I have a cousin who lives in Italy. They own a small Fiat van which runs on both methane (compressed) and regular gasoline; Apparently it costs the equivalent of $20 to fill the methane tank, and about $100 to fill the gas tank (which they'll do if they're in the hinterlands and can't find a methane station).

If most H2 comes from methane (natural gas), why not just burn the methane directly, instead of converting it multiple times (and losing something at every step), so you can feed it to a fuel cell?

Regards,

Marion

On 07/28/14 10:30 PM, Mike Nickerson via EV wrote:
https://greet.es.anl.gov/

I have looked at it in the past.  One thing to look at when someone reports 
results of the model:

Everything is configurable in the model.  Make sure the assumptions about 
generation and usage are well understood (either left to defaults or well 
documented).  It is very easy to sway the outcome with changes in assumptions.

In many cases, the changes can be realistic, but they need to be vetted.  For 
example, running the model for Idaho, the electrical grid is more than 50% 
renewable and less than 30% coal.  Those assumptions for New York would be very 
wrong.  I believe the defaults are national averages.

Mike


On July 28, 2014 7:33:57 PM MDT, Cor van de Water via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> 
wrote:
All data I have seen till now shows that emissions go up with the
indroduction of H2, due to the low efficiency well-to-wheels of
creating
H2.
So, it is considered not just a very difficult energy carrier, but also
inefficient, besides being very costly in roll out.
If you have data to the contrary, I am interested in vetting it (since
it is easy to mislead with cherry-picked info). My mind is open, I tend
to decide
based on data. Fan-boy? Not so much.
Got a link for that GREET model?

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info
Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Abramowitz [mailto:ma...@enviropolicy.com]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 6:27 PM
To: Cor van de Water; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Tesla might Supercharge EVs to regain 400mi in
15min
for7 credits

You are horribly mistaken if you believe that FCEVs increase current
emissions of either criteria or GHGs. Again, check the results from the
GREET model.

Every responsible agency that I work with locally believe that you
CANNOT meet public health standards or GHG goals without both BEVs and
FCEVs.

We need a 60%+ decrease in NOx emissions to meet current standards,
which data indicates are inadequate, and we expect will be tightened
further.

In a short time, most purchased autos will need to be ZEVs. That means
that people like Peri, who has identified range issues as necessitating
his own ICE in addition to a BEV, will need to forget the ICE. For
some,
that will mean BEVs, for some FCEVs, for some hybrids, and (IMO),
combinations of those as technology progresses.

We need ZEVs of all flavors.

Sorry for your pain, but it's all self-induced as well as hindering
efforts of those that know what they're doing. The fanboy stuff isn't
productive for those of us doing real work.


Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 28, 2014, at 5:30 PM, Cor van de Water via EV
<ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:

Mark,
If I am mistaken and you do have an interest in the environment,
then your words and your actions are in conflict.
The fact that you are not just promoting Hydrogen but even lobby to
get legislation that makes it a requirement and the environment be
damned by the associated increase in CO2 output, makes this all the
more painful.

Regards,

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info
Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Abramowitz [mailto:ma...@enviropolicy.com]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 8:23 AM
To: Cor van de Water; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Tesla might Supercharge EVs to regain 400mi in
15min
for7 credits

Thank you for falsely stating stating my interest and what I care
about.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 28, 2014, at 12:05 AM, Cor van de Water via EV
<ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:

Bill,

Mark has no interest whether it is simpler to use Hydrogen or not.
He even does not care that the use of Hydrogen will increase the
amount
of CO2 being burned (so, it is a disaster for the environment).
He is promoting Hydrogen - that is all. Look up his profile and you
will
understand.

I urge all members of this forum to once again adhere to the earlier
decision to avoid Hydrogen as a topic, because it is.... explosive.

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless Corporation http://www.proxim.com
Email: cwa...@proxim.com Private: http://www.cvandewater.info
Skype: cor_van_de_water Tel: +1 408 383 7626

-----Original Message-----
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Bill
Woodcock
via EV
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 10:58 AM
To: Mark Abramowitz
Cc: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Tesla might Supercharge EVs to regain 400mi in
15min
for7 credits


On Jul 27, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Mark Abramowitz
<ma...@enviropolicy.com>
wrote:

I've seen an animation of such a device for natural gas dispensing,
and am told it could just as easily be done for hydrogen.

How does that address what I said?  I've seen animations of the
Incredible Hulk, that doesn't support the proposition that it could
"just as easily be done for X."

But we know that whatever is being talked about... trip to the
moon,
world peace, cold fusion... you will be certain that it is "simpler,
cheaper, and easier than hydrogen."

So, prove me wrong.  What is it about hydrogen that you think is
easier
to move than electrons?

                               -Bill




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL:

<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20140727/a966
07fb/attachment.pgp>
_______________________________________________
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)
_______________________________________________
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)

_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to