From the WIKI: "Considering the industrial production of hydrogen, and using current best processes for water electrolysis (PEM or alkaline electrolysis) which have an effective electrical efficiency of 70–80%" I actually thought 70% was as good as it gets, but they think in another 10 years it might be in the upper 90%'s.
I recall that the combustion of hydrogen was also pretty lossy. SO a lot of inefficiency coming and going with H. I will try to find where I got that idea and write back. The discussion was to the effect that combining O2 and H2 could never be better than some ceiling %. On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 3:20 PM Mark Abramowitz via EV <[email protected]> wrote: > Gee, a lot of incorrect stuff to reply to. > > Not incorrect, but you think that PSI is less confusing to use than bar? > Then it’s 10,000 PSI. As far as your description of what it is - frankly, I > hadn’t a clue what you were talking about. Your numbers seem to be > confusing a point. > > Manufacturing defects in a Camry? I’m not sure what you are talking about. > No Camrys involved. Tanks get tested. If you are trying to imply that they > are dangerous, well so is everything. Risks get managed. Some get managed > better than others. Batteries have their own risks, too, as does any other > energy storage mechanism. > > Fuel cell lifetime of 2,000 hours? Care to provide a source? It’s just not > true. > > Electrolysis not very efficient? What do *you* consider “not very > efficient”? What do you consider acceptable efficiency? > > Hydrogen leakage through pipes? What pipes are you talking about? And the > basis for your assumption that it leaks because it is small? > > Tesla battery packs? Yes, very good. Million mile goal? Happy to talk > about goals. 100% green hydrogen within 10-15 years. Million mile goal? I > wish them luck. I own stock in the company. > > Recycling? Virtually none is happening now. That’s a lot of toxic waste. > Fuel cells - 99% recycled is what I’ve heard, far exceeding the Tesla goal, > today. > > What to buy? If a BEV best meets your needs - excellent! I hope you get > the best one for *you*, and hope that its a Tesla. But don’t make any > decisions based on wrong information, and on the fuel cell side, there > seems to be a lot of that that you are considering. > > BTW, you mentioned natural gas - if you are in California, your hydrogen > transportation fuel is likely *not* to be derived from fossil. > > - Mark > > Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone > > > On Aug 15, 2021, at 8:22 AM, Peter Eckhoff via EV <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Numbers help. For instance, an experimental Toyota Camry with three > > carbon wound hydrogen tanks was filled to "700 bar" with hydrogen for > > a range of 300 miles. Nobody who wants to convey pressure to the > > general public uses bars. It is always PSI. 700 bar translates to 5 > > tons per square inch in a car that weighs less than 2 tons. One tank > > manufacturing defect and the Camry goes "ballistic" in some direction. > > > > If hydrogen is made from natural gas, there is always a little CO > > included in the Hydrogen. That over time corrodes the Fuel Cell. The > > rough rule of thumb was that the fuel cell would last "2,000 hours". > > At 30 mph, that's 60K miles. YMMV That leaves electrolysis which is > > very inefficient. > > > > Then there is the transport of hydrogen to refueling stations. > > Hydrogen seeps through pipes because it is such a small atom. If it > > didn't, then you have a whole lot of new infrastructure to build. > > Tanker trucks are another story. They are capacity limited. > > > > I keep looking for genuine breakthroughs and I am not finding them. > > Most of what I read is hype. > > > > Meanwhile, a Tesla pack lasts from 300,000 to 500,000 miles with > > Musk's goal of 1 million miles. A million miles is 20K miles per year > > for 50 years. Basically, a lifetime of driving on one pack. > > > > Tesla has announced a recycling plan where they will be recycling 92 > > to 97% of a pack. > > > > There are too many basic issues with hydrogen fuel cells that have yet > > to be resolved in order to compete with a BEV. > > > > I'm considering purchasing another EV and a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle > > is not on that list of choices for a lot of fundamental reasons. I > > have not seen anything in your arguments to dissuade me from a BEV or > > point me to a viable HFCEV vehicle. > > > > > >> On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 1:56 AM Mark Abramowitz via EV > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I’m not sure what you want numbers on, but a point can certainly be > made without them, and frequently, numbers can get in the way. > >> > >> - Mark > >> > >> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone > >> > >>>> On Aug 14, 2021, at 8:47 PM, Peri Hartman via EV <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Mark, if you wish to present a point, please at least provide numbers > in your post and a more specific reference. We all have other things to do, > beside repeat research you've already done. > >>> Peri > >>> > >>> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >> > >>> > >>> ------ Original Message ------ > >>> From: "Mark Abramowitz" <[email protected]> > >>> To: "Peri Hartman" <[email protected]>; "Electric Vehicle Discussion > List" <[email protected]> > >>> Sent: 14-Aug-21 07:09:30 > >>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all > >>> > >>>> I think focus on that article was not “green” hydrogen, but “blue” > hydrogen, made from fossil with carbon sequestered. > >>>> > >>>> All I’ll say about blue hydrogen is that I share some of your > concerns about the ability to really do it. > >>>> > >>>> On the green side, I think that your numbers are way off. > >>>> > >>>> Do a search for Hydrogen 101 and Jack Brouwer for some interesting > numbers. And I can tell you that in terms of the economics, at least one > company that is building production plants as we speak, believes that they > can produce green hydrogen at a cost competitive with “grey” hydrogen, and > within a few years, competitive with diesel, which is really what we need > to compare it with. > >>>> > >>>> - Mark > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Address messages to [email protected] > >>> No other addresses in TO and CC fields > >>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > >>> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/ > >>> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Address messages to [email protected] > >> No other addresses in TO and CC fields > >> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > >> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/ > >> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > > _______________________________________________ > > Address messages to [email protected] > > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > > ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/ > > LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > Address messages to [email protected] > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/ > LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > -- Michael E. Ross (919) 585-6737 Land (919) 901-2805 Cell and Text (919) 576-0824 <https://www.google.com/voice/b/0?pli=1#phones> Tablet, Google Phone and Text -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210815/cc56fd5a/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Address messages to [email protected] No other addresses in TO and CC fields UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/ LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
