Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 14 May 2021 at 9:12, jim--- via EV wrote:

> A 3 KW solar array would hardly make a dent at my house.

I read years ago that when you're considering a PV system, the first step is 
to review your energy use and find where you can reduce it.  Obviously the 
more you can cut it, the less your system will cost.

This also applies to EV folks planning renewable transportation.  You have 
to pay attention to your EV's energy use when building or choosing it.  

So it seems to me that you have to look at what you can do.  

Maybe your kid really loves his fish and reptiles but it's worth noting that 
non-tropical fish can also be enjoyable, and that cats and dogs and other 
mammals are self-heating. :-)  

I don't know what you mean by, or have in, your "data cabinet" - but 
choosing infotech equipment based on energy use is important, as is locating 
it where natural cooling is possible.  For example (this may not be possible 
for you) a laptop with a low-power processor located in a cellar will use a 
lot less energy than a desktop processor in a second storey room that has to 
be cooled by aircon.  If you gear is in a closet, even relocating to an open 
shelf in a lightly used room can help.  Solid state drives use less energy 
than spinning disks.  Switching power supplies are usually more efficient 
than old fashioned linear wall warts.  There are many more ways to win the 
energy race in this category.

As for your waterbed heater, I don't want to offend but my first thought was 
that 400 watts seems awfully high.  You emit around 100 watts of heat all on 
your own; add a companion and you're already at 50% of the heater's output.  
I understand that waterbeds have benefits for some people but a good quality 
foam mattress on the bed and a comforter on top needs only your own body 
heat to provide outstanding comfort.  On extra-cold nights, one or two of 
those dogs and/or cats can add a few bonus watts.  :-)

I don't mean to be critical, so please don't take offense, but here in the 
US we use about 12.2 megawatt hours of electricity per person per year. With 
a slightly more temperate climate and much less fuel gas use, France uses 
6.7 MWh per capita (45% less) and the chilly, grey UK only about 4.5 MWh per 
capita (63% less).  France and UK are certainly not third-world nations nor 
is life uncomfortable in either place.  So I think that we have a lot of 
room for efficiency improvements here.

Just my opinion of course but in today's world It seems to me that it's 
getting increasingly difficult to justify our all-American wholesale 
squandering of resources.  EVs can help, thanks to their vastly better 
efficiency, but there is much more to be done.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 I LIKE paying taxes.  With them, I buy civilization. 

   -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[jim--- via EV]

Peter VanDerWal said:
> My 3kw solar array paid for itself years ago.  It produces all of the energy 
> used in my house
> for heating, cooling, cooking, etc. as well as 1/2 the energy used by my 
> vehicles.

I wish.  A 3 KW solar array would hardly make a dent at my house.  My about 9 
KW array covers about half of my electrical consumption.  And that is not 
covering cooking (except the microwave), space heating, or water heating.  And 
I don't have an EV (yet).  And this is southern California where we really do 
get lots of sun.

But my house is unusual - or more appropriately the stuff in it.  About the 
lowest my load ever gets is about 2.4KW.  There are five aquariums between 40 
and 90 gallon with thermostatic heaters, air pumps and filters running 24x7, 
five reptile enclosures with heaters running 24x7, and my data cabinet runs 
about 300 watts (more when it's hot and the AC runs more).  Lastly is my 
waterbed heater draws 400 watts when it is running (how much that is depends on 
the weather and how well we are at making the bed).  I am really looking 
forward to the older son moving out and taking the reptiles and several of the 
aquariums with him.  At that point, my solar will provide most of my total 
consumption.

Jim Walls


___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

What do you mean when you say “practical”?

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 14, 2021, at 8:38 AM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
>> proposal for long-distance air travel? What have you got?
>> 
> 
> Blimps.  Takes a lot longer to get there, but it's very efficient.  You could 
> probably even make it solar powered.
> 
> However, I agree that bio fuels are probably the best option for air travel.  
> However, biofuels are not the best option for surface travel.
> 
> Limiting bio-fuels to air travel might make using them practical.  Using 
> bio-fuel for large scale surface travel is not practical.
> ___
> 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
> 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peter VanDerWal via EV]

> If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
> proposal for long-distance air travel? What have you got?
> 

Blimps.  Takes a lot longer to get there, but it's very efficient.  You could 
probably even make it solar powered.

However, I agree that bio fuels are probably the best option for air travel.  
However, biofuels are not the best option for surface travel.

Limiting bio-fuels to air travel might make using them practical.  Using 
bio-fuel for large scale surface travel is not practical.
___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peter VanDerWal via EV]

My 3kw solar array paid for itself years ago.  It produces all of the energy 
used in my house for heating, cooling, cooking, etc. as well as 1/2 the energy 
used by my vehicles.
With the rediculously low price on PV cells recently, I bought enough to zero 
out the energy used by my vehicles.

My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key

May 9, 2021 2:38 PM, "Jim Walls via EV"  wrote:

> On 05/09/2021 12:37, Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote (in part):
> 
>> My case in point is over the last couple of years we have switched from 
>> natural gas for heating and
>> cooking. It was the pandemic and we drove much less but with the use of 
>> electric space heaters,
>> induction cooking, heat pump clothes drying, electric hot water heater(old 
>> school)
> 
> I heat my house, make hot water, and cook (except for the microwave)
> with natural gas.  I can do all that for less than electric heating one
> room part time.  I'm in no hurry to move away from natural gas for
> making heat.
> 
> --
> 73
> -
> Jim Walls - K6CCC
> j...@k6ccc.org
> Ofc: 818-548-4804
> http://members.dslextreme.com/users/k6ccc
> AMSAT Member 32537 - WSWSS Member 395
> 
> ___
> 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
___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Lawrence Rhodes via EV]

I heat my house, make hot water, and cook (except for the microwave)
with natural gas.? I can do all that for less than electric heating one
room part time.? I'm in no hurry to move away from natural gas for
making heat.

I paid $450 for a year. I make my own electricity so raising my panel depth is 
in the works. Can't imagine you would be paying less than me. It costs $120 a 
year just for the privilege of using gas. Not to mention the poison you are 
making and breathing. 

In American homes, this setup is quite common, but gas appliances—and gas 
stoves in particular—have costs. Cooking on a gas stove unleashes some of the 
same fumes found in car exhaust. If those fumes are not vented outside the 
house, they linger and sneak into lungs. They discovered that 62% of households 
using gas burners without venting range hoods are routinely exposed to 
excessive levels of nitrogen dioxide, 9% to carbon monoxide and 52% to 
formaldehyde, gases that can cause respiratory problems and worsen asthma and 
cardiovascular disease.  
https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-xpm-2013-nov-06-la-sci-sn-gas-stoves-air-pollution-california-20131106-story.html
 


Lawrence Rhodes








On Sunday, May 9, 2021, 5:07:22 PM PDT, ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org 
 wrote: 





Send EV mailing list submissions to
    ev@lists.evdl.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    ev-requ...@lists.evdl.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    ev-ow...@lists.evdl.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of EV digest..."


Also, please be careful not to append the entire digest to your reply. Many 
mail systems do this by default. Trim or delete the digest text from the bottom 
of your message, and quote only the parts to which you're replying.



Today's Topics:

  1. Re: opinion article on hydrogen ((-Phil-))
  2. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (Lawrence Rhodes)
  3. The state of EV's 1890 to 1922 (Robert Bruninga)
  4. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (Lee Hart)
  5. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (Larry Gales)
  6. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (Jim Walls)
  7. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (Mark Abramowitz)
  8. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (EVDL Administrator)
  9. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (Larry Gales)
  10. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (EVDL Administrator)
  11. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (EVDL Administrator)
  12. Re: opinion article on hydrogen (Bill Dennis)


--

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 9 May 2021 12:35:49 -0700
From: "(-Phil-)" 
To: EVDL Administrator 
Cc: Electric Vehicle Discussion List 
Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen
Message-ID:
    
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?

Right now until we have something like fusion, There isn't any current tech
that can handle it.  People aren't just going to stop flying.

The only path I can see right now is Biofuels, Yes it's dirty now, just
like coal on the grid powering EVs, but it most definitely can be fixed to
be at least carbon neutral.  The solution to get free-enterprise to work on
this is a real carbon tax.

