://www.stltoday.com/lifestyles/autos...75b0906784.html
Quote:
Today’s Hybrid Car Battery: Nickel Metal Hydride
Toyota Prius Hybrid Battery
The battery pack of the second generation Toyota Prius consists of 28 Panasonic prismatic nickel metal hydride modules—each containing six 1.2 volt cells—connected in series to produce a nominal voltage of 201.6 volts. The total number of cells is 168, compared with 228 cells packaged in 38 modules in the first generation Prius. The pack is positioned behind the back seat.
Lithium Ion Battery – For Next Generation Hybrids and Electric Cars
Lithium ion (or Li-ion) batteries are important because they have a higher energy density—the amount of energy they hold by weight, or by volume—than any other type. The rule of thumb is that Li-ion cells hold roughly twice as much energy per pound as do the previous generation of advanced batteries, nickel-metal-hydride (NiMH)
http://www.hybridcars.com/hybrid-car-battery/
As far as I know no other car manufactures are using NiMH batteries in their battery electric vehicles or plug-in hybrids.
Toyota planned to make 3,000 Mirai for sale in California in a little more than 2 years (from Oct 2015 to end of 2017), while Tesla had more than 300,000 deposits for model 3.
If Fuel Cell Vehicle is so good according to Toyota, then they should plan to make more than 500,000 Mirai's for sale in US the next 2 years.
I don't know much about hydrogen fueling stations in Japan, they probably have more hydrogen stations there, but for a fuel cell vehicle travel across US we need several hundreds fueling stations, no investors are willing to invest several hundreds million dollar for the infrastructure for no possible profit to make.
Quote:
Nobody makes more batteries than Toyota. We’ve been doing batteries longer than anyone in the automotive business. Which is why we’re so bullish on fuel cells. We don’t see those same hurdles.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/brookecrothe...m/#526796626ecc
It's true that Toyota made more battery than any other car manufacture, Tesla included.
But Toyota had mostly obsolete battery: NiMH (nickel-metal hydride). It is in the current 2016 Lexus ES300H and other vehicles. Toyota doesn't have much experience with more advance Li-on batteries.
Quote:
Regarding mechanicals, ES 300h is motivated by a 2.5-liter, 156-hp gasoline-powered I-4 aided by a pair of 105 kW electric motors (one acting as a generator) and a 245-volt nickel-metal hydride battery pack. Managed by a CVT automatic, that familiar hardware generates 200 total-system horsepower.
Source: http://www.stltoday.com/lifestyles/autos...75b0906784.html
Quote:
Today’s Hybrid Car Battery: Nickel Metal Hydride
Toyota Prius Hybrid Battery
The battery pack of the second generation Toyota Prius consists of 28 Panasonic prismatic nickel metal hydride modules—each containing six 1.2 volt cells—connected in series to produce a nominal voltage of 201.6 volts. The total number of cells is 168, compared with 228 cells packaged in 38 modules in the first generation Prius. The pack is positioned behind the back seat.
Lithium Ion Battery – For Next Generation Hybrids and Electric Cars
Lithium ion (or Li-ion) batteries are important because they have a higher energy density—the amount of energy they hold by weight, or by volume—than any other type. The rule of thumb is that Li-ion cells hold roughly twice as much energy per pound as do the previous generation of advanced batteries, nickel-metal-hydride (NiMH)
http://www.hybridcars.com/hybrid-car-battery/
As far as I know no other car manufactures are using NiMH batteries in their battery electric vehicles or plug-in hybrids.
Toyota planned to make 3,000 Mirai for sale in California in a little more than 2 years (from Oct 2015 to end of 2017), while Tesla had more than 300,000 deposits for model 3.
If Fuel Cell Vehicle is so good according to Toyota, then they should plan to make more than 500,000 Mirai's for sale in US the next 2 years.
I don't know much about hydrogen fueling stations in Japan, they probably have more hydrogen stations there, but for a fuel cell vehicle travel across US we need several hundreds fueling stations, no investors are willing to invest several hundreds million dollar for the infrastructure for no possible profit to make.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Can I drive a Tesla vehicle to Phoenix or Las Vegas ? Absolutely yes, because there are super charger stations on major highways. I can also drive a Tesla vehicle all the way from California to Florida or New York or Main ... Can I do that with Toyota Mirai ?
