This is Davemart's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Davemart's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Why would anyone buy a battery that has been in this system? It is the other way round, these are batteries presently in cars etc and after use as stationary storage they will be scrapped/recycled. 60MWh = 2,000 of the first Nissan Leaf battery cars, so how long to accumulate them is trivial to calculate from the sales of Renault/Nissan a few years ago.
Hydrogen is handled by the millions of tons annually, and has been in major use for a couple of centuries. Sure, understanding and analysis are ever improving, but the notion that this is some sort of show stopper emerging out of nowhere to an industry fresh born to runFCEVs is absurd.
I don't know if they actually do this, but with two smaller FC's they could run just one when low output is required, increasing efficiency. There is no efficiency gain from larger stacks compared to smaller ones, AFAIK. The modular nature of fuel cells and batteries mean that so long as they are above the requisite voltage they can be mixed and matched.
For some reason, I wandered off into buses from trucks! I blame my diet, not allowing me to have my first cup of coffee until 12! Apologies. FCEV trucks in Switzerland will help keep the mountain air pure though, as diesels don't do a lot of good to it.
For cities, these are massively better than BEVs, which although they have no exhaust emissions, still have tire wear and some brake wear in spite of regen. Both of those apply to FCEVs too, of course, but they clean and filter the air to provide a sufficiently clean supply for the FC stack. So a single FCEV car takes out not only its own emissions, but around two diesel car's worth, and an FCEV bus one heck of a lot more. Here is a video at Fully Charged, where he drives a Nexo and rides in an FCEV bus, and discusses air purification at some length: For buses and taxis I am now fully persuaded that FCEVs are the way to go, as they would make a huge difference to air quality in cities, and do not have the range limitations of BEV, especially in the cold.
The American system of vast feed lots for cattle is likely to mean that they will be in closer proximity to towns than would otherwise be the case, But of course without the names and addresses of the farms some will apply 100% discount to the likelihood of anything they don't fancy.
'Still nothing about quantities required or effluent produced (and how treated), and "dairy waste" (presumably manure) and waste water are not exactly cheap to transport in bulk. ' The flow diagram is perfectly explicit. The biogas is generated at the point of use, and presumably piped to the Tri-Gen plant, so there is no bulk transport of materials involved. And it is hardly to be expected that they would in this press release describe in detail all the arrangements for effluents at the dairy farms, waste water treatment plants and so on, as this is an overview, not a full technical paper. What it apparent and Toyota are utterly explicit about in their sustainability publications is that ALL the inputs and outputs from their systems are evaluated. That they have not gone into that level of detail in the PR release is entirely to be expected, but the environmental impact statements of for instance, waste handling from dairy farms have to be filed and so most certainly have been considered.
It looks to me as though they may be hoping to use CATL NMC 811 cells, which if they work OK should have greater energy density and lower cobalt use than current 532 cells: If that is the case, then it is hardly a slam dunk, as the testing in the application is a work in progress and fire hazard is difficult to control with low cobalt chemistries.
The critical thing is: 'Using fast charging systems, the battery can be charged 80% in about 30 minutes thanks to a completely new, significantly more powerful battery system developed by Volkswagen Group Components.' So what are the specs? Are they NMC pouch prismatics? How much cobalt do they use? And is this really going to happen, or are they more'clean diesel' from the VW Group?
Here is the Toyota strategic framework for emissions reduction, GHG and sustainability: For years they are their suppliers have worked to a quantified and measured structure, and have consistently and demonstrably reduced inputs and cleaned output. The only other company I am aware of with a comparable structure is BMW Perhaps critics would clarify and be specific about where in this program Toyota have acted fraudulently or presented false figures, as I am not aware of such actions. It is easy to sling mud, but inappropriate when it is the company which spent years and huge amounts of money developing hybrids and electrification in transport, and are now attempting the same through FCEVs. Now maybe they are mistaken in their approach. That is not the same as the allegation that they are fraudulently misrepresenting what they are doing. If they are wrong, they are sincere in it, and are backing it up with massive effort and substantial resources.
Flow diagram and video here: They state in the video quite clearly and categorically that the hydrogen produced will be more than 100% of what Toyota need at the port facility. And the electricity is clearly also generated renewably on site. Reasonable skepticism is one thing, but Sheesh!