On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 1:46 PM EVDL Administrator  wrote:

> On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
>
> > Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
> > carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
> > complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
> > operation, but this can be fixed over time.
>
> With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much hand-
> waving for my taste.
>
> The problem with biofuels is that growing and harvesting crops, processing
> them, and transporting the fuel to the use point requires substantial
> energy
> input, and most of it comes from carbon based fuels.  Even fertilizer and
> pesticides are made from petroleum.  I just don't see that equation
> changing
> fast enough to get us to carbon-neutral in time.
>
> The only biofuel application I can think of that *might* get closer sooner
> -
> and I'm not 100% sure about even this - is electricity generation.  For
> example, Uruguay's power system runs largely on pulverized Eucalyptus
> wood.
> The problem with this is that petroleum giants have governments bought and
> paid for, and they can't make money from distributing wood chips as easily
> as they can from corn processed into ethanol.
>
> There's also the fact that food turned into fuel while people are starving
> round the world has some ... ethical conside

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Mark Grasser via EV]

The problem with Hydrogen is that it is a pollutant. Until they learn to create 
hydrogen from the sun, economically, it will stay a pollutant. Solar electric, 
wind electric, and batteries, even if they still weigh too much, have 
infrastructure, etc, they are not a pollutant. 
Mark



-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Mark Abramowitz via EV
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 9:54 AM
To: p...@ingineerix.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Cc: Mark Abramowitz
Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

There are many more “problems” with battery electric.  You call them 
“problems,” but they are really just characteristics that MAY make them less 
suitable than other option depending on the needed use case or duty cycle.

Charge time, infrastructure cost, weight, volume, storage

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 9, 2021, at 7:48 PM, (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:
> 
> I think we should switch as much of our transportation systems as possible
> to electric, but some of them just can't work with present (and near
> future) tech; Long-haul flights.   These are also very carbon intensive!
> 
> This is where we need biofuels.
> 
> The only problem for battery-electric is scaling it, and doing so without a
> huge up front carbon release.
> 
>> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 5:07 PM Bill Dennis via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> Here's a link to a timely video on the hydrogen flying topic:
>> 
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFlV1jY6K7Q
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Larry Gales via
>> EV
>> Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 3:09 PM
>> To: p...@ingineerix.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
>> Cc: Larry Gales
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen
>> 
>> There are 3 major types of flying to consider: (1) VTOL (mainly
>> helicopters), (2) regional flights up to 600 miles (more than 1/2 of all
>> commercial flights are within 600 miles), and (3) long distance flights,
>> more than 600 miles.
>> 
>> For the first two types, battery powered electric aircraft (like the 600+
>> mile range Eviation Alice), and VTOL are simply far superior to what we
>> have now, in terms of cleanliness, quietness, safety, smoothness, and
>> dramatically lower fuel and maintenance costs.  So, instead of flying less,
>> we will likely be flying more, and paying much less.
>> 
>> Some time ago I ran the figures for the cost of CH4 (methane) fuel if we
>> created CH4 by (a) electrolyzing water to get H2, (b) using Direct Air
>> Capture to get CO2, and (c) using the Sabatier process to produce CH4.
>> When burned in a jet engine it is carbon neutral because the CO2 we emit is
>> exactly the amount of CO2 that we captured.
>> 
>> I don't remember the exact cost of the fuel, but it was less than twice
>> what it is now.  But, given that fuel cost is only 20% of the cost for
>> current flights, that translates to prices about 20% more than at present.
>> 
>> So, maybe the very low cost of short range battery powered aircraft which
>> makeup more than 1/2 of all flights could subsidize the longer flights?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 1:36 PM (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
>>> proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?
>>> 
>>> Right now until we have something like fusion, There isn't any current
>> tech
>>> that can handle it.  People aren't just going to stop flying.
>>> 
>>> The only path I can see right now is Biofuels, Yes it's dirty now, just
>>> like coal on the grid powering EVs, but it most definitely can be fixed
>> to
>>> be at least carbon neutral.  The solution to get free-enterprise to work
>> on
>>> this is a real carbon tax.
>>> 
>>> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 1:46 PM EVDL Administrator 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
>>>>> carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
>>>>> complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
>>>>> operation, but this can be fixed over time.
>>>> 
>>>> With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much
>>> hand-
>>>> waving for my taste.
>>>> 
>>>> The problem with biofuel

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Robert Bruninga via EV]

Yep, gas and electricity might be about equal for heating, but with a
heatppump AND investing in home solar, you can lock in your home heat
forever.Renewable adn cheaper in the logn run.

Bob

On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 7:40 PM EVDL Administrator via EV
 wrote:
>
> On 9 May 2021 at 14:38, Jim Walls via EV wrote:
>
> > I heat my house, make hot water, and cook (except for the microwave)
> > with natural gas.  I can do all that for less than electric heating one room
> > part time.  I'm in no hurry to move away from natural gas for making heat.
>
> I have two reactions to this.
>
> 1. You're just one case.  Not everyone has the same relative costs for fuel
> gas and electricity.
>
> 2. What it costs you as an individual is only part of the picture.  We also
> have to consider what it costs society - both monetary and health.
> Ultimately that's a cost to you too, because your taxes have to cover it.
>
> Comments on the above:
>
> Our costs for fuel gas here in the US are temporarily unnaturally low,
> because the determined scramble to crush every bit of shale rock under this
> nation and release all its fuel gas has created a gas surplus.  It won't
> last.
>
> Other nations have to import their gas, in some cases from nations they'd
> rather not have to patronize.   Much of western Europe is shifting to
> renewables, both for this political reason, and to reduce their carbon
> emissions.  So typically they price their gas to encourage electricity use,
> and in some cases no longer approve new fuel gas installations.
>
> Take France for example.  Electricity is about 0.16 euro per KWH, and gas is
> about 0.075 euro per KWH.  Seems like a no-brainer at first glance.  But a
> heat pump with a COOP of 3.3 (typical minisplit) effectively cuts the
> electricity cost to 0.048 euro per KWH of heat produced.
>
> When you do the math, you find that, in France, a minisplit is the lowest
> cost home heat source.  It's even cheaper than heating with wood, formerly
> the low cost champ.
>
> As a further incentive, the French government subsidizes heat pump
> installations.  BTW, they also subsidize EVs directly, at 7,000 euros for
> most models, and give homeowners a tax credit toward installing EVSEs.
>
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>  The business model of the internet is surveillance.
>
> -- Bruce Schneier
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> ___
> 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
___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

There are many more “problems” with battery electric.  You call them 
“problems,” but they are really just characteristics that MAY make them less 
suitable than other option depending on the needed use case or duty cycle.

Charge time, infrastructure cost, weight, volume, storage

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 9, 2021, at 7:48 PM, (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:
> 
> I think we should switch as much of our transportation systems as possible
> to electric, but some of them just can't work with present (and near
> future) tech; Long-haul flights.   These are also very carbon intensive!
> 
> This is where we need biofuels.
> 
> The only problem for battery-electric is scaling it, and doing so without a
> huge up front carbon release.
> 
>> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 5:07 PM Bill Dennis via EV  wrote:
>> 
>> Here's a link to a timely video on the hydrogen flying topic:
>> 
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFlV1jY6K7Q
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Larry Gales via
>> EV
>> Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 3:09 PM
>> To: p...@ingineerix.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
>> Cc: Larry Gales
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen
>> 
>> There are 3 major types of flying to consider: (1) VTOL (mainly
>> helicopters), (2) regional flights up to 600 miles (more than 1/2 of all
>> commercial flights are within 600 miles), and (3) long distance flights,
>> more than 600 miles.
>> 
>> For the first two types, battery powered electric aircraft (like the 600+
>> mile range Eviation Alice), and VTOL are simply far superior to what we
>> have now, in terms of cleanliness, quietness, safety, smoothness, and
>> dramatically lower fuel and maintenance costs.  So, instead of flying less,
>> we will likely be flying more, and paying much less.
>> 
>> Some time ago I ran the figures for the cost of CH4 (methane) fuel if we
>> created CH4 by (a) electrolyzing water to get H2, (b) using Direct Air
>> Capture to get CO2, and (c) using the Sabatier process to produce CH4.
>> When burned in a jet engine it is carbon neutral because the CO2 we emit is
>> exactly the amount of CO2 that we captured.
>> 
>> I don't remember the exact cost of the fuel, but it was less than twice
>> what it is now.  But, given that fuel cost is only 20% of the cost for
>> current flights, that translates to prices about 20% more than at present.
>> 
>> So, maybe the very low cost of short range battery powered aircraft which
>> makeup more than 1/2 of all flights could subsidize the longer flights?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 1:36 PM (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
>>> proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?
>>> 
>>> Right now until we have something like fusion, There isn't any current
>> tech
>>> that can handle it.  People aren't just going to stop flying.
>>> 
>>> The only path I can see right now is Biofuels, Yes it's dirty now, just
>>> like coal on the grid powering EVs, but it most definitely can be fixed
>> to
>>> be at least carbon neutral.  The solution to get free-enterprise to work
>> on
>>> this is a real carbon tax.
>>> 
>>> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 1:46 PM EVDL Administrator 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
>>>>> carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
>>>>> complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
>>>>> operation, but this can be fixed over time.
>>>> 
>>>> With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much
>>> hand-
>>>> waving for my taste.
>>>> 
>>>> The problem with biofuels is that growing and harvesting crops,
>>> processing
>>>> them, and transporting the fuel to the use point requires substantial
>>>> energy
>>>> input, and most of it comes from carbon based fuels.  Even fertilizer
>> and
>>>> pesticides are made from petroleum.  I just don't see that equation
>>>> changing
>>>> fast enough to get us to carbon-neutral in time.
>>>> 
>>>> The only biofuel application I can think of that *might* get closer
>>> sooner