Tesla Super Charger stations according to Tesla: https://www.tesla.com/supercharger
Another type of Tesla charging station: Destination Charger. I don't know if it is free or they charge some fees for using it.
Quote:
Tesla partners with hotels, restaurants, shopping centers and resorts to make charging when you arrive at your destination as simple as charging at home. Pull up and plug into a Tesla wall connector to charge Model S while you shop, dine, or even during an overnight stay.
List of current destination charger location: https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/chargers/United+States
Can I drive a Tesla vehicle to Phoenix or Las Vegas ? Absolutely yes, because there are super charger stations on major highways. I can also drive a Tesla vehicle all the way from California to Florida or New York or Main ... Can I do that with Toyota Mirai ?
Tesla Super Charger stations according to Tesla: https://www.tesla.com/supercharger
Another type of Tesla charging station: Destination Charger. I don't know if it is free or they charge some fees for using it.
Quote:
Tesla partners with hotels, restaurants, shopping centers and resorts to make charging when you arrive at your destination as simple as charging at home. Pull up and plug into a Tesla wall connector to charge Model S while you shop, dine, or even during an overnight stay.
List of current destination charger location: https://www.tesla.com/findus/list/chargers/United+States
And Nevada is phasing out that solar panel subsidy over the next 12 years, a move being met with protests, lawsuits and even a failed bid to put the issue before voters. Last week, Nevada's Supreme Court ruled that a referendum from solar activists challenging the decision would not be allowed on the November ballot.
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
A lot of things are done by a lot of organizations for a lot of less than strictly technical reasons.
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
A lot of things are done by a lot of organizations for a lot of less than strictly technical reasons.
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
Honda, Toyota, Mercedes-Benz and others started research fuel cell 2 decades ago, at that time only battery type available was lead acid and NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) later, it was not suitable for automotive. Actually, GM had lead acid batteries in their EV1 the first 2 years 1996-1997 then changed to NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) for 1998-1999.
When they already spent billions in R&D they just try to recoup some of that money.
No investors are willing to waste their money building hydrogen fueling stations, California have to spend taxpayer money for infrastructure.
Quote:
California Investing Nearly $50 Million in Hydrogen Refueling Stations
Accelerates construction of 28 new stations and one mobile refueler to boost statewide public network
Today's recommended awards will add 28 new stations to 9 existing and the 17 stations currently under development. These 54 hydrogen refueling stations represent significant progress towards meeting California's goal of establishing a 100-station network to support the full commercialization of fuel cell vehicles in California.
Award recipients:
Air Liquide Industrial US LP will receive $2,125,000 to construct a 100% renewable hydrogen refueling station in Palo Alto.
FirstElement Fuel, Inc. will receive $2,902,000 to construct two 100 percent renewable refueling stations in Los Angeles, and $24,667,000 for 17 stations in Campbell, Coalinga, Costa Mesa, Hayward, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, La Canada Flintridge, Long Beach, Mill Valley, San Diego, San Jose, Santa Barbara, Saratoga, South Pasadena, South San Francisco, Redwood City and Truckee.
HyGen Industries, LLC will receive $5,306,814 to construct three 100 percent renewable hydrogen refueling stations in Orange, Pacific Palisades and Rohnert Park.
Institute of Gas Technology will receive $999,677 for a mobile refueling unit.
ITM Power, Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Riverside.
Linde LLC will receive $4,250,000 to construct stations in Oakland and San Ramon.
Hydrogen Technology & Energy Corporation (HTEC) will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Woodside.
Ontario CNG Station Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Ontario.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/releases/2014_r..._awards_nr.html
Virtually California taxpayers pay for fueling stations, these companies just rip some profit if there is any.
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
Honda, Toyota, Mercedes-Benz and others started research fuel cell 2 decades ago, at that time only battery type available was lead acid and NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) later, it was not suitable for automotive. Actually, GM had lead acid batteries in their EV1 the first 2 years 1996-1997 then changed to NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) for 1998-1999.