sd That is a weird accusation to make against Toyota, who are one of the very few companies which do carbon and energy impact calculations for all of their production, including that of all of their suppliers. And the grants they have got are on the basis that the hydrogen is to be 100% renewably supplied. It is from their Tri-Gen facility which they are constructing: 'Toyota Motor North America Inc. said it plans to build a large power generating facility that will convert agricultural waste from California's farms to water, electricity and hydrogen to support its operations at the Port of Long Beach. Toyota (NYSE: TM) said the Tri-Gen facility will be the world's first megawatt-scale carbonate fuel cell power generation plant and hydrogen fueling station. When it comes online in 2020, it will generate roughly 2.35 megawatts of electricity and 1.2 tons of hydrogen per day, enough to power the equivalent of about 2,350 average-sized homes and meet the daily driving needs of nearly 1,500 vehicles. In addition, the power generation facility will be 100 percent renewable, supplying Toyota Logistics Services' operations at the port and making it the first Toyota facility in North America to use 100 percent renewable power. "For more than 20 years, Toyota has been leading the development of fuel cell technology because we understand the tremendous potential to reduce emissions and improve society," Doug Murtha, group vice president for strategic planning, said in a statement. Murtha said Tri-Gen is a major step forward for sustainable mobility and the company’s goal to achieve net zero CO2 emissions from its operations by 2050. The facility will supply all Toyota fuel cell vehicles moving through the port, including new deliveries of the Mirai sedan and Toyota's heavy duty hydrogen fuel cell class 8 truck, known as Project Portal. To support these refueling operations, Toyota said it also built one of the largest hydrogen fueling stations in the world on-site with the help of Air Liquide.' Note that it is a 'Tri-Gen' facility, so produces its own electricity to power operations. It is not Toyota which has a reputation for greenwashing and overstating its capabilities.
And here is the link to their biogas generation on this website: sd - you commented on it! It ain't coal fired
@sd The electricity is not coming from the grid. There were earlier articles here about Toyota and Toshiba? Building a new biogas facility, from memory for the supply of hydrogen I am not at home at the moment so do not have the reference to hand, but you can easily look it up.
sd: There is not one solution fits all, and batteries are not the answer to everything no matter what the question. They simply have not got the performance envelope to do the job required here, as they can't mess around charging for hours and even with the CF tanks the system is a lot more energy dense than can be done with batteries. I don't know what the coal fired plants have to do with it, as these don't use power from them.
Picking what is clearly a press release and only intended for that purpose as though it were either a document intended for investment purposes or engineering data makes no sense. They have made no attempt at false precision, and what it is all about should be clear enough from: 'enables the production of around 500 kg a day' It is ludicrous to read out either utilisation or efficiency figures from that, let alone financial metrics for investment. And this is obviously a pilot project, so there is no question of substantial investment on the back of it, even if one were daft enough to imagine that this provides financial data for that. After a couple of years of running the pilot project, then they may make proposals for more substantial installations, and will have from this data on capacity factors, efficiency in real world operation, and so on.
The rather poor wording of the statement is that: 'The electrolyzer, with a capacity of 1.2 MW, enables the production of around 500 kg of hydrogen a day without releasing CO2.' Which is an entirely different matter to a claim that they are actually producing 500 kg a day. The point of the project is to store renewables as hydrogen when they are in surplus, they are not so desperate for the hydrogen that they will be using grid energy to do so. Most days it won't produce anything like the 500 kg, which will only happen when it is windy all day and night or whatever.
I don't have a lot of faith in car manufacturers producing proprietary A1. I think that they will be overwhelmed by the big boys, and make expensive niche products.
This article reckons that a truly gigantic installation of wind and solar in the Sahara could actually increase rainfall there: I would not rush out to invest the family fortune in it, and anyway other areas of the world they looked at and other locations, presumably including Australia, showed far smaller effects. But perhaps it indicates that very large installations for the purpose of producing hydrogen for export would at any rate do no harm to levels of precipitation. For renewable hydrogen the tire is about to hit the track with the substantial installations now being built for Nikola and their FCEV truck venture: We will know a lot more about the current economics and practicality by around 2022. Interesting times
SJC: Its a trade off of utilisation and efficiency. Electrolysis equipment is now cheap enough that for instance in Germany it is being used when renewables are in surplus to make hydrogen. In the case of using solar thermal for heat, the heat energy can be stored in molten salts, but of course the efficiency will go down.
Solar thermal can produce 600C, which is going to cut the amount of remaining electricity needed substantially, and of course it can also provide that:
This and rapidly dropping costs are why the hydrogen infrastructure will be successfully rolled out.
This would seem to offer good potential for the production of hydrogen from renewables, as the cost of heat is less than electricity, and concentrated solar might provide it. The use of renewables can be far more optimised in a system involving hydrogen than attempting to go straight from say, solar input to electricity, as the plants can be put in the most favourable locations and the hydrogen produced and transported at any time of the year.
-30C as it is there a BEV busses would have difficulty running: ' The extreme cold temperature of Urumqi which is below -30C, gives the advantage to fuel cell vehilces rather than pure electric vehicles whose litihum ion battery performance is greatly affected below -20C. Presently, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles that can work in temperatures of -30C have been adapted and launched in China, thus meeting the operation requirement of Urumqi.'