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peri Hartman via EV]

For the prototype, it uses electricity from the grid. In production, it 
could power itself - or not. The inventors proposed a portable, truck 
mounted system that could be taken to various sites, so they are mostly 
thinking of self powered. I don't know the amount of energy required to 
produce a unit of energy, but it definitely comes out strongly on the 
beneficial side.


From my point of view, biofuel shouldn't compete with wind, solar, etc. 
We should build out the latter and switch as much energy usage as 
possible to electricity generated them them. Biofuel can be used to 
generate virgin plastic and run jet planes - better than than more 
extraction.


Peri

<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>

-- Original Message --
From: "EVDL Administrator via EV" 
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
Cc: "EVDL Administrator" 
Sent: 09-May-21 3:38:22 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen


On 9 May 2021 at 18:30, Peri Hartman via EV wrote:


 I've seen a prototype reactor (high pressure, high temp, with a
 catalyst)


I'm all for snagging energy from the waste stream, but pressure and heat
require energy input.  Where will it come from?  And how does that input
compare with the energy that the product produces?  That's the big hammer
hanging over ethanol's head, too.

I may be missing something, but I don't see any comparable ongoing energy
input for PV, wind, tidal, or geothermal sources.


___
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


___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[(-Phil-) via EV]

I think we should switch as much of our transportation systems as possible
to electric, but some of them just can't work with present (and near
future) tech; Long-haul flights.   These are also very carbon intensive!

This is where we need biofuels.

The only problem for battery-electric is scaling it, and doing so without a
huge up front carbon release.

On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 5:07 PM Bill Dennis via EV  wrote:

> Here's a link to a timely video on the hydrogen flying topic:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFlV1jY6K7Q
>
> Bill
>
> -Original Message-
> From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Larry Gales via
> EV
> Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 3:09 PM
> To: p...@ingineerix.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
> Cc: Larry Gales
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen
>
> There are 3 major types of flying to consider: (1) VTOL (mainly
> helicopters), (2) regional flights up to 600 miles (more than 1/2 of all
> commercial flights are within 600 miles), and (3) long distance flights,
> more than 600 miles.
>
> For the first two types, battery powered electric aircraft (like the 600+
> mile range Eviation Alice), and VTOL are simply far superior to what we
> have now, in terms of cleanliness, quietness, safety, smoothness, and
> dramatically lower fuel and maintenance costs.  So, instead of flying less,
> we will likely be flying more, and paying much less.
>
> Some time ago I ran the figures for the cost of CH4 (methane) fuel if we
> created CH4 by (a) electrolyzing water to get H2, (b) using Direct Air
> Capture to get CO2, and (c) using the Sabatier process to produce CH4.
> When burned in a jet engine it is carbon neutral because the CO2 we emit is
> exactly the amount of CO2 that we captured.
>
> I don't remember the exact cost of the fuel, but it was less than twice
> what it is now.  But, given that fuel cost is only 20% of the cost for
> current flights, that translates to prices about 20% more than at present.
>
> So, maybe the very low cost of short range battery powered aircraft which
> makeup more than 1/2 of all flights could subsidize the longer flights?
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 1:36 PM (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:
>
> > If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
> > proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?
> >
> > Right now until we have something like fusion, There isn't any current
> tech
> > that can handle it.  People aren't just going to stop flying.
> >
> > The only path I can see right now is Biofuels, Yes it's dirty now, just
> > like coal on the grid powering EVs, but it most definitely can be fixed
> to
> > be at least carbon neutral.  The solution to get free-enterprise to work
> on
> > this is a real carbon tax.
> >
> > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 1:46 PM EVDL Administrator 
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
> > >
> > > > Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
> > > > carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
> > > > complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
> > > > operation, but this can be fixed over time.
> > >
> > > With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much
> > hand-
> > > waving for my taste.
> > >
> > > The problem with biofuels is that growing and harvesting crops,
> > processing
> > > them, and transporting the fuel to the use point requires substantial
> > > energy
> > > input, and most of it comes from carbon based fuels.  Even fertilizer
> and
> > > pesticides are made from petroleum.  I just don't see that equation
> > > changing
> > > fast enough to get us to carbon-neutral in time.
> > >
> > > The only biofuel application I can think of that *might* get closer
> > sooner
> > > -
> > > and I'm not 100% sure about even this - is electricity generation.  For
> > > example, Uruguay's power system runs largely on pulverized Eucalyptus
> > > wood.
> > > The problem with this is that petroleum giants have governments bought
> > and
> > > paid for, and they can't make money from distributing wood chips as
> > easily
> > > as they can from corn processed into ethanol.
> > >
> > > There's also the fact that food turned into fuel while people are
> > starving
> > > round the world has some ... ethical considerations.
> > >
> > > > To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization
>

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Bill Dennis via EV]

Here's a link to a timely video on the hydrogen flying topic:  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFlV1jY6K7Q

Bill

-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Larry Gales via EV
Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 3:09 PM
To: p...@ingineerix.com; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Cc: Larry Gales
Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

There are 3 major types of flying to consider: (1) VTOL (mainly
helicopters), (2) regional flights up to 600 miles (more than 1/2 of all
commercial flights are within 600 miles), and (3) long distance flights,
more than 600 miles.

For the first two types, battery powered electric aircraft (like the 600+
mile range Eviation Alice), and VTOL are simply far superior to what we
have now, in terms of cleanliness, quietness, safety, smoothness, and
dramatically lower fuel and maintenance costs.  So, instead of flying less,
we will likely be flying more, and paying much less.

Some time ago I ran the figures for the cost of CH4 (methane) fuel if we
created CH4 by (a) electrolyzing water to get H2, (b) using Direct Air
Capture to get CO2, and (c) using the Sabatier process to produce CH4.
When burned in a jet engine it is carbon neutral because the CO2 we emit is
exactly the amount of CO2 that we captured.

I don't remember the exact cost of the fuel, but it was less than twice
what it is now.  But, given that fuel cost is only 20% of the cost for
current flights, that translates to prices about 20% more than at present.

So, maybe the very low cost of short range battery powered aircraft which
makeup more than 1/2 of all flights could subsidize the longer flights?




On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 1:36 PM (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:

> If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
> proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?
>
> Right now until we have something like fusion, There isn't any current
tech
> that can handle it.  People aren't just going to stop flying.
>
> The only path I can see right now is Biofuels, Yes it's dirty now, just
> like coal on the grid powering EVs, but it most definitely can be fixed to
> be at least carbon neutral.  The solution to get free-enterprise to work
on
> this is a real carbon tax.
>
> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 1:46 PM EVDL Administrator  wrote:
>
> > On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
> >
> > > Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
> > > carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
> > > complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
> > > operation, but this can be fixed over time.
> >
> > With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much
> hand-
> > waving for my taste.
> >
> > The problem with biofuels is that growing and harvesting crops,
> processing
> > them, and transporting the fuel to the use point requires substantial
> > energy
> > input, and most of it comes from carbon based fuels.  Even fertilizer
and
> > pesticides are made from petroleum.  I just don't see that equation
> > changing
> > fast enough to get us to carbon-neutral in time.
> >
> > The only biofuel application I can think of that *might* get closer
> sooner
> > -
> > and I'm not 100% sure about even this - is electricity generation.  For
> > example, Uruguay's power system runs largely on pulverized Eucalyptus
> > wood.
> > The problem with this is that petroleum giants have governments bought
> and
> > paid for, and they can't make money from distributing wood chips as
> easily
> > as they can from corn processed into ethanol.
> >
> > There's also the fact that food turned into fuel while people are
> starving
> > round the world has some ... ethical considerations.
> >
> > > To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization is
> > > good.
> >
> > Your point about improving utilization of limited battery-production
> > capacity is a good one.  We need to keep plugging ahead (sorry) with
> > battery
> > recycling, and with developing batteries that use less exotic materials.
> > NiMH, anyone?  Hello?
> >
> > But at the consumer level, I think that the use case for hybrids - I
mean
> > real ones, not "you naver have to plug it in" pseudo-hybrids - is fading
> > as
> > true BEV battery capacity grows and rapid charging facilities multiply.
> >
> > It's also easier and more efficient to add PV capacity to EV charging
> than
> > it is to add "renewability" to ICEV refueling.
> >
> > Finally, a BEV is mechanically much simpler and at least theoretically
> > more
> > r

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 9 May 2021 at 12:35, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:

> If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
> proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?