When they already spent billions in R&D they just try to recoup some of that money.
No investors are willing to waste their money building hydrogen fueling stations, California have to spend taxpayer money for infrastructure.
Quote:
California Investing Nearly $50 Million in Hydrogen Refueling Stations
Accelerates construction of 28 new stations and one mobile refueler to boost statewide public network
Today's recommended awards will add 28 new stations to 9 existing and the 17 stations currently under development. These 54 hydrogen refueling stations represent significant progress towards meeting California's goal of establishing a 100-station network to support the full commercialization of fuel cell vehicles in California.
Award recipients:
Air Liquide Industrial US LP will receive $2,125,000 to construct a 100% renewable hydrogen refueling station in Palo Alto.
FirstElement Fuel, Inc. will receive $2,902,000 to construct two 100 percent renewable refueling stations in Los Angeles, and $24,667,000 for 17 stations in Campbell, Coalinga, Costa Mesa, Hayward, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, La Canada Flintridge, Long Beach, Mill Valley, San Diego, San Jose, Santa Barbara, Saratoga, South Pasadena, South San Francisco, Redwood City and Truckee.
HyGen Industries, LLC will receive $5,306,814 to construct three 100 percent renewable hydrogen refueling stations in Orange, Pacific Palisades and Rohnert Park.
Institute of Gas Technology will receive $999,677 for a mobile refueling unit.
ITM Power, Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Riverside.
Linde LLC will receive $4,250,000 to construct stations in Oakland and San Ramon.
Hydrogen Technology & Energy Corporation (HTEC) will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Woodside.
Ontario CNG Station Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Ontario.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/releases/2014_r..._awards_nr.html
Virtually California taxpayers pay for fueling stations, these companies just rip some profit if there is any.
Originally Posted By: Falken
Create jobs with inefficient green energy and stop looking at the energy content of things.
Build an economy around it.
If we kept drooling over how much more energy something filthy has we would have nuclear plants everywhere.
As green energy gets better, we will reap the benefits.
There are a lot of economic benefits in moving away from oil as well.
In Saskatchewan we just had a big oil spill and people can't even wash their clothing or have a shower with the municipal water.
I say employ millions of people to get rid of fossil fuels. The oil industry hasn't exactly given us a free ride.
All I have to say is it is inevitable anyway, even if we only ran passenger vehicles on Propane/NG we'd be much further ahead, and we aren't even going after low hanging fruit like that it boggles the mind.
Says the guy living in the welfare capital of Canada...
Create jobs with inefficient green energy and stop looking at the energy content of things.
Build an economy around it.
If we kept drooling over how much more energy something filthy has we would have nuclear plants everywhere.
As green energy gets better, we will reap the benefits.
There are a lot of economic benefits in moving away from oil as well.
In Saskatchewan we just had a big oil spill and people can't even wash their clothing or have a shower with the municipal water.
I say employ millions of people to get rid of fossil fuels. The oil industry hasn't exactly given us a free ride.
All I have to say is it is inevitable anyway, even if we only ran passenger vehicles on Propane/NG we'd be much further ahead, and we aren't even going after low hanging fruit like that it boggles the mind.
Says the guy living in the welfare capital of Canada...
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Falken
Overkill, we use green energy, with waterfalls, in Quebec.
I believe we can find greener methods that make regional sense.
And, where oil makes the most sense in the future, so be it, use oil.
But why can't we have widely adopted CNG or Propane for commuter cars at this point?
If you only attack the weakest point of any argument it throws out many valid points as well.
We have geniuses trying to figure all this stuff out still, and I am far from a genius over here, but we already have many technologies that are falling to the wayside "just because... Oil oil oil...".
See the last line of my post regarding HE. I'm a huge proponent of HE, where it works. It doesn't work everywhere however.
What do you think the folks that developed Nuclear power were, morons?
