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