Sorry if I offended, I didn't mean to.

What I mean by hand-waving (though this definition is a bit rough):

www.lexico.com/en/definition/hand_waving

> biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive operation,
> but this can be fixed over time. 

I'm not an expert on these matters, so please forgive my skepticism, but I 
just don't see a clear path yet to a solution.  Please don't take offense, 
but that's why I think it's hand-waving to say that with such confidence.

I may have missed something, but the biofuels energy input problem doesn't 
seem to be as tractable as the EV battery problem has been.  

Back in the 1980s we could say with some certainty that the battery problem 
would be solved in time.  Nickel-hydrogen batteries, NiMH forerunners, were 
used in satellites in the late 1970s.  The first lithium ion prototype 
landed in 1985.  By 1989 or 1990, I was hearing of lithium batteries as the 
probable future of EVs.

Is there a comparable route to making biofuels with sustainable energy 
input?

Considering how much more efficient it is already to make electricity with 
PV, store it in batteries, and run EVs on it directly, do you really think 
that biofuels have a bright future for transportation use?  I mean barring 
blatant political intervention of course.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 First they came for the journalists.  We don't know what 
 happened after that.  

  -- Unknown
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 9 May 2021 at 18:30, Peri Hartman via EV wrote:

> I've seen a prototype reactor (high pressure, high temp, with a 
> catalyst)

I'm all for snagging energy from the waste stream, but pressure and heat 
require energy input.  Where will it come from?  And how does that input 
compare with the energy that the product produces?  That's the big hammer 
hanging over ethanol's head, too.  

I may be missing something, but I don't see any comparable ongoing energy 
input for PV, wind, tidal, or geothermal sources.


___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Larry Gales via EV]

Well, natural gas may be cheaper at present, but it is neither sustainable
nor clean

On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 3:36 PM Jim Walls via EV  wrote:

> On 05/09/2021 12:37, Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote (in part):
> > My case in point is over the last couple of years we have switched from
> natural gas for heating and cooking. It was the pandemic and we drove much
> less but with the use of electric space heaters, induction cooking, heat
> pump clothes drying, electric hot water heater(old school)
>
> I heat my house, make hot water, and cook (except for the microwave)
> with natural gas.  I can do all that for less than electric heating one
> room part time.  I'm in no hurry to move away from natural gas for
> making heat.
>
> --
> 73
> -
> Jim Walls - K6CCC
> j...@k6ccc.org
> Ofc:  818-548-4804
> http://members.dslextreme.com/users/k6ccc/
> AMSAT Member 32537 - WSWSS Member 395
>
> ___
> 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
>


-- 
Larry Gales
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 9 May 2021 at 14:38, Jim Walls via EV wrote:

> I heat my house, make hot water, and cook (except for the microwave) 
> with natural gas.  I can do all that for less than electric heating one room
> part time.  I'm in no hurry to move away from natural gas for making heat.

I have two reactions to this.  

1. You're just one case.  Not everyone has the same relative costs for fuel 
gas and electricity.  

2. What it costs you as an individual is only part of the picture.  We also 
have to consider what it costs society - both monetary and health.  
Ultimately that's a cost to you too, because your taxes have to cover it.

Comments on the above:

Our costs for fuel gas here in the US are temporarily unnaturally low, 
because the determined scramble to crush every bit of shale rock under this 
nation and release all its fuel gas has created a gas surplus.  It won't 
last.

Other nations have to import their gas, in some cases from nations they'd 
rather not have to patronize.   Much of western Europe is shifting to 
renewables, both for this political reason, and to reduce their carbon 
emissions.  So typically they price their gas to encourage electricity use, 
and in some cases no longer approve new fuel gas installations.  

Take France for example.  Electricity is about 0.16 euro per KWH, and gas is 
about 0.075 euro per KWH.  Seems like a no-brainer at first glance.  But a 
heat pump with a COOP of 3.3 (typical minisplit) effectively cuts the 
electricity cost to 0.048 euro per KWH of heat produced. 

When you do the math, you find that, in France, a minisplit is the lowest 
cost home heat source.  It's even cheaper than heating with wood, formerly 
the low cost champ.  

As a further incentive, the French government subsidizes heat pump 
installations.  BTW, they also subsidize EVs directly, at 7,000 euros for 
most models, and give homeowners a tax credit toward installing EVSEs.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 The business model of the internet is surveillance.  

-- Bruce Schneier
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

This is, and I think, will be changing.  Technology moves forward. 

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 9, 2021, at 10:18 AM, Peter VanDerWal via EV  wrote:
> 
> May 8, 2021 10:10 AM, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:
> 
>> From what research I've done, I believe BioFuels are a better stop gap than
>> H2.
> 
> Perhaps some day this will be true.  However, the major 'biofuel' we produce 
> in the USA is ethanol and numerous studies indicates that the way we produce 
> ethanol uses more pertroleum fuel that it offsets.  
> Worse than that, the polution that results from farming and refining ethanol 
> (mostly)stays in this country while the majority of the ethanol is sold to 
> overseas customers.
> 
> Then there is the fact that growing biofuel uses a lot of land (as well as 
> other resources), if we used ALL of the arable land in the USA to grow 
> biofuel, it wouldn't offset even 1/4 of our petroleum consumption.  And of 
> course if we use all of the land to grow fuel, we wouldn't have any food to 
> eat.
> 
> If we could figure out how to grow fuel without consuming massive amount of 
> petroleum, then it might make sense to grow limited amount of biofuel for 
> those applications that can't be solved with electricity.  However, I suspect 
> that long before we solve that problem, there will no longer be applications 
> that can't be solved with electricity, or some other green solution they 
> might come up with.
> 
> 
> My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
> ___
> 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
> 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Jim Walls via EV]

On 05/09/2021 12:37, Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote (in part):

My case in point is over the last couple of years we have switched from natural 
gas for heating and cooking. It was the pandemic and we drove much less but 
with the use of electric space heaters, induction cooking, heat pump clothes 
drying, electric hot water heater(old school)


I heat my house, make hot water, and cook (except for the microwave) 
with natural gas.  I can do all that for less than electric heating one 
room part time.  I'm in no hurry to move away from natural gas for 
making heat.


--
73
-
Jim Walls - K6CCC
j...@k6ccc.org
Ofc:  818-548-4804
http://members.dslextreme.com/users/k6ccc/
AMSAT Member 32537 - WSWSS Member 395

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Larry Gales via EV]

There are 3 major types of flying to consider: (1) VTOL (mainly
helicopters), (2) regional flights up to 600 miles (more than 1/2 of all
commercial flights are within 600 miles), and (3) long distance flights,
more than 600 miles.

For the first two types, battery powered electric aircraft (like the 600+
mile range Eviation Alice), and VTOL are simply far superior to what we
have now, in terms of cleanliness, quietness, safety, smoothness, and
dramatically lower fuel and maintenance costs.  So, instead of flying less,
we will likely be flying more, and paying much less.

Some time ago I ran the figures for the cost of CH4 (methane) fuel if we
created CH4 by (a) electrolyzing water to get H2, (b) using Direct Air
Capture to get CO2, and (c) using the Sabatier process to produce CH4.
When burned in a jet engine it is carbon neutral because the CO2 we emit is
exactly the amount of CO2 that we captured.

I don't remember the exact cost of the fuel, but it was less than twice
what it is now.  But, given that fuel cost is only 20% of the cost for
current flights, that translates to prices about 20% more than at present.

So, maybe the very low cost of short range battery powered aircraft which
makeup more than 1/2 of all flights could subsidize the longer flights?




