This is Davemart's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Davemart's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
They are running this at half the output they use in the Mirai, presumably to optimise efficiency/longevity. The set is also surprisingly bulky, but a fine zero pollution alternative to a diesel generator.
A bit more here:
As it says in the article above, the oxygen release happens at just 95C, and confirmed here: Fairly low grade heat should be fine.
'In the future, the researchers aim to develop new and improved solid electrolytes to enable fast charging ' Low power density in and out?
Lad: Reason 1: Around 50% of cars in Europe have nowhere they could reasonably be plugged into at home Reason 2: This costs a heck of a lot more than an ICE, rather disguised by subsidies. Reason 3: You might not fancy either spending thousands for a new battery pack when the old one gets tired, or junking your car after 10 years or so.
That is some serious financial and industrial muscle getting behind Nikola. Each of their fuelling stations is to also offer fuelliing for FCEV cars, so coast to coast travel may be available for them much sooner than might have been otherwise expected.
'Electrolyzers run something like 60% efficiency' No they don't. A reasonable evaluation means getting the basics right, not pulling duff stuff out of a hat.
In other news from China and their switch in emphasis to hydrogen and fuel cells, there is this from the centre of their coal production: 'Datong has put 50 hydrogen-powered buses onto its streets. The vehicles can run up to 500 km and operate well at minus 30 Celsius degrees. It is building a complete industrial chain related to hydrogen energy and locking an array of enterprises in. Wuhan HydraV Fuel Cell Technologies Co., Ltd. put into production its first fuel cell engine production line in Datong last year. Currently, it is building a hydrogen energy industrial park with an investment of 2.7 billion yuan (around 380 million U.S. dollars). Zhou Qiang, the general manager’s assistant of HydraV, said it would be the company’s largest industrial base in northern China, with an annual production capacity of at least 50,000 hydrogen fuel cell engines within three years. HydraV is not alone in pioneering the city’s hydrogen energy industry. Beijing Shouhang IHW Resources Saving Technology Company Co., Ltd has set up a branch in Datong, with a plan to build three hydrogen production factories, 10 to 20 refueling stations, and three to five distributed hydrogen power plants here in the following five years. However, Datong looks beyond hydrogen-powered vehicles. The city sees an annual coal output of over 100 million tonnes regardless of its exhausted quality coal resources. Producing hydrogen from coal is a key step for the city to move towards a hydrogen capital. Datong Coal Mine Group Co., Ltd. is calling for bids for its 5,000-tonne coal-to-hydrogen project, which is expected to produce 110,000 tonnes of hydrogen each year when it completes. “The cost of producing hydrogen from coal on a large scale is around 0.8 yuan per cubic meter, much cheaper than from natural gas and water electrolysis,” said Zhang Junlong, director with the Group’s hydrogen energy development preparation office. According to Wu, the cooperation between Datong and several automakers is under discussion, hoping to build a complete industrial ecosystem from hydrogen production and storage to manufacturing of core hydrogen fuel cell components as well as vehicles.' Hopefully this will include CO2 sequestration, as Japan is doing in exploiting Australian coal deposits for hydrogen, and Europe is doing in its 'blue hydrogen' programs. I don't know if that is in the plans, but the costs at least seem to show room to finance it and still have economic hydrogen.
Solid state has been falling down on power out as well as power in.
@mahonj: 'You then use them in vehicles which are mostly 20% or less efficient. I know ICE engines can get to 40% efficiency, but mostly they are run inefficiently at low revs and low power.' 'Mostly?' 'Mostly' battery cars are wildly uneconomic, and 'mostly' they lose loads of range in cold weather, and 'mostly' whenever they are not massively subsidised sales plummet. And 'mostly' enormous amounts of very environmentally unfriendly energy is needed to produce batteries. You are applying criteria in two entirely different ways, according to what you fancy. Present hybrid technology can hit something like approaching 40% efficiency, right now, and on a lifecycle basis hammers battery cars, especially big battery ones, let alone cost. You are assuming zero improvement in ICE and hybrid technology, in fact are not even rating it for proven current perfromance, whilst assuming vast increases in battery technology, and the energy and emissions cost of produving them. And even then, a PHEV running on renewably produced synfuel when the battery is depleted would still be a formidable competitor.
