This is SJC's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following SJC's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
SJC
Recent Activity
I could see Toyota, Honda and Hyundai leasing FCVs then providing free hydrogen for the 3 year lease. You might get some customers in selected areas.
Instead of 6000 cells per EV, you might have 1500 with quad energy density, the cost would be reduced with range increased. If you need more than 200 mile range, the car maker has a deal with rental companies for discounts.
There is "bolt on" technology for the 200 ethanol plants in the U.S. They can add cellulose processing to make sugars out of corn stalks then ferment them in the same plant, reducing costs. I never said the U.S. would provide ALL our transportation fuels using biomass, the all or nothing argument makes no sense. Reducing oil imports and fossil carbon emissions even 10% is a good goal.
It would be good to have a table showing the actual costs, the PHEV seems to do well compared to the EV. If you have $8 per gallon fuel prices in Europe, $8 per hydrogen kilo does not seem so bad.
If we did, industry would not need coal nor natural gas, but that is NOT the case and you know it.
Designing a FCV with a trunk is no problem if you reform liquid hydrocarbon fuels into hydrogen on board. Liquid fuel has higher energy density than CNG or H2.
Just factor in ALL costs in the Total Cost of Ownership and Operation, that applies to ALL cars. To say electric cars are 1/4th the cost to provide energy without paying road taxes nor replacement costs is misleading, that is my point. Engine cars may have to have an engine and transmission rebuild after 100,000 miles, some may not. It is a function of design and upkeep. If you change the transmission fluid and filter every 30,000 miles you might not need a rebuild until 200,000 miles. You can be sure that an electric car driven 100,000 miles over 10 tens will have reduced range. If the car had 70 mile range (real range, not the rated estimate) then after 5 years and 50,000 miles had a 50 mile range, you might not be so happy.
"..development of commercially viable renewable gasoline, diesel, and jet technologies by 2017.." We are on our way towards having bio synthetic gasoline from biomass like corn stover through thermal chemical gasification and synthesis. This is what I have written about on here for 5 years. My vision was a bio processing plant every 10 x 10 mile section of farm land. You do not move the biomass far and the fuel can be piped out to distribution. The three cellulose ethanol plants in Iowa and Kansas by POET, Dupont and Abengoa are a start, they are showing what can be done.
In the cases of solar panels, battery storage and electric cars, we are trading fossil fuels for hardware. It takes fossil fuels to make the hardware, which could be THE best use for fossil fuels.
"..as good as admitting that you lost the previous argument." Policies for Sustainable Mobility has become a "gotcha" argument where only one can win. I think the creator of this site meant for it to be a forum for discussion, not where every comment is dissected and criticized.
Historically OPEC cuts production, to reduce supply and increase prices. Energy security means we have energy from sources that are secure. We could get 1/3 of our transportation fuels from biomass, coal and natural gas, that would reduce OPEC's pricing power. Carter created the Synthetic Fuels Corporation then Reagan stopped it. Arguably oil at $14 per barrel means it would not have been profitable, if you exclude "externalities". Once you factor in environment, climate change, wars and the uncertainty of less energy security, it is profitable.
I believe the solar/hydrogen route will be the first low hanging fruit. One scientist had a solar cell he put in water and exposed to sunlight. The hydrogen bubbles were coming off the cell profusely. Lots of good ideas, the problem with sun only solutions is 2000 hours per year instead of 8000, much harder to pay back the investment quickly. It was once said in the future people will be for maximizing human potential to help society, cost will be irrelevant.
Question assumptions. Many assume that battery prices will come way down, but that has to do with economies of scale driven by marginal cost. The curve may not be as attractive as many assume. Will batteries go from $400 per kWh to $200 to $100 in the next 10 years? Maybe, but probably not for the reasons everyone assumes. A 2X,3X or 4X improvement in energy density will do more to reduce costs. You go from 6000 cells, to 3000, to 1500 cells per car.
One of the factors in making electricity with heat engines is cooling. Power plants take a LOT of cooling which requires a LOT of water. So when you calculate total cost, consider all factors.
Rather than methanogens making methane to reform for hydrogen, modify the organism to produce hydrogen, then you can produce 24/7 instead of during only 6 hours of sunlight. "Policies for sustainable mobility" involves more than arguing about valve timing, it will take a whole new way of looking at things. The past and present views may be inadequate, so a change of thinking will be required.
"FirstElement Fuel is providing a vital piece of what is needed for a successful launch of fuel-cell vehicles..." It is good to see Honda, Toyota and others getting involved, the public sector can not do it all. That would be like everyone expecting Federal and State government to build all the fueling stations 100 years ago, not realistic.
Audi/VW have beautiful engine compartments, they take pride in the layout and appearance. IMO fuel cells will always be a bit expensive, they got the platinum content down, but you still have hundreds of cells and each cell costs. These are nice announcements, Audi/VW have not said much up until now, they have maintained a low profile but kept working in the engineering labs. Good for them, they knew 2015 was going to be show time and they got there.
Oil companies used to scoff at NG, then they longed to get into NG. Car companies could have gotten into NG decades ago when the getting was good. Chevron and Exxon now have large positions in NG, but many producers are smaller companies who can be acquired. Sure refineries make H2 to crack with, but they do not have H2 refueling stations, refineries are not in the business, but they could be. Petcoke can easily be reformed into fuels, H2 or both, but they would rather sell boat loads to India where it is thrown into furnaces to make electricity.
Some say oil companies are behind hydrogen, I don't think so. For the first time Honda, Hyundai, Daimler and others can get a piece of the fuel business. In 5-10 years the car owner can spend as much for fuel as for the car. If I were a car maker, I would want to sell the fuel as well. Decades ago oil could have gotten into ethanol, whether grain, then cellulose or synthesizing from natural gas...but NO..they had to fight it with expensive lobbyists. Some times capitalist activity makes no sense, they work AGAINST their better interests in favor of short term dull so called "thinking".
Wireless charging in parking lots and on street parking could be popular, you might pay as much as fuel, but it is cleaner, more convenient using less imported oil. Audi could follow on with a reformed diesel FCEV, they offer diesel engines, so this could be popular. You reform diesel to hydrogen for use in a PEM with 12 kWh battery capacity. While the reformer is starting, the heat can be used to warm the stack more quickly.
"Methanol, which is a product of natural gas..." It can also be synthesized from gasified biomass.
An FCEV can run the reformer\PEM in parking lots with no problem.
Range extender engines can have different characteristics from conventional gear/drive train types. Torque and horsepower that can do the job of driving the alternator under load is required. I prefer reforming liquid fuels then using fuel cells as a range extender, but we are not there on cost yet. With fuel cells, there is no combustion, the CO2 from oxidation can be neutral if we use bio fuels. Cellulose E100 would be one candidate.
Yuasa is the company who made the 787 batteries that caught fire, let's hope they do a better job going forward. BTW, for those interested in the topic, there is a documentary on Al Jazeera called "Broken Dreams" about the quality problems on the 787. If any of you like Frontline, you will like this. http://www.aljazeera.com/investigations/boeing787/
The DOE has assessed feedstock availability in The Billion Ton Study and Son of Billion Ton — bottom line conclusion, not much to worry about in terms of land availability, as a billion tons would cover 1000 biorefineries three times over, or more. http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2014/09/15/a-looming-cellulosic-feedstock-shortage/