On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 1:36 PM (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:

> If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
> proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?
>
> Right now until we have something like fusion, There isn't any current tech
> that can handle it.  People aren't just going to stop flying.
>
> The only path I can see right now is Biofuels, Yes it's dirty now, just
> like coal on the grid powering EVs, but it most definitely can be fixed to
> be at least carbon neutral.  The solution to get free-enterprise to work on
> this is a real carbon tax.
>
> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 1:46 PM EVDL Administrator  wrote:
>
> > On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
> >
> > > Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
> > > carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
> > > complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
> > > operation, but this can be fixed over time.
> >
> > With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much
> hand-
> > waving for my taste.
> >
> > The problem with biofuels is that growing and harvesting crops,
> processing
> > them, and transporting the fuel to the use point requires substantial
> > energy
> > input, and most of it comes from carbon based fuels.  Even fertilizer and
> > pesticides are made from petroleum.  I just don't see that equation
> > changing
> > fast enough to get us to carbon-neutral in time.
> >
> > The only biofuel application I can think of that *might* get closer
> sooner
> > -
> > and I'm not 100% sure about even this - is electricity generation.  For
> > example, Uruguay's power system runs largely on pulverized Eucalyptus
> > wood.
> > The problem with this is that petroleum giants have governments bought
> and
> > paid for, and they can't make money from distributing wood chips as
> easily
> > as they can from corn processed into ethanol.
> >
> > There's also the fact that food turned into fuel while people are
> starving
> > round the world has some ... ethical considerations.
> >
> > > To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization is
> > > good.
> >
> > Your point about improving utilization of limited battery-production
> > capacity is a good one.  We need to keep plugging ahead (sorry) with
> > battery
> > recycling, and with developing batteries that use less exotic materials.
> > NiMH, anyone?  Hello?
> >
> > But at the consumer level, I think that the use case for hybrids - I mean
> > real ones, not "you naver have to plug it in" pseudo-hybrids - is fading
> > as
> > true BEV battery capacity grows and rapid charging facilities multiply.
> >
> > It's also easier and more efficient to add PV capacity to EV charging
> than
> > it is to add "renewability" to ICEV refueling.
> >
> > Finally, a BEV is mechanically much simpler and at least theoretically
> > more
> > reliable than an ICEV, let alone a hybrid with the complexity of both.  I
> > haven't run the numbers, but intuitively, manufacturing a BEV has to be
> > less
> > carbon intensive than manufacturing a hybrid, and it should have a longer
> > service life.
> >
> > Like LPs and phono cartridges in 1980, today's ICEVs are highly complex,
> > almost impossibly refined machines only made affordable by serial
> > production
> > and massive amounts of long-term development.
> >
> > Like CD players in the late 1980s and early 1990s, EVs are evolving
> > rapidly
> > and quickly declining in cost, thanks to economy of scale and research
> > into
> > battery optimization.
> >
> > Perhaps I'm being uncharacteristically overoptimistic, and I could
> > certainly
> > be wrong, but I think that what CDs did 

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Lee Hart via EV]

Peri Hartman via EV wrote:
Biofuels don't have to be made from crops. We have an enormous waste 
stream with high carbon content. Imagine a process to convert that into 
methane and oil, which could then be reused to produce virgin plastic. 
Or fuel jet planes.


I seem to recall that Brazil makes a significant amount of ethanol for 
vehicle fuels out of the waste from sugar cane crops. Instead of burning 
it, they process it into alcohol.


There are certainly cleaner ways to produce biofuels. But the almighty 
dollar and government subsidies make the US use corn for making alcohol.


Lee

--
A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is
nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
-- Antoine de Saint Exupery
--
Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, www.sunrise-ev.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Lawrence Rhodes via EV]

 No transition fuel needed. As people who use energy realize the cost factor 
fossil fuel will die and renewables will thrive. My case in point is over the 
last couple of years we have switched from natural gas for heating and cooking. 
It was the pandemic and we drove much less but with the use of electric space 
heaters, induction cooking, heat pump clothes drying, electric hot water 
heater(old school) and car charging we spent $450 for the year on electricity. 
Our solar system is modest at 2.4kw.  We tried to use solar directly when the 
sun shined.   Nuf said. Lawrence Rhodes
___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[(-Phil-) via EV]

If future true carbon neutral is "handwaving", then I'd love to hear your
proposal for long-distance air travel?  What have you got?

Right now until we have something like fusion, There isn't any current tech
that can handle it.  People aren't just going to stop flying.

The only path I can see right now is Biofuels, Yes it's dirty now, just
like coal on the grid powering EVs, but it most definitely can be fixed to
be at least carbon neutral.  The solution to get free-enterprise to work on
this is a real carbon tax.

On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 1:46 PM EVDL Administrator  wrote:

> On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:
>
> > Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
> > carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
> > complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
> > operation, but this can be fixed over time.
>
> With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much hand-
> waving for my taste.
>
> The problem with biofuels is that growing and harvesting crops, processing
> them, and transporting the fuel to the use point requires substantial
> energy
> input, and most of it comes from carbon based fuels.  Even fertilizer and
> pesticides are made from petroleum.  I just don't see that equation
> changing
> fast enough to get us to carbon-neutral in time.
>
> The only biofuel application I can think of that *might* get closer sooner
> -
> and I'm not 100% sure about even this - is electricity generation.  For
> example, Uruguay's power system runs largely on pulverized Eucalyptus
> wood.
> The problem with this is that petroleum giants have governments bought and
> paid for, and they can't make money from distributing wood chips as easily
> as they can from corn processed into ethanol.
>
> There's also the fact that food turned into fuel while people are starving
> round the world has some ... ethical considerations.
>
> > To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization is
> > good.
>
> Your point about improving utilization of limited battery-production
> capacity is a good one.  We need to keep plugging ahead (sorry) with
> battery
> recycling, and with developing batteries that use less exotic materials.
> NiMH, anyone?  Hello?
>
> But at the consumer level, I think that the use case for hybrids - I mean
> real ones, not "you naver have to plug it in" pseudo-hybrids - is fading
> as
> true BEV battery capacity grows and rapid charging facilities multiply.
>
> It's also easier and more efficient to add PV capacity to EV charging than
> it is to add "renewability" to ICEV refueling.
>
> Finally, a BEV is mechanically much simpler and at least theoretically
> more
> reliable than an ICEV, let alone a hybrid with the complexity of both.  I
> haven't run the numbers, but intuitively, manufacturing a BEV has to be
> less
> carbon intensive than manufacturing a hybrid, and it should have a longer
> service life.
>
> Like LPs and phono cartridges in 1980, today's ICEVs are highly complex,
> almost impossibly refined machines only made affordable by serial
> production
> and massive amounts of long-term development.
>
> Like CD players in the late 1980s and early 1990s, EVs are evolving
> rapidly
> and quickly declining in cost, thanks to economy of scale and research
> into
> battery optimization.
>
> Perhaps I'm being uncharacteristically overoptimistic, and I could
> certainly
> be wrong, but I think that what CDs did to LPs by 1995 is what EVs are
> poised to do to ICEVs now - if politicians will let them.  True hybrids
> may
> still have a place, but I think (and hope) not for much longer.
>
> David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey
>
> To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my
> offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>  That's not a "cloud,"  It's just someone else's computer.
>
> -- Anonymous
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peri Hartman via EV]

Biofuels don't have to be made from crops. We have an enormous waste 
stream with high carbon content. Imagine a process to convert that into 
methane and oil, which could then be reused to produce virgin plastic. 
Or fuel jet planes.


I've seen a prototype reactor (high pressure, high temp, with a 
catalyst) that does that with wood fibers with no water residue and 
virtually no mineral contamination. It theoretically would also work for 
paper and plastic waste, though I'm not sure that has been tested.


Peri

<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>

-- Original Message --
From: "Peter VanDerWal via EV" 
To: p...@ingineerix.com; "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 


Cc: "Peter VanDerWal" 
Sent: 09-May-21 9:47:24 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen


May 8, 2021 10:10 AM, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:


 From what research I've done, I believe BioFuels are a better stop gap than
 H2.


Perhaps some day this will be true.  However, the major 'biofuel' we produce in 
the USA is ethanol and numerous studies indicates that the way we produce 
ethanol uses more pertroleum fuel that it offsets.
Worse than that, the polution that results from farming and refining ethanol 
(mostly)stays in this country while the majority of the ethanol is sold to 
overseas customers.