'That plant may theoretically reach efficiencies of about 60%—i.e., 60% of the green power used can be stored in the fuel as chemical energy.' Would appear to be what they are claiming as end-to-end effriciency, but I would have to see far more comprehensive and broken down figures.
IMO this is way more practical and low carbon on a total lifecycle emission basis than fooling around with big battery BEVs for anywhere with large seasonal variations in climate.
No mention here or on their site of the power density, which is the Achille's heel of solid state.
There is more than one metric involved in deciding the optimum strategy. Hydrogen by weight is just one of them, with how easy or tough it is to get the hydrogen out critical. And fuel cells are modular, but there is a lot of ancillary equipment including hydration and air flow. Those kind of ranges of performance and restrictions mean that a range of solutions are available, and don't lend themselves to back of the envelope dismissal of the particular ones chosen.
I don't think it is productive to be absolute in demands for 'all renewables right now' and so on. Hydrogen can certainly be produced renewably, as well as a host of other ways such as the 'blue hydrogen' that places like the UK and Australia are developing, where sequestration is the deal as is already done at the million ton level. But in any case, the other pollutants from present planes are also significant and very damaging, and either battery planes or FCEV ones can ameliorate that. The ideal should not be the enemy of improvement.
Thanks for the additional info, gryf. It would be good to know how they intend to get around peak power considerations. The fuel cells from Hyundai and Toyota should reach comparable density in their next iteration after 2020. Since I criticise those who assume that super batteries will come in anytime soon, I am not going to assume that the manganese hydride Kubas-1 storage system for hydrogen will be available. However the figures work in any case for light and low range aircraft using presently available off the shelf storage technologies, and still provide a very large advantage over battery only solutions for anything except the very lightest and lowest range airdraft, trainers and so on.
SJC: 'The system is based on SOFC fuel cells which can be operated with low-sulfur diesel fuel or liquefied natural gas (LNG) as an energy source.'
sd: The 6 seater is just the test platform: ' ZeroAvia plans to start supplying its platform to commercial operators and aircraft manufacturers in 2022, initially targeting up to 500-mile regional flights in 10 to 20-seat fixed-wing aircraft.' (ibid) The bigger and heavier the aircraft, and the longer the flight envelope required, the more the advantage of fuel cells and hydrogen over batteries, as even with the associated tanks and so on they are still way more dense in weight than batteries including losses in coverting hydrogen to electricity also. Still nowhere near jetfuel of course for really big aircraft and distances of course, but far cleaner.
A great advance if they can pull it off, as the need for additional infrastructure is so limited, and shipping is a major source of pollutants.
Flight test videos here:
Maybe this will work:
Heath-Robinson engineering:
I can't see much of the information needed for an evaluation here. No figures at all are given for the efficiency of the ammonia fuel cell, understandable perhaps for a prototype, but its impossible to calculate the actual cost per mile without it. The figure for methanol in GGE is to burn it in an ICE, which is way less efficient than using it in a fuel cell for hydrogen. I can't find a definitive figure, but the energy density of PEM fuel cells seems to be around 200mW/CM2, which is a lot more than the 135mW for the ammonia fuel cell given here.
Perhaps we will eventually get there to roll out thousands of small, safe reactors. Compared to nuclear energy all the renewables stuff is Heath-Robinson engineering, but nuclear only counts if it is being built.
@Gasbag Tesla are introducing faster chargers, so on the 3 they are OTA'ing software to use it, but the average charge speed is going to be nothing like 200KW, In typical Tesla fashion, it misleads grossly by naming the peak rate, which happens for just a few minutes. But in any case, since I referred to 4 year old cars, I was obviously not talking about the Model 3 as it had not been out that long. The cars in question are 2015 or so Model S and X cars which have been conveniently, for Tesla, updated by OTA restricting range and charge speed. You can read all about it on the Tesla forums.