It was complete and utter brilliance; genius that brought us nuclear power. Brilliance that brought us the CANDU and further genius to get us to where we are now with utilizing Thorium and breeders for essentially zero waste. The folks at AECL are leveraging far more in the way of grey matter developing these phenomenal achievements than those who slap a generator on a stick with a big propeller or make a giant version of the technology found in the power circuit of your high school calculator and stick it in a field. You want genius? Look no further than nuclear power to see what genius can achieve. A single unit making 1,200MW of power with unequalled reliability and an energy density no other generator can even come close to touching.
The problems associated with nuclear are by and large political. Breeders to use the waste, flexible fuel CANDU's....etc. There is so much that is seeing very little in the way of utilization and it ALL makes power, absolutely tons of it.
Overkill, we use green energy, with waterfalls, in Quebec.
I believe we can find greener methods that make regional sense.
And, where oil makes the most sense in the future, so be it, use oil.
But why can't we have widely adopted CNG or Propane for commuter cars at this point?
If you only attack the weakest point of any argument it throws out many valid points as well.
We have geniuses trying to figure all this stuff out still, and I am far from a genius over here, but we already have many technologies that are falling to the wayside "just because... Oil oil oil...".
See the last line of my post regarding HE. I'm a huge proponent of HE, where it works. It doesn't work everywhere however.
What do you think the folks that developed Nuclear power were, morons?
It was complete and utter brilliance; genius that brought us nuclear power. Brilliance that brought us the CANDU and further genius to get us to where we are now with utilizing Thorium and breeders for essentially zero waste. The folks at AECL are leveraging far more in the way of grey matter developing these phenomenal achievements than those who slap a generator on a stick with a big propeller or make a giant version of the technology found in the power circuit of your high school calculator and stick it in a field. You want genius? Look no further than nuclear power to see what genius can achieve. A single unit making 1,200MW of power with unequalled reliability and an energy density no other generator can even come close to touching.
The problems associated with nuclear are by and large political. Breeders to use the waste, flexible fuel CANDU's....etc. There is so much that is seeing very little in the way of utilization and it ALL makes power, absolutely tons of it.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
Honda, Toyota, Mercedes-Benz and others started research fuel cell 2 decades ago, at that time only battery type available was lead acid and NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) later, it was not suitable for automotive. Actually, GM had lead acid batteries in their EV1 the first 2 years 1996-1997 then changed to NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) for 1998-1999.
When they already spent billions in R&D they just try to recoup some of that money.
No investors are willing to waste their money building hydrogen fueling stations, California have to spend taxpayer money for infrastructure.
Quote:
California Investing Nearly $50 Million in Hydrogen Refueling Stations
Accelerates construction of 28 new stations and one mobile refueler to boost statewide public network
Today's recommended awards will add 28 new stations to 9 existing and the 17 stations currently under development. These 54 hydrogen refueling stations represent significant progress towards meeting California's goal of establishing a 100-station network to support the full commercialization of fuel cell vehicles in California.
Award recipients:
Air Liquide Industrial US LP will receive $2,125,000 to construct a 100% renewable hydrogen refueling station in Palo Alto.
FirstElement Fuel, Inc. will receive $2,902,000 to construct two 100 percent renewable refueling stations in Los Angeles, and $24,667,000 for 17 stations in Campbell, Coalinga, Costa Mesa, Hayward, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, La Canada Flintridge, Long Beach, Mill Valley, San Diego, San Jose, Santa Barbara, Saratoga, South Pasadena, South San Francisco, Redwood City and Truckee.
HyGen Industries, LLC will receive $5,306,814 to construct three 100 percent renewable hydrogen refueling stations in Orange, Pacific Palisades and Rohnert Park.
Institute of Gas Technology will receive $999,677 for a mobile refueling unit.
ITM Power, Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Riverside.
Linde LLC will receive $4,250,000 to construct stations in Oakland and San Ramon.
Hydrogen Technology & Energy Corporation (HTEC) will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Woodside.
Ontario CNG Station Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Ontario.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/releases/2014_r..._awards_nr.html
Virtually California taxpayers pay for fueling stations, these companies just rip some profit if there is any.