Then there is the fact that growing biofuel uses a lot of land (as well as 
other resources), if we used ALL of the arable land in the USA to grow biofuel, 
it wouldn't offset even 1/4 of our petroleum consumption.  And of course if we 
use all of the land to grow fuel, we wouldn't have any food to eat.

If we could figure out how to grow fuel without consuming massive amount of 
petroleum, then it might make sense to grow limited amount of biofuel for those 
applications that can't be solved with electricity.  However, I suspect that 
long before we solve that problem, there will no longer be applications that 
can't be solved with electricity, or some other green solution they might come 
up with.


My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
___
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


___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Willie via EV]

On 5/9/21 12:00 PM, Peter VanDerWal via EV wrote:


Advantages of this system:
Less resources used for batteries (vs BEVs)
Less resources used for ICE generators (vs Hybrids)
Better vehicle efficiency for normal (non-extended use) since you'll be 
carrying around less weight
All of which results in: Cheaper vehicles


Perhaps overlooked is the longevity of large batteries compared to 
smaller batteries. A 100kwh battery might last 200k miles in a car while 
a 50kwh may last only 100k miles.  With a big battery, you are buying 
more total energy transfer than with a smaller one.


___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peter VanDerWal via EV]

> Finally, a BEV is mechanically much simpler and at least theoretically more
> reliable than an ICEV, let alone a hybrid with the complexity of both. I
> haven't run the numbers, but intuitively, manufacturing a BEV has to be less
> carbon intensive than manufacturing a hybrid, and it should have a longer
> service life.

I can see a potential use case for "part-time" hybrids, although I doubt it 
would ever fly in our country.

I occurs to me that it would be a better use of resources to make 'short range" 
EVs (~80 miles perhaps) with the a designed in ability to have that range 
'extended' on the fly with some sort of rental apperatus for occasional use.
I.e. for the occasional long distance trip you could rent a generator that 
plugs into the vehicle.  This way instead of having millions of vehicles with 
onboard generators, you could get by with just a few thousand plug in 
generators.  If the generator fails, then the rental company brings a new one 
out to you and picks up the failed unit.
You could even use the system with a plug in battery for moderate range 
extention.
The space where the range extender plugs in could be additional storage space 
when not using a range extender.

Advantages of this system:
Less resources used for batteries (vs BEVs)
Less resources used for ICE generators (vs Hybrids)
Better vehicle efficiency for normal (non-extended use) since you'll be 
carrying around less weight
All of which results in: Cheaper vehicles
___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peter VanDerWal via EV]

May 8, 2021 10:10 AM, "(-Phil-) via EV"  wrote:

> From what research I've done, I believe BioFuels are a better stop gap than
> H2.

Perhaps some day this will be true.  However, the major 'biofuel' we produce in 
the USA is ethanol and numerous studies indicates that the way we produce 
ethanol uses more pertroleum fuel that it offsets.  
Worse than that, the polution that results from farming and refining ethanol 
(mostly)stays in this country while the majority of the ethanol is sold to 
overseas customers.

Then there is the fact that growing biofuel uses a lot of land (as well as 
other resources), if we used ALL of the arable land in the USA to grow biofuel, 
it wouldn't offset even 1/4 of our petroleum consumption.  And of course if we 
use all of the land to grow fuel, we wouldn't have any food to eat.

If we could figure out how to grow fuel without consuming massive amount of 
petroleum, then it might make sense to grow limited amount of biofuel for those 
applications that can't be solved with electricity.  However, I suspect that 
long before we solve that problem, there will no longer be applications that 
can't be solved with electricity, or some other green solution they might come 
up with.


My PGP public key: https://vanderwal.us/evdl_pgp.key
___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

I don’t remember the technology.

The switch from H2 to gasoline and back was seamless.

It was never made available to the public. It was only for technology 
demonstrations.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 9, 2021, at 1:57 AM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
> 
> Ah. Direct injection H2. (Essentially a Diesel engine running hydrogen.) 
> Thus, the low octane (MON) doesn't matter.
> Most definitely not a converted vehicle.
> 
> 100 of these vehicles produced in total. This beast got only 16.9 MPG on gas, 
> 4.7 MPG on H2.
> 
>> On 5/9/2021 3:07 PM, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:
>> Well, yes - why would you want an internal combustion engine running on 
>> hydrogen?
>> 
>> I don’t know the answer, but at one time BMW thought it was a good idea. I 
>> drove the result of their work - a bi-fueled series 8, and loved driving it 
>> (it was *not* a disappointment), but why?
>> 
>> Sure, reduced emissions compared to the gas alternative, but a fuel cell can 
>> perform so much better with zero emissions.
>> 
>> - Mark
>> 
>> Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
>> 
 On May 8, 2021, at 5:42 PM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Gasoline engines are designed to run best on gasoline. They can barely be 
>>> converted to run on H2.
>>> 
>>> In a nutshell, H2 has an extremely low motor octane number (MON) of about 
>>> 60, and the compression must be reduced so much that the engine makes very 
>>> little power. The low charge density is a further detriment to the engine 
>>> HP.
>>> 
>>> Yes, you can make an ICE run on H2, but it will be difficult and the result 
>>> will be disappointing.
>>> 
>>> It begs the question; Why would you do this? Just run the engine on methane 
>>> (MON 120) and skip all the fuel conversion effort and energy losses.
>>> 
>>> Better yet, skip the electrolysis step and the H2 transport, and run an 
>>> electric car directly on the electricity delivered right to your house 
>>> already!
>>> 
>>> Bill D.
>>> 
 2. There are billions of ICEs already in use. They can be converted to
 run on H2. And they will be able to claim they are "green" because
 pollution at the vehicle is considerably reduced (it moves to where the
 H2 is manufactured).
 
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>> 
>> ___
>> 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
> 
> 
> ___
> 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
> 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Bill Dube via EV]

Ah. Direct injection H2. (Essentially a Diesel engine running hydrogen.) 
Thus, the low octane (MON) doesn't matter.

Most definitely not a converted vehicle.

100 of these vehicles produced in total. This beast got only 16.9 MPG on 
gas, 4.7 MPG on H2.


On 5/9/2021 3:07 PM, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote:

Well, yes - why would you want an internal combustion engine running on 
hydrogen?

I don’t know the answer, but at one time BMW thought it was a good idea. I 
drove the result of their work - a bi-fueled series 8, and loved driving it (it 
was *not* a disappointment), but why?

Sure, reduced emissions compared to the gas alternative, but a fuel cell can 
perform so much better with zero emissions.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone


On May 8, 2021, at 5:42 PM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:

Gasoline engines are designed to run best on gasoline. They can barely be 
converted to run on H2.

In a nutshell, H2 has an extremely low motor octane number (MON) of about 60, 
and the compression must be reduced so much that the engine makes very little 
power. The low charge density is a further detriment to the engine HP.

Yes, you can make an ICE run on H2, but it will be difficult and the result 
will be disappointing.

It begs the question; Why would you do this? Just run the engine on methane 
(MON 120) and skip all the fuel conversion effort and energy losses.

Better yet, skip the electrolysis step and the H2 transport, and run an 
electric car directly on the electricity delivered right to your house already!

Bill D.


2. There are billions of ICEs already in use. They can be converted to
run on H2. And they will be able to claim they are "green" because
pollution at the vehicle is considerably reduced (it moves to where the
H2 is manufactured).


___
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


___
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



___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Mark Abramowitz via EV]

Well, yes - why would you want an internal combustion engine running on 
hydrogen?  

I don’t know the answer, but at one time BMW thought it was a good idea. I 
drove the result of their work - a bi-fueled series 8, and loved driving it (it 
was *not* a disappointment), but why? 

Sure, reduced emissions compared to the gas alternative, but a fuel cell can 
perform so much better with zero emissions.

- Mark

Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone

> On May 8, 2021, at 5:42 PM, Bill Dube via EV  wrote:
> 
> Gasoline engines are designed to run best on gasoline. They can barely be 
> converted to run on H2.
> 
> In a nutshell, H2 has an extremely low motor octane number (MON) of about 60, 
> and the compression must be reduced so much that the engine makes very little 
> power. The low charge density is a further detriment to the engine HP.
> 
> Yes, you can make an ICE run on H2, but it will be difficult and the result 
> will be disappointing.
> 
> It begs the question; Why would you do this? Just run the engine on methane 
> (MON 120) and skip all the fuel conversion effort and energy losses.
> 
> Better yet, skip the electrolysis step and the H2 transport, and run an 
> electric car directly on the electricity delivered right to your house 
> already!
> 
> Bill D.
> 
>> 
>> 2. There are billions of ICEs already in use. They can be converted to
>> run on H2. And they will be able to claim they are "green" because
>> pollution at the vehicle is considerably reduced (it moves to where the
>> H2 is manufactured).
>> 
> 
> ___
> 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
> 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Bill Dube via EV]

Gasoline engines are designed to run best on gasoline. They can barely 
be converted to run on H2.


