Ah - sorry... it must have got lost in the translation! Glad we are singing from the same hymn-sheet after all. MW
On 22 Jun 2013, at 12:43, Jukka Järvinen wrote: > sorry if i was not clearly enough sarcastic. I should have said > Foolcells. I just wanted to point out one good argument for all > lobbyists to support Tesla and Elon. Clever move from them. -akkuJukka > > 2013/6/22, Martin WINLOW <[email protected]>: >> Jsl, >> >> I'm afraid the issues you mention are only the most obvious... but I have >> taken the bait and so here are some of the rest! (sorry if I've bored you >> all with this before)... >> >> 1. The main source of hydrogen currently is from 'cracked' (steam reformed) >> natural gas - i.e. it is effectively a fossil fuel. The efficiency of the >> steam reformation process is approximately 70%. Alternatively, electrolysis >> can be used to make H2 from water - but this uses much more electricity to >> make H2 than just using the electricity in EVs directly would. You also >> need water - a resource that is itself getting scarcer and scarcer. >> 2. A typical fuel cell it is only MAX 40% efficient. >> 3. To put enough H2 in a package sufficiently practical to put in a car to >> give it 'adequate' range is enormously expensive due to its lack of >> compressibility. It isn't LPG or propane etc which will compress to liquid >> with a few atmospheres - standard filling pressures are 350 & 700 BAR >> (atmospheres or 4900/9800 PSI!) meaning very strong and therefore big, heavy >> (and VERY expensive) containment vessels. >> 4. To store and transport H2 has all the same issues as 3. For this >> reason, to build a network of equivalent motorway-style refilling stations >> would require HUGE sums of money compared to petrol/diesel (or electric) >> designs and more huge sums of money to service it. >> 5. Having all that H2 sloshing about everywhere you look would be a recipe >> for colossal disasters on a daily basis. It would be much more dangerous >> than petrol - hence the reason the only London based H2 refuelling point was >> shut during the Olympics causing all London-based trial H2 powered vehilces >> to either not be used - or worse (and don't laugh) truck them 50 miles to >> Swindon and back for refuelling! >> 6. Fuel cells capable of powering a vehicle are very expensive at US$50-100k >> and they have not fallen in price much and probably won't for a very long >> time. >> 7. H2 is incredibly dangerous - far more so than petrol or any other common >> flammable gas. The main reason for this is because it has a very wide >> explosive/ignition mix range with air e.g. *when leaking*. Also, if it >> ignites, its flame is near invisible. Consequently, a leak is much more >> likely to lead to an explosion than other fuels. >> >> The list goes on. Despite all the posts I have made about this on various >> web sites and forums, I have never had a single response saying I'm wrong >> and why. The reverse in fact, I have had several learned individuals tell >> me I am absolutely right! If so, why is so much money - most of it provided >> by Government - and effort being wasted on fuel cell research? >> >> One of life's little mysteries, I supose. MW >> >> >> On 22 Jun 2013, at 11:38, John Lindsay wrote: >> >>> I saw a Ballard fuel cell system this week. >>> >>> 5KW in a large cabinet. Two cells each producing 24 volts about the size >>> of four shoe boxes each. A convertor the size of a two draw filing cabinet >>> that turns methanol mixed with water into hydrogen for the cells. >>> >>> It would make an awesome battery charger but it costs around $30K >>> including the two door cabinet. >>> >>> Fuel isn't cheap either and the tank costs $250 to fill and lasts 6 or 7 >>> hours. >>> >>> Don't you hate how economic reality gets in the way of electric dreams? >>> >>> Solar keeps getting cheaper because it's silicon based tech. >>> >>> Fuel cells are full of platinum and aren't getting cheaper until the >>> electrochemistry uses something else as catalysts. >>> >>> jsl >>> >>> On 22/06/2013, at 7:53 PM, Martin WINLOW <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Jukka! Shame on you. Fuel cells in Teslas (ones that work, are >>>> practical and don't cost twice as much as the rest of the car) are a pipe >>>> dream. If you haven't already, I suggest you read... >>>> http://planetforlife.com/h2/h2conclude.html ...and the associated pages >>>> (the link is to the conclusion). It is a bit dated now (2004) but the >>>> laws of physics and chemistry have not changed much, so the conclusion is >>>> still valid. H2 fuel cells as a replacement for fossil fuelled ICEs (or >>>> battery electric drive trains for that matter) in personal transport >>>> vehicles do not work and probably never will. For a host of reasons. >>>> Amen. >>>> >>>> Regards, MW. >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub >>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org >>> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA >>> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub >> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org >> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA >> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) >> >> > > > -- > http://www.google.com/profiles/jarviju#about > _______________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) > _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
