Availability - fair enough, if you want to define it that way. But then, you need to be consistent with how you define it.
But I don’t think it’s ridiculous for me not to count them as “available”. The fueling stations were all “pilot” and not considered “retail” stations. Retail stations required credit card capability, and had other standards to get funding, set by the state. That didn’t happen until around the time the Hyundai was released. And I wasn’t allowed to fill my Toyota at any place but these retail stations. You want to define it in your way, fine, know know that the industry and the state look at it differently. Despite the marketing PR of the OEMs. “Modern” batteries - We differ on definition of modern EV versus not. I view the not- modern ones to be the ones that were common in the late-1800s to the early 1900s. Besides the chemistry of the battery, how else do they differ? How would you view those BEVs or fuel cells that use completely different chemistries? - Comparable cars - I think you misunderstood what I said. I didn’t say the FCEVs were leading BEVs. I just said that the vehicles weren’t comparable. Has nothing to do with energy storage mechanism. No need to be insulting. As far as my comment on the adoption curves of BEV v. FCEV, again, you misunderstand what I said, or even the meaning of the data. Maybe this chart will help. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/ab8_report_2020.pdf Page 21 - Figure 8 - Analysis of Historical FCEV and BEV Early-Market Deployment Rates Number of stations - where did you find the incorrect numbers at DOE? If you look at the above document, 31 stations in 2017, 39 in 2018, 44 in 2019, 58 in 2020 (given date of document, this would have to be projected), and projected 2021 of 62. These numbers have changed somewhat, and there are other sources that will have updates. Of course, this has nothing to do with what is “better”, only what might work for one person over another, which is more location specific in the short term. But five new stations since 2017? You must have misread the data. In comparing infrastructure numbers, what would be interesting is a comparison on an apples to apples basis. What’s the fueling/recharging capacity that is equivalent? I know it’s been done someplace. One thing you must also recognize is that subsidies for the two technologies have been very uneven (I think something like a 5:1 or more ratio). Again, not a factor in “which one is better”. A further interesting comparison is the pathway to self-sufficiency for infrastructure. I know the fuel cell industry has done it, but don’t know if there is a similar path on the BEV side. That COULD impact a consumer’s view. - Mark Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone > On Aug 24, 2021, at 9:06 AM, Peter VanDerWal via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: > > >> >> Well, a history lesson for you….technically, yes, Honda did start producing >> an FCX Clarity in 2008 >> in Japan, and first available there. However, this was essentially a run of >> demo vehicles with a >> very limited number of people that were given them to try. Some key >> influencers got them, like >> several well-known actresses. I tried, but was unable to get one. > > Whether or not 'you' could get one doesn't hange the fact that they were > available to some people, so OBVIOUSLY their development had started. > >> On the BEV side, you’re forgetting the RAV4-EV in 1997, I think, and the EV1 >> about that time, too, >> and Honda also had one. > > I said "Moden EVs", those EVs did not use LiIon batteries. The rest of their > EV drive train is the same as used by modern BEVs AS WELL AS FCEVs, so as > far as 'development' goes they are irrelevant since their development is > share by both BEVs and FCEVs > > If we want to make rediculous comparisons on development, well hydrogen Fuel > Cells have been under continuous development for almost 180 years, whereas > LiIon batteries have only been around for ~36 years > >> >> Of the EVs you mentioned, really only the Tesla was comparable. I tried >> unsuccessfully to get a FIT >> EV, and that was a great car, but not car able to the FCEVs. And yes, the >> EVs outsold the FCEVs in >> 2012, in part because you could not buy a FCEV! > > So what you're saying is, when it comes to 'comparable' cars, FCEVs have been > leading EVs? > Why is it then that while there have been over a million BEVs sold, there > have been less than 7,000 FCEVs sold? > Be honest, what do you think this says about the future of FCEV vs BEVs? In > the real world, not some imaginary daydream of yours. > >> In fact, it you look at sales numbers in California, they were outsold every >> year. However, it you >> compare the adoption curve for the EV with the FCEV, the curve is the same >> for the two, just later >> by seven years. I consider that remarkable given the limits in >> infrastructure and other challenges. > > That's rediculous, there were more BEVs sold in California alone in 2011 than > the TOTAL number of FCEVs sold (or leased) WORLD WIDE in the last million > years. > > >> >> Fueling stations - I hadn’t noticed that you got the number of stations >> wrong, only that you said >> they were closing. But your comment about only five opening since 2017 is >> way off. I think that at >> least five have already opened just this year. > > Not according to the DOE. > _______________________________________________ > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210824/15c2b342/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org 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
