This is Davemart's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Davemart's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Davemart
Recent Activity
But, but, but.... Toyota know nothing about cars and what sells! long range BEVs are on course for world domination by next Tuesday!
I think fuel cell vehicles are unbeatable for taxi services etc as soon as there is any infrastructure for fueling. That is because they don't need downtime for charging, and Toyota have already proven phenomenal reliability and low down time. I prefer the design of the Hyundai Nexo, as it is a proper small SUV, whereas the new Mirai is still limited in rear seat accommodation, and effectively a 4 seater, which is disappointing.
Just a thought that fuel cell vehicles and in particular buses and trucks would filter out road dust, and so presumably gradually decrease the lead pollution from that source.
Processes like this used in steel, cement and fertiliser production are major sources of GHG, and deserve greater emphasis in relation to light transport, where electrification has taken and is taking an inordinate proportion of funds and subsidies.
Lets not forget that BMW are also behind the flat design tanks, which hopes to make the storage system more amenable to most cars layout without having to fit in whacking great cylinders: https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/bryson-project-aim-is-to-develop-new-types-of-hydrogen-pressure-storage-systems/
Nails the notion the fuel cells are no good for performance cars.
@Peace Hugger It is done with desalination in the Gulf and elsewhere.
Might be handy for smaller, lighter vehicles, although fuel cell power output is not forever static and will likely increase.
@electric car insider. Costs for a complete battery system are very different to those for a pack, let alone a cell, and cost is very different to the needed sales price. If Tesla or anyone else was at $102KWh at the pack or system level, with what is charged for BEV cars and subsidies, let alone replacement packs, profits would be showing up in the 10Ks. No such profits are to be found in the accounts. BEVs still lose money copiously. And with material prices rising, not falling, largely due to the huge quantities required by even present low levels of BEV production, and materials representing 80% of battery prices, expect prices to be rising, not falling, at least for a few years, as suppliers like Hyundai have noted. And yes, that takes account of increased volumes, and technical progress, now much, much slower at this part of the curve.
@yoatman: You can't argue with religion, and I don't propose to. However it is somewhat tedious when you simply repeat your credo. Easier than thinking though, for sure.
I was very surprised to learn that direct electrolysis of seawater was even possible, so I am completely unsurprised that it does not look economic.
I should have added that the above is about a small SUV
Here are their costs for a vehicle bought in 2025 for a projected life of 15 years (pg109-110) ' Comparing across powertrains, the HEV is the vehicle powertrain with the lowest cost of ownership over a 15-year span, at 44.6¢/mile. The ICE-SI, ICE-CI, FCEV, and PHEV50 all have costs around 48¢/mile. The BEV300 has the highest cost, at 51.8¢/mile, though the shorter-range BEV200 (not pictured) has a cost of 45.3¢/mile. The comparatively high costs for BEV300 come from assumed battery costs of $170/kWh in 2025 in the Autonomie model (Islam et al. 2020), though BEV would reach cost parity with HEV at a cost of $102/kWh. For allpowertrains, the vehicle cost is the single most expensive cost over the 15-year analysis window.Maintenance and repair taken together is the second most expensivefor all powertrain types except FCEV.For petroleum-fueled vehicles,this is followed by fuel,then insurance.For electric-fueled vehicles (both BEV and PHEV)and hybrids, reduced fuel costs lead to higher insurance costs than fuel costs.Hydrogen fuel cells have a different cost breakdown, where the cost of fuel is higher than maintenance and repair and insurance. This is due to the high price of hydrogen as described in Section 0.' IOW, for BEVs, it is all down to what happens with battery costs. For FCEVs, it is all down to what happens with hydrogen costs.
Yoatman: The chart you are criticising is projected costs for 2025, not current ones as you seem to imagine.
Yoatman: Here is the full report: https://publications.anl.gov/anlpubs/2021/05/167399.pdf I look forward to your detailed, line by line critique! I am sure it will be remarkable.