In a nutshell, H2 has an extremely low motor octane number (MON) of 
about 60, and the compression must be reduced so much that the engine 
makes very little power. The low charge density is a further detriment 
to the engine HP.


Yes, you can make an ICE run on H2, but it will be difficult and the 
result will be disappointing.


It begs the question; Why would you do this? Just run the engine on 
methane (MON 120) and skip all the fuel conversion effort and energy losses.


Better yet, skip the electrolysis step and the H2 transport, and run an 
electric car directly on the electricity delivered right to your house 
already!


Bill D.



2. There are billions of ICEs already in use. They can be converted to
run on H2. And they will be able to claim they are "green" because
pollution at the vehicle is considerably reduced (it moves to where the
H2 is manufactured).



___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Larry Gales via EV]

Certainly H2 makes no sense for most transportation or most
heating/cooking.  But it appears to have potential for long term energy
storage (days, weeks, or months), and for long range aviation and rocket
fuel, although in the latter cases it would probably be better to combine
H2 from electrolysis with CO2 captured from the air, to make CH4 using the
Sabatier process. CH4 is far less bulky than H2 and it would be much easier
to convert long range aircraft to it rather than H2, and Elon Musk is using
CH4 in his revolutionary Starship.  When you burn this type of CH4 you do
put CO2 into the atmosphere, but exactly the same amount that you
originally took out of the atmosphere.

On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 12:24 PM (-Phil-) via EV  wrote:

> From what research I've done, I believe BioFuels are a better stop gap than
> H2.
>
> H2 is a boondoggle.   I just can't find a use case that makes sense, it's
> poor systemic efficiency, and super-high infrastructure cost take it out of
> consideration.
>
> We'll still need some kind of energy dense solution for things like air
> travel.  Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
> carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
> complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
> operation, but this can be fixed over time.
>
> To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization is
> good.  I'm part of this project: https://youtu.be/TuLE7CcSvRc
> It is a good way to get more electric cars on the road faster.  The lower
> cost and battery size mean more cars in the fleet faster, and the same
> battery supply that can build one Tesla Model 3 or Y can now build more
> than 4 cars instead of just one.   Unlike H2, this can be implemented now,
> and can allow biofuels to be phased in without any new tech on the car or
> distribution infrastructure side.  Also removes the immediate requirement
> to build more fast charging infrastructure while still allowing long
> distance travel.
>
> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 6:09 AM Peri Hartman via EV 
> wrote:
>
> > Resending... didn't go through.
> >
> > << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> >
> > -- Original Message --
> > From: "Peri Hartman" 
> > To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> > Sent: 07-May-21 6:27:44 PM
> > Subject: opinion article on hydrogen
> >
> > >This article claims that producing hydrogen will remain too expensive
> and
> > therefore people will continue to choose to use natural gas if there
> isn't
> > an electric alternative. It also mentions the poor efficiency of
> producing
> > it.
> > >
> > >Using hydrogen fuel risks locking in reliance on fossil fuels,
> > researchers warn
> > >
> >
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/may/06/hydrogen-fuel-risks-reliance-on-fossil-fuels
> > >
> > >...
> > >Fuels produced from hydrogen can be used as straight replacements for
> oil
> > and gas and can be low-carbon, if renewable electricity is used to
> produce
> > these “e-fuels”. However, the research found that using the electricity
> > directly to power cars and warm houses was far more efficient.
> > >...
> > >The analysis estimated that hydrogen-based fuels would be very expensive
> > and scarce in the coming decade. Therefore, equipment such as
> > “hydrogen-ready” boilers could end up reliant on fossil gas and continue
> to
> > produce the carbon emissions driving global heating.
> > >...
> > >The research, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, calculated
> > that producing and burning hydrogen-based fuels in home gas boilers
> > required six to 14 times more electricity than heat pumps providing the
> > same warmth. This is because energy is wasted in creating the hydrogen,
> > then the e-fuel, then in burning it. For cars, using e-fuels requires
> five
> > times more electricity than is needed than for battery-powered cars.
> > >...
> > >Daryl Wilson, the executive director of the global, industry-backed
> > Hydrogen Council, said hydrogen could become the most competitive
> > low-carbon solution for some sectors by 2030, such as long-haul trucking
> > and steel.
> > >...
> > >
> > >---
> > >
> > >Peri
> > >
> > ><< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
> >
> > ___
> > 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/20210508/347ee47d/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/
> 

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peri Hartman via EV]

For the time being, I agree that biofuels are a better transition fuel 
than H2.


However, they aren't really carbon neutral unless the source for the 
biofuel is currently being used as fuel. For example, we bury in 
landfills huge amounts of plastic waste and other carbon-containing 
materials. Those are currently "capturing" some percentage of their 
carbon. If we start converting them to biofuels, none is being captured.


On the other hand, the manner in which many waste products are currently 
used for energy creates toxins in the air and water. If we can safely 
convert them to biofuels instead, that would be an improvement.


Longer term, anything we convert to biofuels could be turned into virgin 
plastic and other useful materials rather than be used for energy. We 
could, then, produce plastics and other materials from biofuels instead 
of fracked natural gas.


Peri

<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>

-- Original Message --
From: "(-Phil-)" 
To: "Peri Hartman" ; "Electric Vehicle Discussion 
List" 

Sent: 08-May-21 10:10:37 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

From what research I've done, I believe BioFuels are a better stop gap 
than H2.


H2 is a boondoggle.   I just can't find a use case that makes sense, 
it's poor systemic efficiency, and super-high infrastructure cost take 
it out of consideration.


We'll still need some kind of energy dense solution for things like air 
travel.  Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the 
carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the 
complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive 
operation, but this can be fixed over time.


To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization is 
good.  I'm part of this project: https://youtu.be/TuLE7CcSvRc
It is a good way to get more electric cars on the road faster.  The 
lower cost and battery size mean more cars in the fleet faster, and the 
same battery supply that can build one Tesla Model 3 or Y can now build 
more than 4 cars instead of just one.   Unlike H2, this can be 
implemented now, and can allow biofuels to be phased in without any new 
tech on the car or distribution infrastructure side.  Also removes the 
immediate requirement to build more fast charging infrastructure while 
still allowing long distance travel.


On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 6:09 AM Peri Hartman via EV  
wrote:

Resending... didn't go through.

<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>

-- Original Message --
From: "Peri Hartman" 
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
Sent: 07-May-21 6:27:44 PM
Subject: opinion article on hydrogen

>This article claims that producing hydrogen will remain too expensive 
and therefore people will continue to choose to use natural gas if 
there isn't an electric alternative. It also mentions the poor 
efficiency of producing it.

>
>Using hydrogen fuel risks locking in reliance on fossil fuels, 
researchers warn

>https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/may/06/hydrogen-fuel-risks-reliance-on-fossil-fuels
>
>...
>Fuels produced from hydrogen can be used as straight replacements for 
oil and gas and can be low-carbon, if renewable electricity is used to 
produce these “e-fuels”. However, the research found that using the 
electricity directly to power cars and warm houses was far more 
efficient.

>...
>The analysis estimated that hydrogen-based fuels would be very 
expensive and scarce in the coming decade. Therefore, equipment such 
as “hydrogen-ready” boilers could end up reliant on fossil gas and 
continue to produce the carbon emissions driving global heating.

>...
>The research, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, 
calculated that producing and burning hydrogen-based fuels in home gas 
boilers required six to 14 times more electricity than heat pumps 
providing the same warmth. This is because energy is wasted in 
creating the hydrogen, then the e-fuel, then in burning it. For cars, 
using e-fuels requires five times more electricity than is needed than 
for battery-powered cars.

>...
>Daryl Wilson, the executive director of the global, industry-backed 
Hydrogen Council, said hydrogen could become the most competitive 
low-carbon solution for some sectors by 2030, such as long-haul 
trucking and steel.

>...
>
>---
>
>Peri
>
><< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>

___
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.o

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

On 8 May 2021 at 10:10, (-Phil-) via EV wrote:

> Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
> carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
> complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
> operation, but this can be fixed over time.