When it comes to energy there will always be investors. Just because the first stations are built with wasted taxpayer dollars does not mean there will not be investors. Smart money doesn't show up to "help out". Investors aren't investing in infrastructure because it is stupid early into this program and will yield no profit.
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
Honda, Toyota, Mercedes-Benz and others started research fuel cell 2 decades ago, at that time only battery type available was lead acid and NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) later, it was not suitable for automotive. Actually, GM had lead acid batteries in their EV1 the first 2 years 1996-1997 then changed to NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) for 1998-1999.
When they already spent billions in R&D they just try to recoup some of that money.
No investors are willing to waste their money building hydrogen fueling stations, California have to spend taxpayer money for infrastructure.
Quote:
California Investing Nearly $50 Million in Hydrogen Refueling Stations
Accelerates construction of 28 new stations and one mobile refueler to boost statewide public network
Today's recommended awards will add 28 new stations to 9 existing and the 17 stations currently under development. These 54 hydrogen refueling stations represent significant progress towards meeting California's goal of establishing a 100-station network to support the full commercialization of fuel cell vehicles in California.
Award recipients:
Air Liquide Industrial US LP will receive $2,125,000 to construct a 100% renewable hydrogen refueling station in Palo Alto.
FirstElement Fuel, Inc. will receive $2,902,000 to construct two 100 percent renewable refueling stations in Los Angeles, and $24,667,000 for 17 stations in Campbell, Coalinga, Costa Mesa, Hayward, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, La Canada Flintridge, Long Beach, Mill Valley, San Diego, San Jose, Santa Barbara, Saratoga, South Pasadena, South San Francisco, Redwood City and Truckee.
HyGen Industries, LLC will receive $5,306,814 to construct three 100 percent renewable hydrogen refueling stations in Orange, Pacific Palisades and Rohnert Park.
Institute of Gas Technology will receive $999,677 for a mobile refueling unit.
ITM Power, Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Riverside.
Linde LLC will receive $4,250,000 to construct stations in Oakland and San Ramon.
Hydrogen Technology & Energy Corporation (HTEC) will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Woodside.
Ontario CNG Station Inc. will receive $2,125,000 to construct a station in Ontario.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/releases/2014_r..._awards_nr.html
Virtually California taxpayers pay for fueling stations, these companies just rip some profit if there is any.
When it comes to energy there will always be investors. Just because the first stations are built with wasted taxpayer dollars does not mean there will not be investors. Smart money doesn't show up to "help out". Investors aren't investing in infrastructure because it is stupid early into this program and will yield no profit.
Originally Posted By: firemachine69
Originally Posted By: Falken
Create jobs with inefficient green energy and stop looking at the energy content of things.
Build an economy around it.
If we kept drooling over how much more energy something filthy has we would have nuclear plants everywhere.
As green energy gets better, we will reap the benefits.
There are a lot of economic benefits in moving away from oil as well.
In Saskatchewan we just had a big oil spill and people can't even wash their clothing or have a shower with the municipal water.
I say employ millions of people to get rid of fossil fuels. The oil industry hasn't exactly given us a free ride.
All I have to say is it is inevitable anyway, even if we only ran passenger vehicles on Propane/NG we'd be much further ahead, and we aren't even going after low hanging fruit like that it boggles the mind.
Says the guy living in the welfare capital of Canada...
even simple things like the concrete plinth at the bottom of the windmill have a cost to put in and remediate.
Burning resources to "create an economy" isn't working really well last few years when interest rates keep betting lowered to try to drag (non existent) money out from under matresses.
Originally Posted By: Falken
Create jobs with inefficient green energy and stop looking at the energy content of things.
Build an economy around it.
If we kept drooling over how much more energy something filthy has we would have nuclear plants everywhere.
As green energy gets better, we will reap the benefits.
There are a lot of economic benefits in moving away from oil as well.
In Saskatchewan we just had a big oil spill and people can't even wash their clothing or have a shower with the municipal water.
I say employ millions of people to get rid of fossil fuels. The oil industry hasn't exactly given us a free ride.
