Comments on: Nissan Replies to Arizona Leaf Owners, Chevy Volt Outselling Over 50% of Cars, Tesla Launches Solar-Powered Superchargers, Bieber Gives Fisker Karma to Sean Kingston (& More Clean Car News)

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:11:00 +0000

I think we’re going to see signficantly better EV batteries soon. The *lithiated manganese oxide-based
**Electrovaya batteries that Chrysler has been testing apparently have about 120% more energy denisity of lithium-ion batteries currently in use.*
Electrovaya batteries apparently heat up a bit when being rapidly charged so using them might require an active cooling system but that wouldn’t hurt range because the system would run only when the vehicle was charging off the grid. (Might be a small weight range penaltiy.)

120% extra range puts us in the neighborhood of an EV that can be driven all day (500 miles) with only two charging stops.

Seems to me that if EVs reach “adequate range” and the price comes down to about that of ICEVs then they will become the dominate cars sold. I can’t see how hydrogen could force its way into the market since they wouldn’t offer any advantages over EVs, would cost more to fuel, and would require hundreds of billions of infrastructure investment.

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:30:00 +0000

The sad thing is, despite the huge infrastructure costs and inefficiency, i could see us making such a dumb move. But don’t think it’s likely — hope not.

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:29:00 +0000

Thanks for those points, Anne. Very succinct and sharp.

By: Anne

Anne — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:23:00 +0000

What the fuel cell advocates usually forget is that hydrogen can not be mined somewhere.

It can be produced from methane. This is a process that a) still depends on a finite fossil resource, introducing it’s own collection of environmental ‘challenges’ (eg. fracking) and b) still releases considerable amounts of CO2.

Or it can be produced by electrolysis. But the overall efficiency of that process (electricity –> hydrogen –> electricity) is quite low. About half the km’s per kWh as compared to a battery electric vehicle. Renewable electricity is in short supply already, we can not afford the luxury of spending it in such a wasteful process.

There is a reason that this much hyped ‘hydrogen economy’ is on the back burner.

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 18:14:00 +0000

Recently a pro-fuel cell vehicle (FCEV) enthusiast worked out the numbers for the amount of electricity lost starting with clean electricity, cracking water into hydrogen, compressing or liquefying the hydrogen, distributing it and using it in a FCEV.

Best case, a FCEV uses 1.4x as much electricity per unit of movement more than does an EV.

Then. A hydrogen FCEV transportation would require hundreds of billions (trillions?) of dollars worth of infrastructure to be built. Think of replacing every gas station pump with a hydrogen pump, but more of them since it takes longer to fill hydrogen tanks and range is less than with gasoline. Think of replacing all our refineries with ‘water crackers’ and building a fleet of hydrogen delivery trucks.

The electric grid is already in place. We have enough spare generation and transmission capacity to charge over 70% of all American cars if they suddenly turned into EVs. Our grid is designed to stay up during peak-peak demand hours. That means that we have a lot of unused generation during off-peak hours.

All that we need to make EVs work for everyone in terms
of infrastructure is “reachable” outlets for the 40% who do not currently park close to an outlet and some rapid chargers along our main travel routes. We’re now installing those needed public slow and rapid charge outlets, thousands are in place.

Now, do you think we’ll spend hundreds of billions on infrastructure, build 1.4x more generation capacity and pay 1.4x as much per mile to drive in order to use FCEV?

Well, pay more than 1.4x per mile since we’ll have to cover the cost of hydro infrastructure.

Or will we use the infrastructure we already have, just build it up some more, avoid building 40% more generation and drive for 40+% less per mile and go with EVs?

By: Stan Stein

Stan Stein — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:54:00 +0000

Being in the renewable power industry, I am always happy to see progress being made towards the independence from foreign fossil fuel for pertoleum based propulsion systems……however……because most of the reserves of lithium are foreign, we are simply not addressing THAT part of the issue.
If we were to put a pencil to it, it would be a no brainer, that between the cost of an EV battery, the cost of charges over it’s lifetime, the federal tax credits for buying an EV…all MORE than add up to what a home size fuel cell recharge unit would be. One company os in the $10,000 range already. With that kind of a price tag, you can easily see what I’m taking about…..the price of a volt, at $40K, is more than $10k over what the price of a fuel cell car would be…..there’s your difference right there…..then, if you trade the $2. per day for a charge, that’s $60 per month, or $720 per year….certainly enough for replacing the membrane in the fuel cell charger when it’s required….in what?….between 3-4 yrs with the low volume of one car usage?
We need to remember, that electricity doesn’t pop out of thin air….well, unless you have a windmill…..or solar…so for every 3 EVs, it’s like adding another household’s power consumption to the grid……and just where’s THAT power going to come from?
If there are going to be something like 50,000 EVs, eventually in most states by about 2020, that’s about 25 more MWs of power they will have to get……not to mention the humungous consumption of lithium, and the disposal crisis waiting to happen at the end of the battery’s lifetime.
Fuel cell cars need to be put on the front burner….NOW.