With all due respect, "this can be fixed over time" is a bit too much hand-
waving for my taste.

The problem with biofuels is that growing and harvesting crops, processing 
them, and transporting the fuel to the use point requires substantial energy 
input, and most of it comes from carbon based fuels.  Even fertilizer and 
pesticides are made from petroleum.  I just don't see that equation changing 
fast enough to get us to carbon-neutral in time.

The only biofuel application I can think of that *might* get closer sooner - 
and I'm not 100% sure about even this - is electricity generation.  For 
example, Uruguay's power system runs largely on pulverized Eucalyptus wood.  
The problem with this is that petroleum giants have governments bought and 
paid for, and they can't make money from distributing wood chips as easily 
as they can from corn processed into ethanol.  

There's also the fact that food turned into fuel while people are starving 
round the world has some ... ethical considerations.

> To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization is
> good. 

Your point about improving utilization of limited battery-production 
capacity is a good one.  We need to keep plugging ahead (sorry) with battery 
recycling, and with developing batteries that use less exotic materials.  
NiMH, anyone?  Hello?

But at the consumer level, I think that the use case for hybrids - I mean 
real ones, not "you naver have to plug it in" pseudo-hybrids - is fading as 
true BEV battery capacity grows and rapid charging facilities multiply.

It's also easier and more efficient to add PV capacity to EV charging than 
it is to add "renewability" to ICEV refueling.

Finally, a BEV is mechanically much simpler and at least theoretically more 
reliable than an ICEV, let alone a hybrid with the complexity of both.  I 
haven't run the numbers, but intuitively, manufacturing a BEV has to be less 
carbon intensive than manufacturing a hybrid, and it should have a longer 
service life.

Like LPs and phono cartridges in 1980, today's ICEVs are highly complex, 
almost impossibly refined machines only made affordable by serial production 
and massive amounts of long-term development.  

Like CD players in the late 1980s and early 1990s, EVs are evolving rapidly 
and quickly declining in cost, thanks to economy of scale and research into 
battery optimization.

Perhaps I'm being uncharacteristically overoptimistic, and I could certainly 
be wrong, but I think that what CDs did to LPs by 1995 is what EVs are 
poised to do to ICEVs now - if politicians will let them.  True hybrids may 
still have a place, but I think (and hope) not for much longer.

David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey

To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it.  Use my 
offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
 That's not a "cloud,"  It's just someone else's computer.

-- Anonymous
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Lee Hart via EV]

(-Phil-) via EV wrote:

From what research I've done, I believe BioFuels are a better stop
gap than H2.

H2 is a boondoggle.   I just can't find a use case that makes sense,
it's poor systemic efficiency, and super-high infrastructure cost
take it out of consideration.


I'm worried that the use case for H2 isn't scientific; it's based on
profits, politics and emotion:

1. H2 is almost entirely made from fossil fuels. Switching to it keeps
the fossil fuel industry in business.

2. There are billions of ICEs already in use. They can be converted to
run on H2. And they will be able to claim they are "green" because
pollution at the vehicle is considerably reduced (it moves to where the
H2 is manufactured).

3. Automakers and consumers can keep right on using ICEs; what they know
and love. They don't want to change, and H2 promises them an easy way out.


To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization
is good. I'm part of this project: https://youtu.be/TuLE7CcSvRc It
is a good way to get more electric cars on the road faster.  The
lower cost and battery size mean more cars in the fleet faster, and
the same battery supply that can build one Tesla Model 3 or Y can now
build more than 4 cars instead of just one.


I like this idea. I've been driving Priuses since 2000, and think the 
hybrid concept is a great way to reduce emissions and "wean" people away 
from ICEs. Make them plug-in hybrids, and 80-90% of people's driving can 
be pure electric.


I have friends and family members who are motor-heads, and would rather 
*die* than drive an EV. But they will consider a hybrid, because it's 
not a "damned EV". It's not rational; it's emotional.


Lee Hart
--
A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is
nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
-- Antoine de Saint Exupery
--
Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, www.sunrise-ev.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[(-Phil-) via EV]

From what research I've done, I believe BioFuels are a better stop gap than
H2.

H2 is a boondoggle.   I just can't find a use case that makes sense, it's
poor systemic efficiency, and super-high infrastructure cost take it out of
consideration.

We'll still need some kind of energy dense solution for things like air
travel.  Biofuels can at least be carbon neutral, as you can close the
carbon cycle.  It will take a long way to get there of course, as the
complete biofuel production cycle is also still a carbon intensive
operation, but this can be fixed over time.

To get to electrification quicker, I still think some hybridization is
good.  I'm part of this project: https://youtu.be/TuLE7CcSvRc
It is a good way to get more electric cars on the road faster.  The lower
cost and battery size mean more cars in the fleet faster, and the same
battery supply that can build one Tesla Model 3 or Y can now build more
than 4 cars instead of just one.   Unlike H2, this can be implemented now,
and can allow biofuels to be phased in without any new tech on the car or
distribution infrastructure side.  Also removes the immediate requirement
to build more fast charging infrastructure while still allowing long
distance travel.

On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 6:09 AM Peri Hartman via EV 
wrote:

> Resending... didn't go through.
>
> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Peri Hartman" 
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
> Sent: 07-May-21 6:27:44 PM
> Subject: opinion article on hydrogen
>
> >This article claims that producing hydrogen will remain too expensive and
> therefore people will continue to choose to use natural gas if there isn't
> an electric alternative. It also mentions the poor efficiency of producing
> it.
> >
> >Using hydrogen fuel risks locking in reliance on fossil fuels,
> researchers warn
> >
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/may/06/hydrogen-fuel-risks-reliance-on-fossil-fuels
> >
> >...
> >Fuels produced from hydrogen can be used as straight replacements for oil
> and gas and can be low-carbon, if renewable electricity is used to produce
> these “e-fuels”. However, the research found that using the electricity
> directly to power cars and warm houses was far more efficient.
> >...
> >The analysis estimated that hydrogen-based fuels would be very expensive
> and scarce in the coming decade. Therefore, equipment such as
> “hydrogen-ready” boilers could end up reliant on fossil gas and continue to
> produce the carbon emissions driving global heating.
> >...
> >The research, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, calculated
> that producing and burning hydrogen-based fuels in home gas boilers
> required six to 14 times more electricity than heat pumps providing the
> same warmth. This is because energy is wasted in creating the hydrogen,
> then the e-fuel, then in burning it. For cars, using e-fuels requires five
> times more electricity than is needed than for battery-powered cars.
> >...
> >Daryl Wilson, the executive director of the global, industry-backed
> Hydrogen Council, said hydrogen could become the most competitive
> low-carbon solution for some sectors by 2030, such as long-haul trucking
> and steel.
> >...
> >
> >---
> >
> >Peri
> >
> ><< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
>
> ___
> 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: 

___
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

Re: [EVDL] opinion article on hydrogen

[Peri Hartman via EV]

Resending... didn't go through.

<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>

-- Original Message --
From: "Peri Hartman" 
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" 
Sent: 07-May-21 6:27:44 PM
Subject: opinion article on hydrogen


This article claims that producing hydrogen will remain too expensive and 
therefore people will continue to choose to use natural gas if there isn't an 
electric alternative. It also mentions the poor efficiency of producing it.

Using hydrogen fuel risks locking in reliance on fossil fuels, researchers warn
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/may/06/hydrogen-fuel-risks-reliance-on-fossil-fuels

...
Fuels produced from hydrogen can be used as straight replacements for oil and 
gas and can be low-carbon, if renewable electricity is used to produce these 
“e-fuels”. However, the research found that using the electricity directly to 
power cars and warm houses was far more efficient.
...
The analysis estimated that hydrogen-based fuels would be very expensive and 
scarce in the coming decade. Therefore, equipment such as “hydrogen-ready” 
boilers could end up reliant on fossil gas and continue to produce the carbon 
emissions driving global heating.
...
The research, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, calculated that 
producing and burning hydrogen-based fuels in home gas boilers required six to 
14 times more electricity than heat pumps providing the same warmth. This is 
because energy is wasted in creating the hydrogen, then the e-fuel, then in 
burning it. For cars, using e-fuels requires five times more electricity than 
is needed than for battery-powered cars.
...
Daryl Wilson, the executive director of the global, industry-backed Hydrogen 
Council, said hydrogen could become the most competitive low-carbon solution 
for some sectors by 2030, such as long-haul trucking and steel.
...

---

Peri

<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>


___
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