Even though I also feel that the BEV will beat the pants off of the hydrogen car I think hydrogen research and development should continue. It has been argued extensively in the past that hydrogen may be the only alternative for some niche markets. However, The focus should be on exactly what Koz just posted, "advancement of batteries, electric drivetrain components, range extending power generation, AND charging infrastructure. " BEVs and plug-in hybrids will get us where we need to be - independence from petroleum imports. I don't know what the exact economic ramifications will be but what we are doing now is killing us with a slow bleed. A Band-Aid is not going to do it. We need to stitch that up (or should I say sew that limb back on).
Toyota introduces advanced FCV.
41 - 60 of 87 Posts
Tom,Rough numbers: The cost of fuel cells have come down. Say a fuel cell costs $3000 and outputs 16 kW. Compare this with a GM 455 325 hp engine, costing $2100. Then the relative cost per kW is a factor of 21. Not exact, but it certainly establish the point that fuel cells, per kW, are more than an order of magnitude more expensive. A 100X is a stretch, but whats a little stretching between friends.
Updated:
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/progress04/ivi4_carlson.pdf
Gives projected cost of $4000/kW for fuel cells in 2010. This gives a ratio of 461.
I might be the only one who read your link, but I don't see anything stating $4000/kWh for Fuel Cells in 2010, if I am wrong, please point it out to me. The chart and table on page 5 is talking about storage tanks and not the cost of the fuel cell itself. And it's quoting the DOE target a $4/kWh for the storage tank in 2010. Don't seen anything that states that the chart is listed in thousands of dollars. This chart is also only probabilities and not reality.
Check out :
http://www.ovonic-hydrogen.com/home/home.htm
Watch the video:
http://www.ovonic-hydrogen.com/video/h2_car/h2_car_100k.asf
They are targeting 250m+ per fill at a cost of less than $3/kg, this year . I do not know all the maths to do the conversions, but depending on the efficiency of the fuel cell, the energy density of hydrogen versus the energy density of lithium batteries, the hydrogen tank is the better way to go if you can compress it enough, as these guys have done.
Also, besides this flawed reading of that document, the argument in the first part of your post is completely flawed. You are comparing the cost of the fuel cell, versus the cost of the ICE. These are not the same thing, apples and oranges comparison. The fuel cell does not directly convert the hydrogen to motion, but powers and electric motor as does the battery.
The cost of a battery that can go 250 mi per charge is somewhere in the range of $30,000 versus your fuel cell, which is simply a converter. While using electricity or other means to produce hydrogen may be more efficient in theory, the need to store that much energy in a form compact enough and lite enough to be used in mobile applications is expensive in both technologies. However, from what I can tell in my readings on the internet, the cost of hydrogen storage is coming down more quickly that the storage of electricity. I also believe that using the energy stored in chemical bonds formed by naturally occurring elements such as hydrogen and petroleum may be less efficient over all than creating batteries to store and harness electricity directly, there are many benefits that will not be outweighed by the efficiencies until the cost of electric storage comes down and "recharging" becomes as quick and simple as refueling a gas tank or compressing a gas.
Until that time, versus other sources of energy, I believe pursuing hydrogen has many benefits. Done correctly using solar and electrolysis, the energy infrastructure can become decentralized and robust. Then when the storage of electricity catches up to those of traditional storage, we can make an easy transition.
To break it down and sum it up, the technology for using hydrogen to fuel a vehicle in a manner consistent with what we are used to today is already available at a cost that is not currently unreasonable and is in a downward spiral. However, the technology for using electricity directly in a manner that is also consistent is still down the road a piece in terms of cost. So if we build out a decentralized infrastructure for capturing electricity from renewable resources and use that to generate our hydrogen, we will be ready for the transition to pure electric when and if that becomes cost effective in the future.
Please tell us how heavy the car you are proposing is and how far this range extender is supposed to go. I will then calculate how big your trailer needs to be to hold the compressed air tanks.
I know I keep bringing it up but you keep saying compressed air will work as a range extender. The other thread already proved it's not viable.
Is that just the cost of the tank or all of the systems needed:
Do realize those tanks are over 4 inches thick of extremely expensive carbon fiber, have limited life and will probably need to be water tested every 5 years? That's what the DOD currently requires for high pressure tanks that travel on the road. Only $64 for 16 kWh? Bull$%^&. YOU ARE DREAMING... PLEASE WAKE UP.
It must kill you to see all the pieces coming together for hydrogen. Small, high pressure tanks, cheap fuel cell stacks, EV systems and components cost reduced in REEV's, so that fuel cells and hydrogen tanks can swap right in later.Is that just the cost of the tank or all of the systems needed:
![]()
Do realize those tanks are over 4 inches thick of extremely expensive carbon fiber, have limited life and will probably need to be water tested every 5 years? That's what the DOD currently requires for high pressure tanks that travel on the road. Only $64 for 16 kWh? Bull$%^&. YOU ARE DREAMING... PLEASE WAKE UP.
41 - 60 of 87 Posts