All I have to say is it is inevitable anyway, even if we only ran passenger vehicles on Propane/NG we'd be much further ahead, and we aren't even going after low hanging fruit like that it boggles the mind.
Says the guy living in the welfare capital of Canada...
even simple things like the concrete plinth at the bottom of the windmill have a cost to put in and remediate.
Burning resources to "create an economy" isn't working really well last few years when interest rates keep betting lowered to try to drag (non existent) money out from under matresses.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
Honda, Toyota, Mercedes-Benz and others started research fuel cell 2 decades ago, at that time only battery type available was lead acid and NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) later, it was not suitable for automotive. Actually, GM had lead acid batteries in their EV1 the first 2 years 1996-1997 then changed to NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) for 1998-1999.
When they already spent billions in R&D they just try to recoup some of that money.
Originally Posted By: businessinsider.com
Toyota has been working on hydrogen-powered cars the longest, having put 23 years into the technology.
Originally Posted By: businessinsider.com
It may seem odd that so many automakers are developing hydrogen-powered cars.
Not many people have heard of the technology, and from an infrastructure standpoint, purely electric vehicles make more sense. For example, there are 14,117 electric stations in the United States, and hydrogen stations are really only available in California.
But a lot of work is being done behind the scenes to make hydrogen-powered cars a reality.
http://www.businessinsider.com/8-hydroge...-toyota-mirai-1
Only Californians who live around Los Angeles, Orange County and Silicon Valley (with H2 stations) can purchase Toyota Mirai, Toyota actually is looking at buyer address and if the buyer is living too far from those areas they will not allowed to buy Mirai.
Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
Good. Honda took this route too. Guess they are stupid too.
Honda, Toyota, Mercedes-Benz and others started research fuel cell 2 decades ago, at that time only battery type available was lead acid and NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) later, it was not suitable for automotive. Actually, GM had lead acid batteries in their EV1 the first 2 years 1996-1997 then changed to NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) for 1998-1999.
When they already spent billions in R&D they just try to recoup some of that money.
Originally Posted By: businessinsider.com
Toyota has been working on hydrogen-powered cars the longest, having put 23 years into the technology.
Originally Posted By: businessinsider.com
It may seem odd that so many automakers are developing hydrogen-powered cars.
Not many people have heard of the technology, and from an infrastructure standpoint, purely electric vehicles make more sense. For example, there are 14,117 electric stations in the United States, and hydrogen stations are really only available in California.
But a lot of work is being done behind the scenes to make hydrogen-powered cars a reality.
http://www.businessinsider.com/8-hydroge...-toyota-mirai-1
Only Californians who live around Los Angeles, Orange County and Silicon Valley (with H2 stations) can purchase Toyota Mirai, Toyota actually is looking at buyer address and if the buyer is living too far from those areas they will not allowed to buy Mirai.
GM has been working for decades on fuel cell technology and is now partnered with Honda. According to Wiki GM had the first on road fuel cell road vehicle in 1966.
Interesting article here GM says one reason they don't bring fuel cell car to market is that the technology is advancing too quickly meaning once you bring a car to market it will already be old technology.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/20...a-hydrogen.aspx
Other reason is of course lack of H2 infrastructure. They have had a commercially viable system ready since 2010.
Here is another interesting article on GM's fuel cell fleet:
http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news....-fuel-cell.html
Quote:
General Motors’ fleet of fuel cell vehicles recently passed 3 million miles of hydrogen-powered, real-world driving. Some individual vehicles have accumulated more than 120,000 miles.
Interesting article here GM says one reason they don't bring fuel cell car to market is that the technology is advancing too quickly meaning once you bring a car to market it will already be old technology.
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/20...a-hydrogen.aspx
Other reason is of course lack of H2 infrastructure. They have had a commercially viable system ready since 2010.
Here is another interesting article on GM's fuel cell fleet:
http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news....-fuel-cell.html
Quote:
General Motors’ fleet of fuel cell vehicles recently passed 3 million miles of hydrogen-powered, real-world driving. Some individual vehicles have accumulated more than 120,000 miles.
- Status
Similar threads