Toyota reckon they can make a FCEV for the same price as a regular hybrid within the next few years. The cost of hydrogen from renewables is falling rapidly. Those who are blind to the virtues of FCEVs are in for a shock!
20% from renewables right now ain't chickenfeed, although I assume that most of it is from dams on the Nile currently.
I'd give a shout out here to Kubas -1 hydrides, too. If that works out, then certainly for local distribution options change. Here is a pod cast I have come across with Professor Antonelli giving progress and the to do list. https://www.buzzsprout.com/1117901/8331482-kubagen-hydrogen-tank-storage The next stage in a couple of years is a 200g or so test tube for testing. The 1g Lab work etc is basically done, with it handed over to the production engineers, those of Shell among them, with most of the other companies looking at it under NDA's.
Others are rushing to produce luxury BEV cars needing huge subsidies and mandates with immature and limited battery technology at the expense of the average motorist, much to the detriment of society. Wealthy greenwashers are in hog heaven. As soon as batteries are ready to do the job safely and economically Toyota will produce plenty of them.
Many thanks for your excellent research as usual, gryf! I don't know how you manage to dig them out. Any tips on your searches? I use google advanced, but don't find many of the links you do. On the subject, here is an article from the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57447564 I particularly like this: ' "There's a lot of hype in this market," Vertical Aerospace president Michael Cervenka told the BBC. "We have taken the approach that is pushing the bounds of what is available in terms of technology, but not going beyond."' And: ' He said the company's goals could be achieved with today's technology rather than hoping for the invention of a "magical new battery".' Their credibility just went way up, for this observer.
I can't find anything at all on what batteries they intend to use, which is the critical component.
After 50 years of waiting, perhaps we are finally getting somewhere! This sort of technology can greatly reduce the strain on renewables, whose deployment to run everything is challenging to put it mildly. I'd like to see these used in district heating systems, so that efficiencies of thermal plus electrical is way up. They would also be great in combination with hydrogen production off peak, which would improve the economics and allow for decarbonising transport, fertiliser and steel production and so on.
If it works at good efficiency and reasonable cost for in installation, a fine alternative perhaps for major highways. I am a bit sceptical though as to whether the installed cost will allow for smaller batteries, so reducing costs and imposing less strain on materials supplies. Similar considerations might apply to those for railroads, where line electrification is only economic for very heavily traveled routs, and otherwise hydrogen FCEV trains are becoming the go to option.
This lithium from seawater process sounds to me as though it will work: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2021/EE/D1EE00354B#!divAbstract ' we estimated the total electricity required to enrich 1 kg lithium from seawater to 9000 ppm in five stages to be 76.34 kW h. Simultaneously, 0.87 kg H2 and 31.12 kg Cl2 were collected from the cathode and the anode, respectively. Taking the US electricity price of US$ 0.065 per kW h into consideration, the total electricity cost for this process is approximately US$ 5.0. In addition, based on the 2020 prices of hydrogen and Cl2 (i.e., US$ 2.5–8.0 per kg and US$ 0.15 per kg, respectively),34 the side-product value is approximately US$ 6.9–11.7, which can well compensate for the total energy cost. It should also be noted that the current Cl2 utilisation capacity in the chlor-alkali industry is ∼80 Mtons y−1. Even in the case where all the world lithium capacity is produced from our extraction process, the amount of Cl2 produced will be <3 Mtons, and so will have very little effect on the total market. It is also noted that the total concentration of other salts after the first stage is less than 500 ppm, which implies that after lithium harvest, the remaining water can be treated as freshwater.' Lithium in the oceans is around 5000 times greater than land based resources. I never thought lithium likely to be a problem longer term, with other resources far more critical and capable of putting a crimp in production and forcing up prices at least in the medium term, although in my view able to be overcome in the longer term.
Dunno what you have against badge engineering. Many users prefer the particular take of their preferred badge, with different layout of controls, suspension etc. With fundamentally different models costing huge amounts, it is the only realistic way of keeping a bit of diversity at reasonable cost.